Woman accused of torching Joshlin Smith's home to remain in custody for another week
A woman has appeared in the Vredenburg Magistrate's Court for allegedly torching Joshlin Smith's home.
The house was set alight on Friday, hours after Joshlin's mother, Kelly, was found guilty of kidnapping and trafficking.
The accused has been remanded until her bail hearing next week.
The Middlepos woman accused of torching Joshlin Smith's home will remain in custody for another week.
Monique Kekana, 27, briefly appeared in the Vredenburg Magistraste's Court on Monday for allegedly setting the house alight.
The incident took place just hours after Joshlin's mother, Racquel "Kelly" Smith, and her two accused were convicted of kidnapping and trafficking.
Kekana has been remanded in custody until 12 May for a bail hearing.
On Friday night, the home where missing Joshlin once lived was burnt to the ground.
READ | Kelly Smith has been found guilty, but where is Joshlin?
This after Judge Nathan Erasmus found Smith, her partner, Jacquen "Boeta" Appollis, and their friend, Steveno van Rhyn, guilty of kidnapping and trafficking Joshlin.
Local councillor Veronique Pretorius said the community sentiment overall supported Kekana, with many locals expressing that they wanted the house to be destroyed.
Pretorius said this was most likely due to claims that drug users were using it, and this had made residents feel unsafe.
"Many of the people in the community are saying there's a reason why the house was burned down. It was planned," Pretorius claimed.
Joshlin went missing on 19 February 2024 and has still not been found despite ongoing searches by the police.
The multipurpose centre in Saldanha Bay, where the trial has been held for the last seven weeks, was packed to capacity for the judgment on Friday.
People clapped when they heard the final verdict, while Smith was tearful.
Delivering his judgment on Friday, Erasmus said Joshlin had been "exchanged" and "sold like a commodity".
In a judgment that took him more than two hours to deliver, Erasmus said the State's evidence stood uncontested and added that it then became a proven fact.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
He Fell Behind on His Taxes. So the Government Seized His Home, Sold It, and Kept the $258,000 Profit.
First the government seized Kenneth Michael Sikorsky's home and all of its equity over a tax debt worth far less than what it took. Now a federal court has ruled that Sikorsky has successfully stated a claim for a taking—an early sign that the legal landscape is shifting since the Supreme Court weighed in on these sorts of seizures two years ago. In 2012, the city of Newburgh, New York, foreclosed on Sikorsky's house after he fell behind on his property taxes. The parties were later able to broker an agreement that allowed him to repurchase the home for the price of his outstanding debt. But he was unable to satisfy those regular installments, prompting the city to cancel the sale. The government later found another buyer who could pay much more than the value of Sikorsky's debt, which with penalties, interest, and fees stood at $92,786.24. The sale went through in June 2021 for $350,500. The city then pocketed the profit: $257,713.76. Sikorsky is far from the first person to experience this nightmare scenario. But his case coincided with a petition that would upend the practice nationwide. Geraldine Tyler argued that the practice was unconstitutional after Hennepin County, Minnesota, seized her Minneapolis condo over a modest tax debt, sold it, and kept the profit. This worked its way through the court system until 2023, when the Supreme Court sided with Tyler. "A taxpayer who loses her $40,000 house to the State to fulfill a $15,000 tax debt has made a far greater contribution to the public fisc than she owed," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the unanimous Court. "The taxpayer must render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, but no more." The decision centered around the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment, which says the government cannot take private property without providing "just compensation." So foreclosing on a property to collect a debt is constitutional, but pocketing the profit is not. Sikorsky's suit made it to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York shortly after that ruling. Sounds like perfect timing, yet the court ruled against him. But now the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that he can, in fact, sue for his equity under the Takings Clause, resuscitating his suit and sending it back to the district court for review. While the high court ruled the practice unconstitutional, several states—including Arizona, Alabama, New Jersey, and Sikorsky's home of New York—responded by passing labyrinthine debt collection statutes that seek to technically comply with the law while simultaneously making it difficult for property owners to collect their surplus equity. Michigander Chelsea Koetter, for example, lost her house in 2021 over a $3,863.40 tax debt. Manistee County, Michigan, then auctioned it off and kept the $102,636 profit. But the state's supreme court had already ruled the practice illegal in 2020—after which the Legislature approved a debt-collection law that sends owners on an obstacle course should they want to get their leftover equity back. Koetter, according to her complaint, submitted a form 8 days late, which the government said justified its decision to keep her six figures of equity. In Sikorsky's case, New York's new statute applies only to people whose properties were sold on or after May 25, 2023, so he will get to proceed under the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution instead. But future plaintiffs who lose everything after falling on hard times may find it much harder to recover their money. The post He Fell Behind on His Taxes. So the Government Seized His Home, Sold It, and Kept the $258,000 Profit. appeared first on
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Defense for Decatur man charged with capital murder in 2018 files to bar death penalty due to ‘intellectual disability'
