Defence lawyer accuses Lowvelder of contempt in Malalane fraud trial

Proceedings in the fraud, forgery and uttering case against suspended attorney Zietta Janse van Rensburg were delayed on Tuesday after her defence lawyer, Marco Lamberti, accused Lowvelder of contempt for photographing him and his client outside the Malalane courthouse.

Accusation over photographs halts start of trial

The matter was scheduled to start at 10:00 and the defence and accused arrived minutes before the hearing. When proceedings began, Lamberti told the court he had been told magistrate Jacob Mamabolo had ruled in April that photographs of him should not be taken or published. He accused Lowvelder of contempt for taking photos at the police station entrance and asked the magistrate to order the newspaper not to publish photos or incorrect information.

Court response and jurisdiction questions

Magistrate Mamabolo told Lamberti he was in the wrong forum to bring such an application and said he would not grant the order. Senior state prosecutor Tobie Steyn opposed Lamberti’s request, noting that the criminal court was not the correct forum because the media was not a party to the criminal case between the State and Janse van Rensburg.

Steyn also questioned why Lamberti had not pursued the matter since April and said there had been time to bring an application in the appropriate forum. Mamabolo noted that, had an application been brought against the media, the media would have to have been served.

Letters exchanged after April hearing

Following Lowvelder’s April report on the earlier hearing, Lamberti sent a letter of demand to the newspaper stating:

“A direction/ruling was made in open court to the effect that photographs of me were not to be published. Notwithstanding the above, photographs of me were published by your publication. In addition, aspects of the publication do not accurately reflect what transpired in court. In particular, the article’s account of the evidential exchange and ruling on objection is materially inaccurate.”

He demanded removal of all photographs of him published in connection with that article.

Lowvelder’s attorney Helene Viljoen replied in writing, saying:

“The presiding magistrate indicated that no application had been brought by the media to take photographs inside the court, and further noted the limits of the court’s jurisdiction outside the courtroom. There was no express order prohibiting publication of photographs, whether taken in court or otherwise. In the absence of a clear and binding court order, your allegation that publication was ‘unlawful’ is not sustainable.”

Viljoen also invited Lamberti to identify any specific statements he alleged were incorrect so they could be addressed; according to the newspaper, Lamberti did not respond or provide such evidence.

Chambers discussion and adjournment

Mamabolo asked Lamberti and Steyn to go into chambers to discuss the issue and court resumed at 13:30. Lamberti indicated he would pursue another avenue to address the media. Before adjourning the hearing to the next day, Steyn asked Mamabolo to warn Janse van Rensburg for recording proceedings without permission. Lamberti apologised on his client’s behalf for using a cellphone in court and said he would instruct her not to bring it in future; Mamabolo ordered her to comply.

The state told the court its witnesses Schalk de Waal and Kayla van Niekerk were present and De Waal, Van Niekerk and the investigating officer are set to testify tomorrow.

Background to charges

The April hearing marked nearly three years since Rita van den Berg laid charges against Janse van Rensburg. Van den Berg and Grant Taylor testified then about a signed agreement whose signature raised concerns; Van den Berg testified that the signatures on the agreement were not hers and that she had never seen the settlement agreement before June 2023. Van den Berg also said the documents did not originate from her legal representative’s office.

Notes from the publisher

According to Lowvelder (The Citizen / Caxton Local Media), “At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention.”

According to Lowvelder (The Citizen / Caxton Local Media), research has shown that “our community newspapers reach 75% of our market while any other daily, weekly or Sunday newspaper doesn’t exceed 20%.”