Natalee Case Discussion #721 2/3- 2/4/08

[cubbeegirl]

Good morning Monkeys.  I am new as a member, but have been lurking and reading and following Justice for Natalee for the past 2 1/2 years. 

One thing I am curious about is since Joran has not mentioned the K2s, are they still considered suspects and can they now be brought in as a witness against him?  They cannot lie as witness, correct?

Thank you and it's a great pleasure to be here.

anilee 

Welcome anilee and any other new monkeys I may have missed.... nice to have you in the cage....

[BUCKSHOT]

Does anyone think there is really a Daury out there somewhere?

Someone named Daury was in an article a page or two back. Is everyone with the name Daury thinking, "Why the hell did this kid pick my name of all names to say?"

Or is Daury - Paulus, Steve Croes, Koen Gottenbos, or Lorenzo?

[vzzzbx]

I do not agree with your statement and juries are not allowed emotion to enter in to their decision making process.

Not allowed, but how do you know they don't. I think this is a common opinion, at least here in Holland, jury members are not law experts like a judge and will pass judgement more like public opinion passes judgement.

[thirdstrike]

Joran's story does not fit the evidence or what we know to be as close to fact as possible...check it out....

Things we know..monkeys help me here, please.

1. FBI told the family there was blood in Deepak's car....
2. There was an 8 min phone call to Deepak from Joran at a very convenient time.  What was Joran relating to Deepak? 
3. There is documentation that Paulus was out at 4 AM (still looking for it, but I know I read it)
4. Deepak was cleaning his car at 3 in the morning on said night.  Before or after the 8 min call?
5. Paulus was arrested on a premeditated murder charge.
6. Satish asks how is the girl?  WHY?
7. Joran's shoes are missing.
8. Freddy offers to buy him a new pair? Is that not a red flag?
9. Deepak calls Joran to tell him they hit the jackpot with Steve Croes testimony.
10. Joran's first confession is lost in infinity forever thanks to Jacobs.

This is a start...the things we know does not jive with Joran's story...this confession is to make it all go away...not gonna happen.

That is what I find interesting about this whole thing Lala's.  Why hasn't he been re-arrested yet?  Do I believe his entire confession?  Of course not.  But, I do believe truths are sprinkled throughout it, and that seems like reason enough to detain him and re-interview based on infor contained within...

I think an admission (on tape) like this is an interrogator's dream!!  I mean, you have a foundation of information to begin with.  Certain elements of the "story" can be focused on in order to extract additional admissions from.  Why not give them another shot at doing just that with Joran?  I mean, we've NEVER had info like this before.  If there was EVER a time to have him arrested, it would be now, wouldn't it?

[Anna]

Basically if he came out and said these things here in the US, the jury would be able to hold it against him and find him guilty.

This may be the key difference, a jury or a judge passing the judgement. A jury judges more along the lines like you and me reason. (Dude did it). A judge follows the law more strictly, not led by emotions.

Not at all.  The law is explained in great detail to a jury and they MUST adhere to it.  They are not allowed to just act on a whim.  And there is the "beyond a reasonable doubt" clause to keep in mind as well.  All twelve must be in agreement also.  Even one can prevent a guilty verdict. 

.

[Observer]

Tacopina on GMA
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4237805&affil=wncf

MSNBC COVERAGE
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/22991283#22991283

GMA NATALEE'S MOM REACTS
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4237586&affil=wncf

[jehnifer]

I feel it is significant that one of the stories told way back in 2005 was about Natalee falling and hurting her head.  There is an element of truth in this kind of statement IMO.  Otherwis why would anyone just randomly bring that up?

Oh ...and hello all.  I am just thrilled to be a member now after three years of lurking!

[Lala'sMom]

Aruba's police has a good track record, and that there is a 100% solution rate about a question from an American reporter how many american tourists have been killed in Aruba. He laughed.
------------------------------
100% solution rate? It's been 12 years since the last American was murdered in Aruba..All of them since have dissapeared or killed themselves.

A truly good reporter would be asking all the questions we ask.  There are no reporters willing to do this...the last one ended up with her hand in her pocket.

[vzzzbx]

Not at all.  The law is explained in great detail to a jury and they MUST adhere to it.  They are not allowed to just act on a whim.  And there is the "beyond a reasonable doubt" clause to keep in mind as well.  All twelve must be in agreement also.  Even one can prevent a guilty verdict. 

How can you explain the law to a jury when it takes a judge several years to study it and has to pass exams to become a judge?

[Peaches]

Is it their law that they need the body??  I guess I really don't understand their system.

No, they don't NEED a body.  Karin Janssens's claim to fame was she had won a conviction in a murder case without a body.  Evidently, she could only pull that something like that off once in her career.  She's another disgrace to women. 

[Observer]

Does anyone think there is really a Daury out there somewhere?

Someone named Daury was in an article a page or two back. Is everyone with the name Daury thinking, "Why the hell did this kid pick my name of all names to say?"

Or is Daury - Paulus, Steve Croes, Koen Gottenbos, or Lorenzo?