DECATUR, Ala. (WHNT) — The defense team for a Decatur man charged with capital murder in 2018 has filed a motion for the judge to bar the death penalty because of an intellectual disability, court documents say. Kendall Rashaid Rucker faces seven capital murder charges for the shooting deaths of David Gullatte, 31, and Sharonda Bouldin, 27, as he 'knowingly and unlawfully entered or remained' in their home in 2018. In April, the State filed a motion stating it intended to seek the death penalty because Rucker 'caused the death of two or more persons by one act' and 'the capital offense was committed by the defendant while engaged in the commission of, or attempt to commit, a robbery or burglary.' In March, the court found Rucker competent to stand trial following a court-ordered mental examination and a hearing. However, Rucker's defense has now filed a motion to strike the death penalty as an option. On June 5, the defense said Rucker meets the criteria for intellectual disability because he displays 'significant subaverage intellectual functioning, as demonstrated by his IQ score of 73, lack of academic accomplishment and other related factors,' as well as stating that he suffers from 'significant deficits in adaptive functioning, including substantial deficits in his conceptual, social, and practical skills,' and finally that the deficits 'manifested' during the developmental period. The defense says that, because of his intellectual disability, the State cannot seek the death penalty against Rucker because it violates the Eighth Amendment. Citing Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), 'the United States Supreme Court found that intellectual disability lessens an individual's 'personal culpability' for a crime because the person has 'diminished capacities to understand and process information, to communicate, to abstract from mistakes and learn from experience, to engage in logical reasoning, to control impulses, and to understand the reactions of others.'' Also cited in this motion to bar the death penalty for Rucker, court documents say, Atkins defined intellectual disability as someone who has 'subaverage intellectual functioning [and] significant limitations in adaptive skills such as communication, self-care, and self-direction that became manifest before age 18.' The American Association of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities says that one way to measure intellectual functioning is an IQ test. 'Generally, an IQ test score of around 70 or as high as 75 indicates a significant limitation in intellectual functioning,' AAIDD says. The organization also says that this condition starts in the developmental period, which is defined as 'before the age of 22.' At the time of this incident in 2018, Rucker was 22, per the Decatur Police Department. Rucker's defense said, according to court documents, Robert Shaffer, Ph.D., a licensed clinical and forensic psychologist and neuropsychologist, evaluated Mr. Rucker to determine whether he suffers from intellectual disability. 'IQ testing that Dr. Shaffer administered reveals Mr. Rucker'sgeneral intelligence falls in the significantly substandard range (Full Scale Score of 73). The lowest cognitive skills involve understanding of verbal information (Verbal Comprehension Index, composite score of 72, in the 3rd percentile) and retaining and applying information (Working Memory Index, composite score of 74, in the 4th percentile). Mr. Rucker's overall score and two of his domain scores are consistent with APA and AIDD guidance on the intellectual functioning criterion.' Court Documents You can read the full motion filed below. yp4yynzqcvk2h1sdhv14sxyb_0676b7e4-2e33-4f78-9c05-4f7cb21fe93aDownload In light of Rucker's intellectual disability, the defense asks the court for the following relief: Schedule an evidentiary at which Mr. Rucker may present evidence in support of this motion. Order the State to provide Mr. Rucker with any discovery that directly or indirectly supports his intellectual disability claim. Grant this motion, find that Mr. Rucker has intellectual disability, and bar the State from seeking or imposing the death penalty in this case. Rucker currently has a hearing set for June 23 and also his jury trial is set for August 18, according to court documents. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
‘Soonest available date': State moves to hold execution warrant application hearing for Menzies
WEST JORDAN, Utah () — The execution of a man on Utah's death row is now moving forward after it was delayed for an investigation into his competency. Ralph Leroy Menzies was convicted in 1988 for the 1986 aggravated murder, kidnapping, and robbery of Maurine Hunsaker. The State filed a motion Monday to lift the stay on Menzie's execution and hold a hearing for an application for an execution warrant on the 'soonest available date.' Victim's family reacts to convicted killer being ruled competent to be executed According to documents, on Feb. 13, 2024, the court ordered that all 'proceedings advancing toward execution are stayed pending the resolution of Meznie's petition into competency.' They cancelled a hearing set later that month for the State's application for an execution warrant. The 67-year-old man has dementia, his defense in May 2025. Last week, on June 6, Menzies was after 16 months of back-and-forth and competency hearings. 'The State, therefore, moves to lift the stay on the execution proceedings and to schedule a hearing on the State's application for an execution warrant on the soonest available date,' the motion reads. In a statement to ABC4 last week, Menzie's attorney with ABC4 after the ruling that he was competent for execution. Court rules that convicted killer with dementia is competent to be executed We respectfully disagree with the Court's order and plan to appeal to the Utah Supreme Court. Ralph Menzies is a severely brain-damaged, wheelchair-bound, 67-year-old man with dementia and significant memory problems. He cannot understand the State's reasons for his execution. His dementia is progressive and he is not going to get better. It is deeply troubling that Utah plans to remove Mr. Menzies from his wheelchair and oxygen tank to strap him into an execution chair and shoot him to death. Lindsey Layer, Attorney for Ralph Menzies Matthew Hunsaker, Maurine Hunsaker's son, last week. He shared the devastation he felt after his mother's murder, but also his fight to get justice. Matthew Hunsaker says that the nearly 40-year wait has been difficult. 'We were at peace either way, but now let's see this execution happen, let's get this over with, and let's let the family close this chapter and move on,' Matthew Hunsaker said. Abigail Jones and McKenzie Diaz contributed to this report. Here's why a Pleasant Grove splash pad is now closed shortly after opening Father's Day gifts to make dad feel loved ICE arrests top 100K under Trump 'Soonest available date': State moves to hold execution warrant application hearing for Menzies Locally-written theater production opening in Utah Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
