Joran van der Sloot, the major suspect in the Natalee Holloway disappearance case, will not be rearrested after his recent on-camera confessions. Law court officials on the Dutch Antillean island of Curaçao say that Mr Van der Sloot's secretly filmed statements that he was with the girl when she died, and that he disposed of her body, do not constitute new legal evidence.
Joran van der Sloot being filmed on hidden camera
(picture based on SBS6 screenshot) |
The suspect's lawyer, Bert de Rooij, claims that his client intentionally lied to the informer who caught the statements on video tape using a hidden camera in his car.
Bitter
Investigative journalist Peter R. de Vries who televised Van der Sloot's confessions in a nationwide TV programme is disappointed by the Curaçao court's decision. Mr De Vries told BNR Radio that this is a bitter pill to swallow, particularly for the family.
"It highlights the distinction between journalistic evidence and legal evidence. I think that the entire nation has been able to see on TV how this man repeated his confessions on five different days: that he was on the beach [in Aruba] with the girl when she died, that he disposed of her body. He never retracted any of this, in fact he reaffirmed it time after time. It is bitter that this information cannot be used. The only reason for him to get rid of the girl's body is that he did not want the police or anybody else to determine what had happened to her."
Shoes
One of the court's arguments to let Mr Van der Sloot off for the time being is that no new legal evidence has come to light as a result of theTV confessions.
Mr De Vries points out that Mr Van der Sloot said he had thrown away a pair of Natalee's shoes. Earlier he had claimed he had forgotten them on the beach. The investigative journalist is suggesting that these shoes may still be around somewhere on Aruba, and that they might yield some forensic evidence.
Improper
Mr De Vries says that Joran van der Sloot has hindered the legal process of establishing the truth. He also questions the view of the Curaçao court, as expressed by a spokesperson, that Mr Van der Sloot may be suffering from a mental condition. Mr De Vries says:
"It is curious for a court spokesman to say anything about a suspect's mental make-up. As far as I know, Joran van der Sloot has never undergone any psychiatric tests, so the court is apparently speaking on the basis of impressions only. I believe that is improper."
| Suspect gone into hiding
Bert de Rooij, the lawyer of the main suspect in the Natalee Holloway case, has told Radio Netherlands Worldwide that his client Joran van der Sloot is in hiding in the Netherlands and fears for his life. "He's not hiding from the police, but from a nationwide kangaroo court. He has very good reasons to fear that if he goes out he won't make it to the other side of the street."
He was referring to the consequences of the televised confession by Joran van der Sloot broadcast on Dutch television on 3 February. The nearly two-hour show, in which the suspect was filmed by hidden camera, was viewed by seven million viewers more than any Dutch TV programme this century. The undercover operation was the brainchild of Peter R de Vries, the Netherlands' top crime reporter.
Mr de Rooij says that some of the statements Mr Van der Sloot made to Mr De Vries's informer couldn't possibly be true. Referring to a statement by his client that he made a local call to someone on the island of Aruba for help: "The public telephone he said he called from can only be used for international calls."
|
Tags:
Aruba,
disappearance,
hidden camera,
Joran van der Sloot,
Natalee Holloway,
Peter R. de Vries
Page:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
>
Cathryn Baillie,
cbaillie@comcast.net,
04-01-2009
- United States of America
Both teenagers involved in this terrible case were spoilt rich brats, drinking and smoking pot, typical of that era. No, he didn't INTEND to kill Natalee. She obviously died in some kind of reaction to the booze and drugs she'd taken. He reacted as any teenager would, scared, terrified, feeling guilty but knowing he's not, and his friends take the body out and dump it - he doesn't even know where. Give this kid a break.
Joseph,
13-03-2008
- USA
I just saw this on Wiki; anyone out there still want to take the highly edited hatchet job by De Vries and Van der Eem at face value?
"In March 2008, news reports indicated that the tables had been turned on Van der Eem, who himself was secretly taped after giving an interview for Aruban TV. Van der Eem, under the impression that cameras had been turned off, kept talking. Van der Eem disclosed that he had been a friend of Van der Sloot for years (contradicting his statement on the De Vries show that he had met Van der Sloot in 2007), that he expects to become a millionaire off his involvement in the Holloway case, and that he knew the person who supposedly disposed of Holloway's body -- and that Van der Sloot had asked him for two thousand euro to buy the man's silence. According to Dutch news service ANP, Van der Eem, who has already signed a book deal, "was furious" after learning of the taping, and "has threatened" the interviewer, who has sought legal advice."
Alex,
07-03-2008
- USA
Rob, is your evidence forthcoming?
Troy Ham,
04-03-2008
- NL
Jennifer Taylor, I'm still waiting to know which ship it is that you are working on so that I can avoid it. I need to book my cruise to Aruba and I really do think it is better if I am not on the same ship as yourself.
Regards, TAHam
Alex,
03-03-2008
- USA
Chuck, Your remarks are entirely clear headed and sober. I would only qualify them by noting that even though consulting toxicologists have concluded that Ms Holloway most likely expired from her own intoxication, it is not certain that she did. We must keep in mind the fact that unless and until her body is discovered, we only have a missing person case. There are several sound, plausible alternatives to her being dead, and we should not exclude those summarily. Remember, Phil McGraw employed a team of specialists to conduct a thorough field investigation of this case, and their conclusion was that Ms Holloway is most likely still alive. Their methodology was sound and their conclusions from evidence apparently reasonable, so much so that even though Beth Twitty voiced her displeasure over their report, one of her paid media consultants had to concede that their conclusions were at least plausible. Ultimately, then, we do not even know that Natalee Holloway is dead. She may be dead, or perhaps even probably is, but we cannot presume her demise with any certainty. There is certainly no substantive evidence of any murder, but since Rob has suggested he has the means to know that a murder took place, I believe we should allow him to produce his (hitherto unknown) evidence before commenting further.
