THERE is something about Sonia Combrink that drives men to protect her. Charles MacDonald resisted identifying her when he gave police the baby she had stolen and pretended was theirs for two years, and current lover Jaques Snyman is vowing to stick by her in the event of a prison sentence.
Combrink (26) was found guilty in the Rand Supreme Court this week of kidnapping new- born baby Micaela Hunter from hospital in May 1994. She had pleaded not guilty.
Judge R Nugent, who on Monday criticised the defence for wasting court time and public money, said he had found her evidence “unimpressive”, and “entirely unacceptable” when the defence had tried to get her confessions to police ruled inadmissible. He found the evidence against her “overwhelming and conclusive”.
But Snyman, a 27-year-old salesman, says he will wait for her if she is sent to prison when sentencing takes place next month. “I love her, it’s as simple as that,” he said shyly. “I’ll stand by her whatever happens.”
It was Snyman’s mother Beatrice who put up the estimated R50 000 needed for the defence because, she said, “they are so very much in love and my son is totally devoted to her”.
Beatrice Snyman, an office worker, would not say where the money came from, but said she would have re-mortgaged her house if necessary because “my son’s happiness was at stake”.
Although she expressed sympathy with the Hunters for the distress Combrink inflicted on them by kidnapping their baby, she insisted that Combrink had already suffered for making the mistake. “She is a wonderful mother to her two kids. The first thing she said after hearing the judgment was: `Bring me my children. I want to see them as soon as possible.'”
South Africa’s most celebrated kidnapping attracted a packed courtroom to hear Judge Nugent give his reasons for finding against Combrinck. He began by explaining why he had ruled in the state’s favour, following a trial within a trial, that confessions made by Combrink to police and a magistrate soon after her arrest could be admitted as evidence.
Defence counsel Lourens de Koning did not call any witnesses, but hinged his case on arguing that the statements were tainted because Combrink had not been fully advised of her rights.
De Koning also argued that a candidate attorney who advised MacDonald on how to return the baby had breached attorney-client privilege, by allowing Combrink’s name to be disclosed to the police.
The judge said MacDonald, who only learnt that Micaela was not his child after Combrink had abandoned them both for Snyman, had tried to protect her initially. But he let slip her name several times while giving his statement, and eventually gave her name and address to police because he did not want to be arrested.
Judge Nugent described Combrink as having been calm and composed on the night four officers from the police Child Protection Unit arrested her at her sister’s house in Johannesburg. She poured out information without much prompting and at the end said it had been a relief. When brought before a magistrate, she agreed to repeat the confession, which she later tried to argue had been made under duress.
In her confession, Combrink told how she fell pregnant, but then lost the baby after nine weeks. Fearing MacDonald would walk out on her, she feigned another pregnancy. “I was going to steal a baby because my boyfriend kept on asking me when I was going to have a baby.”
It took two attempts before she conned Alison Hunter into handing over her child for a demonstration bath at the Marymount maternity hospital in Johannesburg. “I just put her under my jacket and walked out,” she said in the statement.
Combrink, who became pregnant at 14 and gave her baby daughter up for adoption, had been sterilised following the birth of her two young children. As a young widow she began a relationship with MacDonald in 1993.
In May of that year she tried to have the operation reversed, but was told this was impossible. However, she told MacDonald that she was pregnant and soon afterwards moved in with him, taking her two children.
“Strange as it may seem,” said Judge Nugent, “MacDonald believed the baby was due in December” – even though he knew she had been sterilised.
Then Combrink announced she had miscarried, but said she had fallen pregnant again and the baby was due in April 1994. Again MacDonald – described by the judge as a nervous young man, and who had testified that he had never seen a naked pregnant woman before – believed her.
On May 3 1994, Combrink – heavily padded to look pregnant -told MacDonald she was going to have a Caesarean section. She arrived at the hospital dressed in a white dress and, after failing to prise a baby boy from numerous mothers, she took Micaela.
The huge police search which followed failed to turn up any leads, though last year a young woman was arrested and then freed for the offence. It was only after Combrink left Micaela with MacDonald and he tried to adopt her that her crime was exposed. The two have not spoken since.
After the verdict, Bruce Hunter declared himself satisfied that justice had been done. “Unfortunately, we will still have to wait for the sentence. Only then will we be able to get on with our lives.”
He disclosed that MacDonald, who the judge accepted did not know the baby had been snatched, had tried to get in contact with Micaela since handing her over. “The answer was a categoric no. We will not allow anyone from that time of her life to see her. She no longer has any recollection of them and is adapting well to her new surroundings.”
Micaela, who initially had difficulties adjusting to life with her parents and baby brother, took only six weeks to begin calling them mummy and daddy. “It was very hard at first,” added Alison Hunter, “because we had lost two years of her life, but we are bonding very strongly.” She said all that was needed now was for Combrink to be punished.
Combrink will be kept in police cells until November 18, when argument about sentencing will be heard.