The Joshlin Smith trial has reached a boiling point in the Western Cape High Court, drawing national attention not only for the tragic circumstances of the case but also for the increasingly tense courtroom dynamics. At the centre of the latest drama is a sharp verbal clash between presiding Judge Daniel Erasmus and Defence Attorney Nobahle Mkabayi.
The exchange erupted during the cross-examination of key State witness Lourentia Lombaard. Representing the accused, Stevano van Rhyn’s Mkabayi accused the judge of cutting into his line of questioning and undermining his right to challenge the witness’s credibility.
Judge and Defence in Heated Exchange Over Witness Conduct
What began as a typical cross-examination quickly turned contentious. Mkabayi voiced concerns that the judge was limiting his ability to probe inconsistencies in the witness’s testimony.
“I feel that the court is interfering with my ability to test the credibility of this witness,” Mkabayi argued.
Judge Erasmus firmly pushed back: “This is not a discussion, Mr Mkabayi, and this is not your court. If you have a problem with how I run my court, you are free to take it on review.”
These heated words reflect the broader intensity of the Joshlin Smith trial, which has captivated the South African public since the six-year-old girl went missing from her Saldanha Bay home in February 2025.
Spotlight on Witness Questioning and Reliability
Lombaard, a central figure in the case, has admitted to past drug use and giving conflicting statements to authorities. The defence has seized on these inconsistencies to argue that her version of events cannot be trusted—particularly her allegation that Appolis participated in selling Joshlin to a sangoma for R20,000.
In defence of the witness, Judge Erasmus reminded the court that Lombaard is “not sophisticated” and cautioned Mkabayi against overly aggressive tactics. “You are not going to make this witness a liar on a technicality,” the judge said, underlining his responsibility to maintain courtroom fairness.
Legal Experts Weigh In on Judicial Intervention
The tensions have sparked a legal debate about the role of judges in witness questioning. Speaking to issues of courtroom ethics, constitutional law expert Professor Pierre de Vos from the University of Cape Town emphasised the delicate balance judges must strike.
“While judges are responsible for upholding justice, they must also protect the defendant’s right to a fair trial. This includes the right to properly test witness credibility,” he noted in a UCT Law commentary.
The clash between bench and bar in this trial may influence how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly where vulnerable witnesses are involved.
The Road Ahead in the Joshlin Smith Trial
As proceedings continue, attention remains squarely on discovering what happened to young Joshlin. The outcome of this case could have lasting legal and societal implications.
The Joshlin Smith trial is more than just a legal proceeding—it’s a story that has gripped the hearts of South Africans. With defence and judge clashing over witness questioning, and public emotions running high, the trial highlights the need for justice that is both firm and fair.
ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith Trial: Defence Challenges Validity of Confessions Over Rights Violation