Yes,I believe they found the right Daury but he had nothing to do with this case. He even said he just spoke to Joran briefly on MSN just like how Joran told us in that dutch phone interview a few days ago. Joran simply picked out his name to protect who he was really talking about.MO

[thirdstrike]

I do not agree with your statement and juries are not allowed emotion to enter in to their decision making process.

Not allowed, but how do you know they don't. I think this is a common opinion, at least here in Holland, jury members are not law experts like a judge and will pass judgement more like public opinion passes judgement.

Understanding humans carry emotions in the natural decision making process, jurors have an obligation to follow law strictly in determining the fate of those they judge.  It's what makes a balanced judicial system work.  Otherwise, we'd be no better then those we are critical of.

With that being said, I think it's often times extremely difficult to restrict emotion while judging morality. I mean, those of us who value such things...

[cubbeegirl]

Joran's story does not fit the evidence or what we know to be as close to fact as possible...check it out....

Things we know..monkeys help me here, please.

1. FBI told the family there was blood in Deepak's car....
2. There was an 8 min phone call to Deepak from Joran at a very convenient time.  What was Joran relating to Deepak? 
3. There is documentation that Paulus was out at 4 AM (still looking for it, but I know I read it)
4. Deepak was cleaning his car at 3 in the morning on said night.  Before or after the 8 min call?
5. Paulus was arrested on a premeditated murder charge.
6. Satish asks how is the girl?  WHY?
7. Joran's shoes are missing.
8. Freddy offers to buy him a new pair? Is that not a red flag?
9. Deepak calls Joran to tell him they hit the jackpot with Steve Croes testimony.
10. Joran's first confession is lost in infinity forever thanks to Jacobs.

This is a start...the things we know does not jive with Joran's story...this confession is to make it all go away...not gonna happen.

That is what I find interesting about this whole thing Lala's.  Why hasn't he been re-arrested yet?  Do I believe his entire confession?  Of course not.  But, I do believe truths are sprinkled throughout it, and that seems like reason enough to detain him and re-interview based on infor contained within...

I think an admission (on tape) like this is an interrogator's dream!!  I mean, you have a foundation of information to begin with.  Certain elements of the "story" can be focused on in order to extract additional admissions from.  Why not give them another shot at doing just that with Joran?  I mean, we've NEVER had info like this before.  If there was EVER a time to have him arrested, it would be now, wouldn't it?

Morning X.... One would certainly think so .... but then again there we have that darned old Aruban law that we just don't understand. I am in agreement with you that there are truths sprinkled throughout his admission....but I am not buying his whole story as being the truth

[vzzzbx]

Is it their law that they need the body??  I guess I really don't understand their system.

No, they don't NEED a body.  Karin Janssens's claim to fame was she had won a conviction in a murder case without a body.  Evidently, she could only pull that something like that off once in her career.  She's another disgrace to women. 

I thought they need a body. How do you prove someone's dead when there is no body? Let alone, prove someone killed a person?

[klaasend]

Posted by Sunmoonstars at RU:

Rechercheurs Monday of the KLPD have searched two addresses in Arnhem in the investigation into the disappearance of the American teenager Natalee Holloway. The Aruban public prosecutor had this commissioned.

[Tamikosmom]

JOE T. from GMA this morning

GMA:

Joining us now is Joran van der Sloot's attorney, Joseph Tacopina, to get this side of the story. Thank you Joe for being here.

We know that the prosecutors are asking for the case to be re-opened but right now they're not going to re-arrest your client?

Joe:

Well they tried. The prosecution had this tape for over a week and they struggled with the evidenciary value of it because they didn't even seek to re-arrest Joran for a week. They've arrested him twice in this case with no evidence. They went to a Judge finally after we sort of questioned why they wouldn't even seek an arrest and Joran denied Joran's arrest last night, which speaks volumes for the evidenciary value of this tape.

There are problems inherent in the tape, many of the facts are easily disprovable based on corroborative evidence. No one's asking at this point, certainly I'm not asking anyone to believe Joran, or any of his statements. Clearly his credibility is zero, but look separately, look independently at what he's saying are the facts in this case, the evidence and his story is inconsistent as it was

GMA:

Why would he lie like that?

Joe:

Well look, you know that is the toughest question but the facts are easily disprovable. The guy allegedly with the boat, Daury, wasn't even in Aruba in May of 2005, he's never owned a boat, Joran didn't meet him until 2 months ago so he made up these facts.

On thing that you'll see in this tape recording that you've played earlier is he said, the undercover said "In a boat?" and Joran paused and said "yes". Understand that each and every one of these conversations are after there was marijuana induced, introduced into the set, this undercover if you will provided Joran with drugs, marijuana, things like that, said things, he was acting like an idiot quite frankly but don't forget this individual just said he was making himself out to be a mobster, a criminal, a big individual and I think Joran was just playing this game.

He's [inaudible) about a lot of other things too independent of this investigation.

