COUNT 12 - FRAUD

Yolandi Du Toit (‘Du Toit’), the complainant on count 12 testified, inter alia, as follows

[a] That she was born on 23 June 1983. In the year 2010, she received an invitation from the accused on facebook, for a model shoot. She attended the shoot in Pretoria, which was done by the accused. She paid for the photographs and received them from him.

[b] She recalled an incident where she made a payment of R 1300,00 (one thousand three hundred rands) to the accused for an artistic nude shoot. The photo shoot was subsequently done, in the presence of her mother. The accused asked her to sign a consent form, which she refused to do (1), as she did not want her pictures on the web. (2) She never received these photographs from the accused. She made several requests to him and on

each occasion, he had an excuse regarding the photographs. He asked her to sign the consent form, which she refused to do. payment at his home in Kempton Park. Which year was this in? --- It was also in 2010 (1) , a few months after the first shoot. You said you made payment, how much did you pay? --- The amount was R1 300.Who did you pay it to? --- I paid it to Dawie. For what? --- It was for the artistic nude shoot. COURT: For what? --- Artistic nude shoot. Autistic [spelt]. --- Artistic, yes. Artistic is something different, I could not correlate that. --- Yes, M’Lord. So it is artistic nude shoot? --- Yes.

1. Transcripts Page 452 Para 1 - Yes, madam? --- Thereafter I never received my photos. Dawie said I should sign a consent form, but I refused. I told him that I did not want my artistic nude photos on the web because it is private.

NOTES: ACCUSED

Did you ask the accused for the photos, photographs? --- Yes, I did.

• Shoot was not in 2010 – It was in the 17th of May 2011.

• Because of my reputation it was a full nude shoot (I have the images) it cannot be released without a Model Release – She refused to sign it which means I am not

Transcripts Page 451 Para 3 - Yes, madam, and then? --- For the second shoot I made

• The other demand was she wanted the unedited photos, which I never gave a model, they then go and edit and give it to other to edit and that is a massive risk for a photographers reputation.

Cross-Examination page 455 Para 3 - Furthermore, if needs be, the accused will deny that he wanted to place any nude photography, photographs, of you on the website because it would not be good for the business and the models’ parents that he had dealings with at the time. --- But that I did not know. I did not know if he would put it on.

NOTES: ACCUSED

• She testify she refused to sign the model release form because I wanted to put it on our website, yet when Pienaar questioned her she said she did not know if I was going to put them on the net. This confirm my reason;

• The process is, A model pay for the theme shoot, then after the shoot they come and choose the photos they like and get charged a fee per edit upon the signature of the release form. I only edit those that is paid and a release is signed for.

1. Cross-Examination page 455 Para 1 - Did it also occur after the second shoot, the nude shoot, that you sat down had a discussion about the photos? --- Yes, we did that. Now, what is this form, can you just explain to us again that he wanted you to sign, on your version now? --- The form he wanted me to sign is a consent form. The consent form is an authorisation for him to use my photos on his website. This form that you are referring to is it also known as a ‘model release form’? --- I am not sure. Because if necessary the accused will testify that he asked you to sign a model release form which you refused. --- He did not say model release form he said consent form.

NOTES: ACCUSED

a lingerie photo on our websites. 2. I could not release the photos; a. The shoot only was paid for…. i. It was a R1300 for the shoot

ii. R35 per edit, she chose the photos, after that she refused to sign the Model Release and then demanded she wants all the unedited photos because she paid R1300. I explained that was for the shoot “My time and use of equipment. Editing is not free time or a free service. They got angry and left.

[c] She was surprised to receive an invitation from the accused during 2012 for photo shoots. She replied to his invitation wherein she told him that he had the “nerve” to invite her when in the first instance she had not received her photographs. The accused did not respond to her.

[d] She did not receive her photographs, nor the refund of R 1300,00 (one thousand three hundred rands) from the accused.

[e] She emailed Carte Blanche after viewing the broadcast about her complaint. She was referred to a member of the SAPS and accordingly opened a criminal case against the accused.

That in essence concluded the evidence of the 11th witness, Du Toit

Elizabeth Du Toit (‘Elizabeth’), the mother of the complainant on count 12 testified, inter alia, as follows

[a] That the accused is known to her, as she had met him on several occasions when she had taken Du Toit for photo shoots.

[b] She confirmed that the accused was paid the amount of R 1300,00 (one thousand three hundred rands) for the artistic nude shoot, and

That in essence concluded the evidence of the 12th witness, Elizabeth.

JUDGMENT DEFENSE EVIDENCE

[s] Count 12 (Yolandi Du Toit): He confirmed that he did a nude photoshoot for her in the presence of her mother and a makeup artist. He was duly paid for this photoshoot. A few days later they attended at his premises in order to select the photographs that they liked. He required Du Toit to sign a release form before he edited the photographs. She refused to sign the release form and said that she required all her unedited photographs. (1)

NOTES: ACCUSED

1.This was my argument

Due to this dispute between the parties she never received her photographs. He stated that the amount of R 1300,00 (one thousand three hundred rand) was paid for the photoshoot and not the photographs, and that there was an extra cost for the editing of the photos. (2)

NOTES: ACCUSED

2. This was common cause with my work

He conceded that she could have subsequently received a facebook invitation due to the fact that she was on the mailing list. He recalled that DuToit’s mother had called him and threatened to expose him. He denied the allegations of fraud and stated that when he received the hard drive from the investigating officer, during the trial, he realised that there were unedited photographs of this witness on the drive. He subsequently gave them the unedited photographs on a memory stick, during the trial. It was never his intention to defraud this witness. (3)

NOTES: ACCUSED

3. To proof my intent was never not to give her the photos but to protect the reputation and honour my agreement we had once she pays for the photos, I showed kindness and the willingness to solve this in a friendly way, yet the judge still found me guilty.

JUDGMENT

[47] The complainant Yolandi Du Toit testified in respect of Count 12 regarding the fact that she paid the accused an amount of money, as per the indictment and that she did not receive her artistic nude photographs. Despite numerous requests, the accused failed to provide her with her photographs. Her evidence is corroborated by that of her rmother, Elizabeth Du Toit. Both these witnesses gave their evidence in a clear and concise manner, without any bias against the accused. The accused was unable to say whether this witness was involved in the conspiracy against him

PALAVER CONCLUSION

This witness was terrible. She made demands to have photos that did not belong to her and had no right of having.

The State and Court found the Accused guilty on a fraud charge where the SA Police was the reason for the accused not having access to the photos. It was out of his control, and this is not a criminal matter.

This is a civil matter and should not have been heard in a criminal court.

Du Toit used anger for her unreasonable demands to testify and get her way in court.

The court ignored the Release Contract, which is not to be dealt with in a criminal court. #BADJudgement #CivilMatter