Child rapist Nicholas van der Schyff's life sentence upheld by Western Cape High Court

A child rapist sentenced to life imprisonment has failed in an appeal bid at the Western Cape High Court to have his conviction and sentence overturned. 

At the Wynberg Regional Magistrate’s Court, Nicholas van der Schyff was jailed for raping twin sisters and another minor but denied this, maintaining that the evidence against him was fabricated.

The children testified regarding events that allegedly occurred in 2015, when the twins were nine and the friend would have been about seven years old.

Van der Schyff, who was a friend of the twins’ grandfather, was convicted on a charge of rape, six charges of sexual assault and three charges of exposing or displaying pornography to children after his complainants testified in 2023.

The court heard that Van der Schyff would, from time to time, take the three girls to his home, play pornographic films, and sexually molest them.

During the trial, the court heard from victim testimonies the effects they suffered as a result of his actions which included self-harming and suicidal ideations by overdosing on pills, once one of the children discovered that Van der Schyff had been released on bail. 

“One of the twins testified that the appellant (Van der Schyff) raped her on one of those occasions. He was able to do so because he had given some money to the other two children who had gone to buy something at a nearby shop. They testified that when they returned, they had heard their sister/friend crying. It seems they realised something was wrong and started throwing stones on the roof of the appellant’s house,” the court recorded.

Van der Schyff vehemently denied the crimes he was accused of. 

“(He) disputed all the allegations made against him. He said that during 2015 he had not been at home during the days because he was either working as a painter or working with a friend, and only arrived home late in the evenings.  

“He essentially said that the complainants and the twins’ mother had concocted a case against him because he had stopped giving the complainants food (something he said he did sometime in 2014), and because in December 2020 he had accused the twins’ mother of spending money on “tik” (crystal methamphetamine) instead of buying food for her family,” the judgment read.

During review of the matter, the court highlighted a procedural issue with regard to the manner in which a child witness was sworn in and whether the child had full grasp of taking the oath. 

The court record reflects that each victim was sworn in after it was explained to them why they had to take the oath and for them to tell the truth.

Acting Judge Andrew Morrissey said although the twins expressed confusion about what it meant to take an oath, further questioning revealed that they understood what it meant to swear something was true; and the Court then explained that that was essentially what taking the oath meant.

“All three children testified clearly and consistently about the core facts relevant to the charges, in particular, that the appellant had them watch pornographic films and that he touched their private parts. The child who said the appellant raped her described the event with the sort of detail one would expect from a person who had endured such a traumatic event. Significantly, her description included details that at her age she would unlikely have known about unless she had experienced them.

“...(We) do not consider the evidence of the complainants should be rejected simply because they are child witnesses and because there are indications that some evidence or detail that they gave was likely coloured by youthful imagination. That sort of difficulty might be problematic if the detail was more directly material to the probity of their evidence,” said acting Judge Morrissey. 

chevon.booysen@inl.co.za