Natalee Case Discussion #748 4/17 - 4/24/08

[ldstlou]

Id, You are right, I think...He got on my nerves also, because of his arrogance, but maybe its because of it that he was able to even stand dealing with joran...who knows..but I will continue the boycott no matter what he says, and while some info was forthcoming from joran, Patrick didnt solve the case...which is to bad. Im wondering if he really speaks with Beth? Any idea????

I have no idea if he has continued contact with her...but I will just go with Vietvets comments...you boycott us...and we'll boycott you...or something of that nature...works for me!!

[MumInOhio]

"And when it comes to Patrick knowing the van der Sloots....7 years? Where did that come from?  What he meant in the conversation with Pontje was that he knew about he case for years...not the van der Sloots. Where did the 7 years come from? Is this from something else? A different interview / quote?"

Knowing the Natalee case more than 7 years? Or about 7 years?



That could make sense, or?

Does anybody know something about the carwashing of the Kalpoe brothers in the middle of the night?
In Holland people wrote some neighbours seen or heard the Kalpoe brothers while they were washing their car the morning after Natalee disappeared.

Are there any officials statement or is this just a rumour?

Hi Briany and Welcome...I think there is something in the PV's...give me a little bit and I will try and find it for you. Or at least the links! Be back in a few!

[SS]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

[briany]

One thing I overlooked from the beginning though. I actually, yes it is silly of me, never realized that the name scared monkeys, is meant to be racist. When I first saw it and their logo I thought it was creative. Only later I realized that they probably refer to how they see people in Aruba.

In Holland some people say The Scared Monkeys are racists.


I never noticed this is a racist forum myself.

[SS]

It was a great post SS. I think we have approached Patrick with logical explanations of our views and legitimate questions and are repeatedly responded to by the same old rhetoric garbage. I think it shows a very clear mindset on the part of some people from Aruba. I don't want to say all...I don't have the knowledge to say that...but as I said in the DC travel section, if this is our "friend" and this is his mindset, it makes me all the more determined to continue the protests and boycott!!

Thanks.

[ldstlou]

One thing I overlooked from the beginning though. I actually, yes it is silly of me, never realized that the name scared monkeys, is meant to be racist. When I first saw it and their logo I thought it was creative. Only later I realized that they probably refer to how they see people in Aruba.

In Holland some people say The Scared Monkeys are racists.


I never noticed this is a racist forum myself.

Thank you!!! We may have some "conspiracy theories" lol but I have never seen a racists remark in all the time I have been reading here!! I think most of the people agree also that there are good people in Aruba, from reading Beth's book and listening to interviews, the family was treated exceptionally well by the locals. I love the story of the cab driver who took Beth to the Catholic Church that had the crosses where she felt some peace at last. That became her refuge I believe. But that has nothing to do with encouraging US tourists to visit another location until things change and Natalee and her family receives justice.

[Lala'sMom]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

[Lala'sMom]

Sorry, hit post before my thoughts were complete...trying to listen to the Pope and type at the same time....what I was going to say was this...

We must be cautious and suspicious of all that remove Joran and the Kalpoes from any guilt in this case. Those identified from the beginning are still involved in some way.  Even the lower ranks in ALE seemed to want to help until the pressure was placed and they began to shut up out of fear. Too many on Aruba have been silenced into submission. We must question any and all motives until there is proof beyond doubt that what someone says is true..otherwise we are all like sheep being led over the cliff. Take RU for example.

[ldstlou]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

I have never trusted him and still don't either.
He did a great deed...he really did...it opened doors for Beth and brought the story into the mainstream again, for that I am forever grateful.
But he is not the hero of this saga, Beth is, the people who have worked relentlessly to keep the story going and to help with the investigation. People like Tim Miller...who do and do and do for others at great sacrifice to his own family and never asks for anything except for the next family in crisis...those are the kind of people who are heroes to me.

