Kids’ porn hell described
|Published
The eight family members who are accused of producing child pornography material leave the Pretoria North Magistrate Court. Picture by: Masi Losi The eight family members who are accused of producing child pornography material leave the Pretoria North Magistrate Court. Picture by: Masi Losi
The young foster girl could recall the foul taste in her mouth after she had oral sex, while the little boy could describe how he hurt during anal penetration.
This, and other information, were not the kind of details children of their age would make up if they did not experience it, State advocate Tania Carstens told the Pretoria North Magistrate’s Court yesterday.
She was opposing bail for the eight family members accused of sexually abusing their own biological children and two foster children over a period since 2005.
The grandparents and their children (the parents of some of the children) were arrested on December 2 on several charges, including the possession and manufacturing of child pornography.
The foster girl, now aged eight, and the boy, 6, were in the care of the grandparents, but removed earlier this year. Police observed the smallholding north of Pretoria for several months, before arresting the suspects, after the children made certain allegations.
Naas de Jager, an advocate for six of the accused, said the arrest and imprisonment were emotional and traumatic events for the accused. Their lives, both emotionally and financially, were collapsing every minute. They were also concerned about the pigs they farm with.
“Remember, their children were taken away. You won’t run away leaving your children behind,” he told the court.
De Jager said this case was blown up with certain allegations, but if one looked at the accused, it was highly unlikely that they would be a “production machine” (for porn).
They felt their arrests were malicious, as the grandparents were about to bring a high court application to have the foster children returned to them.
“He (the grandfather) testified that he wanted to take on the CMR (Christelike Maatskaplike Raad), and in reaction he was arrested,” De Jager argued.
Lawyer Lara Cole said her two clients, the 36-year-old man and his 26-year-old wife - the parents of two of the boys who were removed - were only linked because they allegedly had sex in front of minor children.
“On what grounds were the children removed? Were there Children’s Court proceedings? No camera or child pornography was found.
“There was a photo of the couple’s two-year-old baby sleeping naked. There is nothing explicit or of a sexual nature.
“If that is porn then half of the mothers and grandmothers in South Africa must be arrested,” Cole added.
Carstens replied that there were several charges under the Sexual Offences Act against all the accused.
The grandparents, their 28-year-old nephew and their 36-year-old son-in-law, were accused of having sex with the children, indecently assaulting them and/or filming these acts.
By having sex in front of the children, the other couple “groomed” the youngsters to be more open to sexual deeds, while the grandfather’s brother and his wife instructed the children to have sex with each other, Carstens said.
“All of the accused can be charged with rape as they acted with common purpose,” she said.
Referring to the statements of the two foster children that were questioned by the defence, Carstens said they were in two separate places of safety and had no contact with each other.
In addition, there were medical reports confirming the sexual allegations of the two children.
The children also gave a description of how videos would be put into a box, packed and picked up by someone, with the adults telling them that once these videos were sold, the children would get sweets, Carstens said.
Regarding the grandparents’ high court application, the State argued that they became worried when the foster children were taken away, as they might talk about what happened to them.
“One of the biological children said their parents warned them that if they spoke about this (the incidents), they would be removed. I believe that is why the biological children don’t want to talk yet,” she said.
The State also feared the accused might interfere with witnesses, especially the children, if granted bail.
The State yesterday also submitted a report from Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital stating that one of the accused, who appeared to be mentally disabled, would be fit to stand trial.
However, “big words, difficult questions and written documentation”, should be explained to him.
Judgment in the bail application will be delivered on Tuesday, January 4. - Pretoria News