State calls for conviction of Leano Vergotine on 18 charges of child abuse

The State has called on the Wynberg Regional Court, currently sitting as the Western Cape High Court, to convict alleged child rapist and child pornography creator Leano Vergotine on all 18 charges against him, arguing that the evidence presented throughout the trial overwhelmingly supports the case against the accused.

During closing arguments on Monday, State Prosecutor Renée Uys told the court that the State believed it had successfully proven every count against Vergotine.

“The evidence speaks for itself,” Uys submitted. Vergotine faces the possibility of five life sentences, along with a further 45 years’ imprisonment relating to the exploitation of minors. Referring to videos viewed during the trial, Uys argued that the footage clearly showed the accused sexually penetrating all three child complainants.

“The accused before court definitely penetrated all three children as seen in the video evidence,” she told the court. The State further pointed to corroborating witness testimony and medical findings in support of several charges. In relation to child complainant one, Uys said there was both witness evidence and medical evidence before court, including J88 reports linked to counts two, three, four and five.

The court heard that bruising to the anus of child complainant one had been recorded in the medical findings.The State also indicated that child complainant two, who was 15 years old at the time, was filmed.

While the accused allegedly claimed the sexual acts were consensual, the State strongly rejected this version.

"He was very open about the fear. You could see the fear,” Uys argued. In relation to child complainant three, the State referred to exhibit three, arguing that the video evidence itself demonstrated both the complainant’s age and the alleged grooming that took place.

“That is why he did not testify, because the evidence already shows the rape and the grooming,” Uys submitted. A legal issue of possible duplication of charges was raised, to which the State submitted that the accused committed each offence separately.

“We are dealing with a unique situation where Vergotine was the creator and possessor of child pornography. He also used childen to make the videos. The intention in each count is different, and therefore each charge is valid on its own.”