[MumInOhio]

Briany…I believe there is more so will post the link for the documents at the bottom…also the Kalpoes neighbors were questioned.

http://www.hollowaycase.com/archive/police_documents/deepak69.htm
 Deepak’s PV of  6/09/2005

On May 29th 2005 I was called before closing time of the business where I work by Joran. (with Joran is meant suspect J.A.P. van der Sloot; comment by reporting officers). I was working. We close approximately at 22.00 hours. I assume that Joran called me at approximately 21.50 hours. Joran had asked me if I had to work the next day. I had told him that I had to work tomorrow afternoon. He then asked me whether I wanted to go with to "Carlos & Charlies", because he had met a few girls and wanted to meet them again in "Carlos & Charlies". I agreed and told him that I would pick him up later. A little before 23.00 hours I drove home. I ate something at home together with my brother Satish and after that I vacuumed the carpet on the inside of my car. (with Satish is meant the suspect S.S. KALPOE; comment reporting officers). My sister Angie was already asleep. My mother was not home, she was working. The man with whom my mother is married, was also at work. While we ate I had asked Satish if he wanted to come to "Carlos & Charlies". After I finished vacuuming I went and took a shower
Documents…
http://www.hollowaycase.com/archive/index.htm

[briany]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

May be you expect too much of Patrick. He delivered the tape. That's it. De case was closed and now it is (hopefully still) open again. He has a different opinion about boycotting Aruba than some other people. So what!

[ldstlou]

One thing I overlooked from the beginning though. I actually, yes it is silly of me, never realized that the name scared monkeys, is meant to be racist. When I first saw it and their logo I thought it was creative. Only later I realized that they probably refer to how they see people in Aruba.

In Holland some people say The Scared Monkeys are racists.


I never noticed this is a racist forum myself.

Briany, there is a wealth of knowledge and research here at Scared Monkeys. Maybe you could direct some of the posters in the Dutch forums to those threads. It tells the story of Natalee's dissappearance and the cover up so well....through the pvs and statements and early interviews.

[KarmaRoundUp]

Other things were brought up, in the taping.  Paulus and the cell phone, the deal with compensation and all the smoking would have been hedged or not brought up, at all, if Joran was in on it.  Image was everything to Joran (and Anita).  I just don't believe they would have planned this display.

Good point Buckeye! A scheme isn't likely at all....and why would they have done it anyway? The case was closed since december 2007! Joran & everyone else involved in the case got away with it.....at least that's what they thought 

Anita and joran would have went along with this whole scheme IF it meant the case would go away and joran would only have to spend a couple of months locked up in a loony bin.I can see them both going along with that.

[ldstlou]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

May be you expect too much of Patrick. He delivered the tape. That's it. De case was closed and now it is (hopefully still) open again. He has a different opinion about boycotting Aruba than some other people. So what!

Briany, I think he just rubs people the wrong way, but regardless...he should be commended for what he did.

I can respect his opinion that the Boycott hurts too many people...but what really surpised me I think was that he stated he did not believe there was ever a cover up. But then again...I have to remember he came came in late in the game. So many who becoming involved in the case did not exeperience what we did with Jansen, Dompig...oh...gosh...we could go on and on.

[ldstlou]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

May be you expect too much of Patrick. He delivered the tape. That's it. De case was closed and now it is (hopefully still) open again. He has a different opinion about boycotting Aruba than some other people. So what!

Maybe for the new posters, we should go back to the beginning and lay out the history of the cover-up, characters, etc. Heck, I could use a refresher course too. I would love to put it all together with the newer info we have now. I think the newer posters should also go through the timeline, witness statements etc. It will also show althought I believe joran told part of the story...it is not all of the truth...so they don't think we are just conspiracy nuts!!! lol

[MumInOhio]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

May be you expect too much of Patrick. He delivered the tape. That's it. De case was closed and now it is (hopefully still) open again. He has a different opinion about boycotting Aruba than some other people. So what!

Maybe for the new posters, we should go back to the beginning and lay out the history of the cover-up, characters, etc. Heck, I could use a refresher course too. I would love to put it all together with the newer info we have now. I think the newer posters should also go through the timeline, witness statements etc. It will also show althought I believe joran told part of the story...it is not all of the truth...so they don't think we are just conspiracy nuts!!! lol

I guess we should keep them away from the 'Shango' thread then!...

[ldstlou]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

May be you expect too much of Patrick. He delivered the tape. That's it. De case was closed and now it is (hopefully still) open again. He has a different opinion about boycotting Aruba than some other people. So what!

Maybe for the new posters, we should go back to the beginning and lay out the history of the cover-up, characters, etc. Heck, I could use a refresher course too. I would love to put it all together with the newer info we have now. I think the newer posters should also go through the timeline, witness statements etc. It will also show althought I believe joran told part of the story...it is not all of the truth...so they don't think we are just conspiracy nuts!!! lol

I guess we should keep them away from the 'Shango' thread then!...

lol

[briany]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

May be you expect too much of Patrick. He delivered the tape. That's it. De case was closed and now it is (hopefully still) open again. He has a different opinion about boycotting Aruba than some other people. So what!