Chuck,
02-03-2008
- USA
What murder are you talking about, Rob? The experts who examined the eyewitness accounts of Natalee's drug and alcohol use concluded that she probably died of her own intoxication. Is there any reason why we should ignore the experts' opinions? Did I miss the part where murder came into the story? No one has witnessed any murder, or found any evidence or even a clue that one was committed. How does murder come into the equation?
Alex,
01-03-2008
- USA
Rob,
You seem to have knowledge of a murder being committed. Can you share this with us? Likewise any legitimate confession Joran van der Sloot has made to the commission of a murder. I have not encountered any evidence suggesting anything other than that Natalee Holloway's night of willful inebriation was followed by her disappearance. If you have legitimate evidence of a murder or other crime being committed, or Joran van der Sloot "confessing" to same, please share it so that we might all benefit from your insight.
You also seem perplexed as to what motive a narcotically influenced young man might have for trying to impress a convicted gangster who has made overtures of criminal enterprise to him. I would suggest that motive, in such a circumstance, might consist merely of the desire to impress a convicted gangster who has made overtures of criminal enterprise to him. Especially so, in light of the fact that the gangster had predicated his overtures with approbatory statements that declared his young mark a "criminal" and "murderer."
I cannot speak for Mr. Harvey, and since he is obviously better educated and more contemplative than you appear to be, I will leave a fuller defense to his own composition. However, since Mr. Harvey has commented that Joran van der Sloot is clearly in need of reform, it would seem that he has no great sympathy for him and your ad hominems are unreasonable. A fairer assessment would be that Mr. Harvey objects to the bloodthristy, injudicious agenda that others, including yourself, seem to advocate. I would join Mr. Harvey in this objection, and I certainly hope that your intemperate, reactionary disposition has led to no harm of your daughter(s).
As for the inane aphorisms you provide regarding one's rightful exculpation from one's own murder, they are, of course, self-evident and undisputed. No sane person believes that another person deserves to be murdered merely because she got drunk and ingested narcotics while pursuing promiscuous sexual encounters, and I have not seen such a belief explicated here. As such, your platitudes argue from ignoratio elenchi, and thus advance no intelligent premise.
Rob,
29-02-2008
- USA
It would seem to me that regardless of whether one engages in salacious behavior as mentioned above, that person still has a right not to be murdered or killed by "accident". If a person takes another human life, that person should be punished. Enough of whether Natalee's own behavior put her into a dangerous situation. That fact certainly doesn't justify what happened. What possible motive could this slime have for confessing guilt to such a crime? If he gets off somehow on the prestige associated with such guilt, he deserves whatever negative attention he gets from it. If somebody hurt my little girl, I'd skin them alive myself. Sounds like Mr. Harvey's sympathies are with the murderer. "Behavioral foibles" can't be blamed for murder. That is a decision that is made by a soulless criminal exploiting an opportunity to prey others.
Alex,
27-02-2008
- USA
sdakotamad, You are, of course, free to think whatever you wish, but the fact remains that Joran van der Sloot's taped musings are factually impossible, and therefore of no value. While it is true that inmate confessions may be of evidentiary value if they are factually consistent, they possess no probity whatsoever if they can be shown to be impossible. As such, your observations are moot at best.
Troy Ham,
27-02-2008
- NL
Jennifer Taylor, Could you please let me know which cruise line it is that you work for? I, for one, do not want to be on the same cruise ship as yourself. Furthermore, if your employer shares you views, I would imagine that the Arubian government would share you desire for you and the ship NOT to call on the island! Seriously, which cruiseline is it?
sdakotamad,
26-02-2008
- USA
The courts in the USA use confessions made by inmates to other inmates in court. What's the difference? He confessed in confidence, multiple times. I think for the most part his confession is legitimate. How he got rid of the body may again be transfering some of the blame to an imaginary person.
Alex,
25-02-2008
- USA
Gerald, You are quite wrong. The Canadian justice system is quite civilized and well ordered. It neither features nor endorses summary or "kangaroo" proceedings, and as such the police would not ordinarily arrest someone in anticipation of one. I assure you that no Canadian prison would be housing Joran van der Sloot at present, simply because their is no substantial evidence demonstrating any crime he may have committed.
Gus,
24-02-2008
- Canada
Boycott ARUBA:
Brianna Denison 19 years old. candle light vigil
Serial rapist murder Took her right off the couch in a friends HOUSE.threw her body in an open field.probably three more.
Jon Benet Ramsey 6 years old /12 years this Christmas. No conviction No suspects after 12 yrs.
Like Joran person said I was with her when she died it was an accident. He was brought back from Europe - a lie
Joran I was with her When she died an accident - a Lie.
Michael Jackson truckloads of evidence walked.
O.J. Simpson two bodies. Hat don't fit you can't convict - hrs of evidence. He walked
And you people want to boycott Abuba? Better to Get into the real world thank them for what they are doing. God's will be done if you get of their backs, they will get on HIS.
gerald brassard,
23-02-2008
- canada
In my country, there are no doubts in my mind that Joran would not be hiding out somewhere because his life is in danger. He would certainly be safely guarded in a prison waiting to be judged for murder. All this has become insane and there must be an near end to this issue
Sandra,
21-02-2008
- Nederlands
Chuck, that was too funny, I almost choked on my coffee reading your post.
Page:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
>