GMA:

But why would he go into such great detail. For Joran to know that people have suspected him and to go into such great detail, to talk with someone as he did with this informant, has a lot of people saying, at the very least, if he did not kill her, that he was there and was involved in the disappearance and wasn't that a crime in itself?

Joe:

Well actually no, there is no admission. This thing has been deemed a confession and that was done for ratings for this guy's show in The Netherlands last night. It was deemed a confession, there's no confession, there's no admission of a crime by Joran in any of these tapes, which is very telling, I mean that's one of the things the prosecution

GMA:

But to say that he was there, that she may still have been alive when she was thrown into the water?

Joe:

No, no, he didn't say that. There are various portions of this tape where his story is drastically different and that's part of the reason, you know he doesn't have details that are accurrate, his story changes over 20 hours but what he says is she died, he panicked and called a friend from a payphone, which by the way is disprovable because the Aruban Coast Guard has already looked at that payphone and there's no such call, we have the records.

GMA:

What are the authorities telling you right now?

Joe:

They're looking at the case again, which they should do. Joran deserves this if you will, but the fact of the matter is he's still not responsible, the evidence, not Joran, the evidence says he's not responsible for Natalee's death.

GMA:

Joseph Tacopina, thank you very much.

Thanks you Nut.

I slept in and only caught the end.

Janet

[Destiny]

Hi Monkeys. Finally got in this place...please give me a new decoder ring...mine doesn't seem to work any longer. 

Tylergal are you still here?  I see you caught my hint last night and ran with it..Thanks.

What about the shoes?  I want to talk shoes...where is Anna?  Do we have a photo of the shoes that Joran says he was wearing that night? I know it is here someplace, but I am lost today for some reason.  Also, just exactly what did Deepak say about those shoes?  He knew they were important and so did Freddy. Didn't Freddy offer to buy him a new pair?  We have to look at what we know and see if it fits?  Guess what?  It doesn't!

WHY DOES JORAN THROW AWAY HIS SHOES?  Surely he's had sandy shoes before living on an island? 

I read a translation that he threw the shoes in a 'well'.  Was that a good translation?

Is that a well for drinking water?   Can you imagine drinking water from that well for over two years now?

Or, does 'well' mean some kind of sewer opening?  Would something like a pair of shoes show up in the end process?  Possibly remain because they aren't as biodegradable as other organic things?

Mornin'!

There is the well on the Sloot property...can't remember if that was searched in the *really big search*...one would think so...but this is Aruba we are talking about....plus the shoes were expensive and new...the IN shoes for the island pimps at the time...you don't just toss a *status* symbol like that without damn good reason....hmmmmmmm   shoes.

[cubbeegirl]

I feel it is significant that one of the stories told way back in 2005 was about Natalee falling and hurting her head.  There is an element of truth in this kind of statement IMO.  Otherwis why would anyone just randomly bring that up?

Oh ...and hello all.  I am just thrilled to be a member now after three years of lurking!

Welcome to the cage jehnifer... I feel and have always felt that the story of Natalee falling and  hurting her head was told to explain obvious head injury in case her body was found . I think Natalee might have hit her head due to Joran's fist or foot slamming into ... JMO

[blah]

I do not agree with your statement and juries are not allowed emotion to enter in to their decision making process.

Not allowed, but how do you know they don't. I think this is a common opinion, at least here in Holland, jury members are not law experts like a judge and will pass judgement more like public opinion passes judgement.

this is a topic that could be debated all day long but i'll just try and give you some quick facts to help understand.

Prior to the jury being picked, both lawyers are allowed to ask questions of each jury member, give them tests even to determin their ability to tell the truth, make decisons based on fact and not emotion, etc.  They have people who are specialized in picking jury members, they have specialized questioneers designed to weed out the ones they dont want.

They jury is made up of 12 people - have you ever tried to get 12 people to agree on anything???

Anyhow, the jurors are given very specific instructions by the judge in how they can make their decision and the rules they must folllow.  Then a leader is selected and they go look at the evidence.  If during the process, there is a juror not playing by the rules, it is the leader (or any other member's) duty to report it to the judge.

Also, afer the jury makes their decision, they have a chat with the judge and possibly the lawyers.  they also may make statements to the press or whatever.  If at any time after the decision, someone says anything to make the judge or one of the lawyers feel the jury didnt play by the rules, they can call for a mistrial.

There are many other factors and people take jury duty very seriously in this country. Jurors can also get into BIG trouble for not playing by the rules.

Anyhow, dont want to steal the thread - just give you a little insight.

Hope this helps!

[Observer]

I feel it is significant that one of the stories told way back in 2005 was about Natalee falling and hurting her head.  There is an element of truth in this kind of statement IMO.  Otherwis why would anyone just randomly bring that up?

Oh ...and hello all.  I am just thrilled to be a member now after three years of lurking!

Welcome Jehnifer,you are right I believe that is extremely significant to what really happened to Natalee. JK2 all told us that,even PVDS when he told two different people she may have hit her head and died in early june 2005. I bet they will want to retract all those statement if Natalee is found.