Maybe for the new posters, we should go back to the beginning and lay out the history of the cover-up, characters, etc. Heck, I could use a refresher course too. I would love to put it all together with the newer info we have now. I think the newer posters should also go through the timeline, witness statements etc. It will also show althought I believe joran told part of the story...it is not all of the truth...so they don't think we are just conspiracy nuts!!! lol

I guess we should keep them away from the 'Shango' thread then!...

lol

That's a good idea. Back to the beginning. There are a lot of Dutch readers these days. I also believe in a cover up, but it is also possible that this is about a baby cover up, we do not know.
So what's the story.......

The car was washed before Natalee went in the car? Is that it?

Joran said in the tape The Kalpoe brothers are not involved at all. They had nothing to do with this, Joran said.
Is that possible?

[ldstlou]

This is Patrick's response to my blog post this morning.  It's like talking to a six year old.

April 19th, 2008 at 4:27 am

Justice for Natalee Holloway said:


Boycott = a group’s NONVIOLENT refusal to have commerical dealings with an organization in protest against its policies.

PATRICK’S RESPONSE

A boycott is a violent instrument, which hurts the little people most, actually the people who are always the biggest victims of crime. The only non-violent protest against crime takes place in a court-of-law or in democratic institutions (with all their failings). However a focused boycott can be a good instrument, for instance against a company that makes products through child labor. Of course that also hurts the little people working in that company and that is why such a boycott should only be called for when the evidence is based on pure facts and not consipracy theories, judged by people who are trained to do so.

All this response says to me is that it's still the same mindset as we all have dealt with for almost 3 years...the 3 year anniversary is approaching fast.  My only response would be to ask this...If the boycott was so distasteful in Patrick's mouth why did he not say so when he had the opportunity while giving interviews and such?  This boycott thing seems to be the sole reason for doing what he did...oops! I forgot, and to obtain money...so it appears to me that there is much fence straddling here on his part.  Funny, he didn't realize that a simple confession of an accident on Joran's part and the unknown Daury disposal would put this all behind Aruba and actually make him a hero in their eyes. I never trusted him and still don't.  W

May be you expect too much of Patrick. He delivered the tape. That's it. De case was closed and now it is (hopefully still) open again. He has a different opinion about boycotting Aruba than some other people. So what!

Maybe for the new posters, we should go back to the beginning and lay out the history of the cover-up, characters, etc. Heck, I could use a refresher course too. I would love to put it all together with the newer info we have now. I think the newer posters should also go through the timeline, witness statements etc. It will also show althought I believe joran told part of the story...it is not all of the truth...so they don't think we are just conspiracy nuts!!! lol

I guess we should keep them away from the 'Shango' thread then!...

lol

That's a good idea. Back to the beginning. There are a lot of Dutch readers these days. I also believe in a cover up, but it is also possible that this is about a baby cover up, we do not know.
So what's the story.......

The car was washed before Natalee went in the car? Is that it?

Joran said in the tape The Kalpoe brothers are not involved at all. They had nothing to do with this, Joran said.
Is that possible?

car was washed in the wee hours after Natalee "disappeared". Greta actually interviewed the neighbors that made the claim last time she was in Aruba.

Baby cover up? as in a small one vs large cover up?
If it's an actualy "baby" cover up...people do know that is not the case. If these theories are still flying around up there...we DO need to go back to Day 1 for our new posters.

[klaasend]

Briany wrote:

That's a good idea. Back to the beginning. There are a lot of Dutch readers these days. I also believe in a cover up, but it is also possible that this is about a baby cover up, we do not know.
So what's the story.......

The car was washed before Natalee went in the car? Is that it?

Joran said in the tape The Kalpoe brothers are not involved at all. They had nothing to do with this, Joran said.
Is that possible?

No it's not possible, IMO.  In the least, the Kalpoes were part of the kidnapping of Natalee.  Early reports were that all 3 had sex with her, if that is true then the Kalpoes are also guilty of rape.  There is no way Natalee would voluntary have sex with all thee of them let alone one.  It is possible that the Kalpoes were not present when Natalee died.