THE Joost van der Westhuizen sex tape saga descended into a tabloid frenzy yesterday as a celebrity magazine screened a grainy video purporting to show the former Springbok captain in compromising positions.
The 29-minute tape, which was shown to journalists, showed a man who bore some resemblance to Van der Westhuizen frolicking with what heat magazine described as a “vindictive young lady” wearing two G-strings “in the stripper tradition”.
It claimed that the video proved conclusively that Van der Westhuizen had cheated on his wife, singer Amore Vittone.
But the magazine did not identify the woman and provided little corroborating evidence in the accompanying story.
Twelve print, radio and television journalists watched the man, whom Van der Westhuizen strongly denies is him, arousing himself, running his hands over the woman’s body, and using a sex toy.
The screening took place at the offices of heat’s lawyers, Werksmans Attorneys.
The magazine also published explicit stills from the tape, accompanied by an article that reads: “The shocking exclusive pictures on these pages are stills from a video that was given to heat and contains [sic] scenes so explicit that it destroys the former Springbok captain’s reputation as a loyal family man”.
But the verdict is still out, with many present at the screening not convinced that it was Van der Westhuizen on the tape — so some people watched it again.
The woman in the video filmed it herself. She had hidden a camera in her handbag, which she frequently realigns to get clearer shots of the action.
And there is plenty of that — including the man kissing her buttocks, her performing fellatio on him, and both of them snorting lines of white powder she took out of her make-up bag and prepared on top of a DVD cover.
The man in the video looks remarkably like Van der Westhuizen, with his muscular body, and an identical hairstyle and body hair. But his voice, which would have helped to establish his identity, was drowned out by the constantly repeated Fleetwood Mac song Don’t Stop (thinking about tomorrow) .
Van der Westhuizen’s lawyer, Jan de Villiers, tried to prevent the media from seeing the video because the rugby hero had not had an opportunity to “have a copy … examined by experts” to determine whether it was authentic.
“Despite having undertaken informally to allow Mr Van der Westhuizen to have the video analysed, heat now wishes to have the video shown to the media without such analysis first being performed,” he said.
“We infer that this is because heat considers the video to be a fabrication, as this is the only reason why the magazine would resist the technical analysis proposed by Mr Van der Westhuizen. Instead of experts, heat now appears to intend to have the media act as experts.”
De Villiers claimed certain “physical characteristics clearly differentiate Van der Westhuizen from the man in the video”.
These differences include a tattoo he claims to have on his buttocks and his reported a**ertion that the man’s penis was “much bigger” than his.
“To show [the film] to the media at this juncture is either reckless or malicious, and is calculated to cause Mr Van der Westhuizen damage,” De Villiers said.
“The conduct of heat in seeking to further publicise the video …appears to be part of a conspiracy to a**a**inate his character and to hurt his family.”
De Villiers said the woman who filmed the tape was “guilty of criminal conduct” and he accused heat of having “questionable motives” in refusing to reveal her identity.
Van der Westhuizen said he has never cheated on his wife.
