Lawyer Disputes Client’s Injury Claims During Cross-Examination At Joshlin Smith’s Trial

In the ongoing Joshlin Smith kidnapping trial, the lawyer representing Jacquen ‘Boeta’ Appollis challenged the narrative that his client had jumped out of a police van, an event that has been central to the case.

Advocate Fanie Harmse, the. Lawyer defending Appollis, raised doubts about the veracity of the claim as he cross-examined Detective Dawid Johannes Fortuin in the Western Cape High Court on Tuesday.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Four Suspects Killed In Gunfire Exchange With EMPD

Fortuin had testified that Appollis sustained injuries before his arrest on March 3, 2024, after the six-year-old girl went missing on February 19, 2024.

Appollis had been looking after the child, Joshlin Smith, when she disappeared in Middelpos, Saldanha Bay.

Accused Faces Serious Charges In Kidnapping And Human Trafficking

Appollis, along with his partner Racquel ‘Kelly’ Smith and friend Steveno ‘Steffie’ van Rhyn, is facing serious charges of kidnapping and human trafficking in connection with the disappearance of Smith’s daughter.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: The Power Of Empathy – Teaching Children To Stand Up To Bullies

All three have pleaded not guilty to the charges.

The trial, currently in the “trial-within-a-trial” phase, revolves around claims that Appollis and Van Rhyn’s confessions were coerced under duress.

The defense lawyer argues that both men were tortured and assaulted during their detention, a claim that Detective Fortuin, who has been involved in the case since the child’s disappearance, denies.

Disputed Injury Claims And Ongoing Investigation

During his testimony, Detective Fortuin said he was not aware of any abuse or torture during Appollis’s detention.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Seven Suspects Arrested For Business Robbery In Bedfordview

He acknowledged noticing injuries on Appollis’s body during a March 6, 2024, interview when the accused gave a warning statement.

According to Fortuin, Appollis claimed that he had fallen from a police van, pointing to visible injuries such as a red eye, scuff marks, and bruising.

However, the defense lawyer Harmse, disputed the possibility that these injuries could have occurred in such a manner and suggested that Appollis’s injuries were inconsistent with his version of events.

Presiding officer Judge Nathan Erasmus noted that no witnesses had testified about Appollis being transported in a police van, further complicating the narrative around the injuries.

The trial continues as the defense lawyer seeks clarity on the circumstances surrounding Appollis’s arrest and the alleged coercion of confessions.

---

For SA Crime News Follow SurgeZirc SA on Facebook,  X and Instagram