The defence continued to question police detective Sergeant Dawid Johannes Fortuin.
Image: Mandilakhe Tshwete
Tensions rose in the Western Cape High Court on Tuesday as the defence continued to question a police detective over the handling of an interview with accused Steveno van Rhyn in the aftermath of six-year-old Joshlin Smith’s disappearance.
The Saldanha Bay girl went missing from her Middelpos home on February 19, 2024.
Her mom Racquel ‘Kelly’ Smith; her boyfriend Jacquen ‘Boeta’ Appollis, and Van Rhyn were arrested and charged with kidnapping and human trafficking.
The trial sits in the White City Multipurpose Centre in Diazville.
Sergeant Dawid Johannes Fortuin admitted that his top priority was locating the missing child. “My priority was to find Joshlin,” he said.
“I asked him if he knew about Joshlin’s whereabouts.”
Van Rhyn’s lawyer Nobahle Mkabayi noted that her client had answered that he did not know where the child was.
Fortuin claimed he still found the response unconvincing.
“There were discrepancies, and I didn’t think he was being honest,” he said.
But Mkabayi challenged him directly: “What discrepancies? You told us he said he didn’t know where Joshlin was.”
Fortuin responded vaguely, stating: “I knew there were discrepancies with all of the accused… The only information I wanted was where Joshlin was.”
The defence seized on his admission that he had not read Van Rhyn’s previous statement before the interview. “What is interesting is that you didn’t read any statements,” Mkabayi said.
Fortuin insisted that the differences in the accounts had been flagged to him by Captain Wesley Lombard, and that he was acting on that basis.
“The difference between the statements was given by Captain Lombard,” he said.
But Mkabayi pushed harder: “Were you not interested in knowing the contents of the statement? Did Joshlin’s disappearance stop you from reading the statements of your potential interviewee?”
“No, my Lord,” Fortuin replied.
Mkabayi further asked how the detective expected to uncover new information without knowing the old information.
“How will you know the new information when you don’t know the previous one?
“The purpose of the interview was about finding discrepancies,” Mkabayi argued. “But now I hear you only asked him about Joshlin.”
Fortuin maintained that he relied on what Lombard had told him.
He claimed that although he brought up the differences in the accused’s stories, his main goal was locating the missing girl.
“All I said was that there was a difference between their statements… My primary goal was to ascertain Joshlin’s whereabouts,” the detective said.
Mkabayi accused him of straying from the stated purpose of the interview.
“You confronted my client about Joshlin’s disappearance and deviated from the interview’s intended goal,” she said.
She reminded the court that it was the State’s duty to prove that a kidnapping had taken place beyond reasonable doubt, and questioned how vague timeline discrepancies between the accused would help meet that burden.
“It has been 13 months since February 2024. What is at your disposal that proves kidnapping and human trafficking against my client?”
Fortuin responded: “I’m not the investigating officer and I am here to testify about what happened on 4 and 5 March 2024.”
The trial continues.
Related Topics:
