Natalee Case Discussion #818 4/30/09 - 5/17/09

[Anna]

Janet,  I think the same could be said for the attorneys representing Dr Phil's insurance.  They would have offered a much lesser settlement, something comparable to what they think it would cost them to fight this unless they thought they could win the case.

The decision of whether to fight or settle is usually taken away from the insured, Dr Phil, and rests solely with the one who would pay, in this case likely insurance.

In medical malpractice suits, sometimes the insurance will settle even when no malpractice happened because it is cheaper of the the two things.  The physician actually being sued does not even have a say even though it is his reputation at stake unless he wants to fight it with his own money and pay with his own money.

I have never heard of even an offer to settle out of court so this makes me think they are sure they will win, the Dr Phil side.

[Anna]

I guess we can only conclude that both sides think they will win.

But do keep in mind that these are the same people in Aruba that think it is possible to take out and collect on a huge insurance policy and LE not know about it.  I don't think they are totally in touch with reality in many regards.

[Tamikosmom]

I feel I am in a twilight zone.

Could somebody please explain to me WHY Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents when a comparison of Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of the McGraw tape will reveal the truth?

The judge and/or jury could listen to both audio recordings ... listen to expert testimony.

Case Closed!!

Janet

[jen3560]

Red has a copy taken directly from Skeeter's hard drive.  I don't know of anyone else who does.  The one transcribed and posted online came from ALE and I have wondered if they were the ones who altered it.  Voice over by Deepak to try to win a suit.  But I believe that Red has said it matches the one played by Dr Phil, hasn't he Klaas?  At one time there was talk of posting it but decided not to until the trial, etc. was over.

I remember there was a show about this when it all first came out - I want to say it was either Dan Abrams or Shepard Smith.

They did a comparison of different recordings with some professionals.

1 - from Aruba

1 - from Dr Phil

It showed over and over and over again, that it was the recording they received from Aruba that had been altered, and not the one they had received from the Dr Phil show.

I remember that part very clearly, because they had Arlene on, and she was about ready to have kittens when they kept calling it "The Aruba Version". 

[jen3560]

I feel I am in a twilight zone.

Could somebody please explain to me WHY Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents when a comparison of Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of the McGraw tape will reveal the truth?

The judge and/or jury could listen to both audio recordings ... listen to expert testimony.

Case Closed!!

Janet

I believe that at least one of the reasons they are requesting case documents is to have complete clarification in regards to their defense of defamation.

If they get ahold of all PV's, witness statements, case summaries from LE and the OM's office - it can't get any clearer that the Dr Phil show did NOT defame Deepak and Satish.

Because all over in those case documents it discusses what charges they were detained under suspicion of, and supportive information for those detentions.

Comparisons of the hard drive to the airing on the show is just icing on the cake.

Also remember - Jamie sent his hard drive directly to the FBI for an analysis to be done by them.

I'd bet my left arm the defendants have those results in their back pocket. 

[klaasend]

I feel I am in a twilight zone.

Could somebody please explain to me WHY Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents when a comparison of Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of the McGraw tape will reveal the truth?

The judge and/or jury could listen to both audio recordings ... listen to expert testimony.

Case Closed!!

Janet

I believe that at least one of the reasons they are requesting case documents is to have complete clarification in regards to their defense of defamation.

If they get ahold of all PV's, witness statements, case summaries from LE and the OM's office - it can't get any clearer that the Dr Phil show did NOT defame Deepak and Satish.

Because all over in those case documents it discusses what charges they were detained under suspicion of, and supportive information for those detentions.

Comparisons of the hard drive to the airing on the show is just icing on the cake.

Also remember - Jamie sent his hard drive directly to the FBI for an analysis to be done by them.

I'd bet my left arm the defendants have those results in their back pocket. 

Or maybe they are in cahoots with JQK and are attempting to gain access to documents and statements to this date are unseen by Natalee's family.

[jen3560]

I feel I am in a twilight zone.

Could somebody please explain to me WHY Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents when a comparison of Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of the McGraw tape will reveal the truth?

The judge and/or jury could listen to both audio recordings ... listen to expert testimony.

Case Closed!!

Janet

I believe that at least one of the reasons they are requesting case documents is to have complete clarification in regards to their defense of defamation.

If they get ahold of all PV's, witness statements, case summaries from LE and the OM's office - it can't get any clearer that the Dr Phil show did NOT defame Deepak and Satish.

Because all over in those case documents it discusses what charges they were detained under suspicion of, and supportive information for those detentions.

Comparisons of the hard drive to the airing on the show is just icing on the cake.

Also remember - Jamie sent his hard drive directly to the FBI for an analysis to be done by them.

I'd bet my left arm the defendants have those results in their back pocket. 

One more thing to add as to why they are requesting case documents.........

In that case file there is sure to be a copy of the NFI forensic report of that recording (IF it was ever actually conducted).  And that is one of the items 2K has thus far failed to produce in Discovery - even though the court has ordered them to do so.

My hunch since this all came about has been that Deepak and Satish have never seen that forensic report from the NFI.  That someone has encouraged them to file this suit on merely the strength of what they were told that report contains.

I've felt that someone is an AHATA representative.

I don't think I'm alone in that hunch - remember, it was either Paramount Productions or CBS themselves who made a public statement in the beginning of this - wherein they pledged to find out WHO was funding the filing of this suit on behalf of the two brothers. 

[jen3560]

I feel I am in a twilight zone.

Could somebody please explain to me WHY Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents when a comparison of Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of the McGraw tape will reveal the truth?

The judge and/or jury could listen to both audio recordings ... listen to expert testimony.

Case Closed!!

Janet

I believe that at least one of the reasons they are requesting case documents is to have complete clarification in regards to their defense of defamation.

If they get ahold of all PV's, witness statements, case summaries from LE and the OM's office - it can't get any clearer that the Dr Phil show did NOT defame Deepak and Satish.

Because all over in those case documents it discusses what charges they were detained under suspicion of, and supportive information for those detentions.

Comparisons of the hard drive to the airing on the show is just icing on the cake.

Also remember - Jamie sent his hard drive directly to the FBI for an analysis to be done by them.

I'd bet my left arm the defendants have those results in their back pocket. 

Or maybe they are in cahoots with JQK and are attempting to gain access to documents and statements to this date are unseen by Natalee's family.

I think you're right - and that it's both.  That's why I had posted that an aid to their defense was "one of the reasons". 

[Tamikosmom]

I know the following transcript negates my theory but ... something is not right when it is considered that Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of McGraw's tape cannot stand alone in this defamation lawsuit.

Janet

+++++++

 'The Abrams Report' - December 1, 2005

DAN ABRAMS, HOST:  Coming up, the Aruban government now claims that a crucial piece of videotape evidence in the Natalee Holloway investigation has been doctored and that one of the suspects did not say that he had sex with Natalee Holloway.  We have got all the versions of the tape ...

Transcript
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10294603/
 

[Tamikosmom]

I feel I am in a twilight zone.

Could somebody please explain to me WHY Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents when a comparison of Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of the McGraw tape will reveal the truth?

The judge and/or jury could listen to both audio recordings ... listen to expert testimony.

Case Closed!!

Janet

I believe that at least one of the reasons they are requesting case documents is to have complete clarification in regards to their defense of defamation.

If they get ahold of all PV's, witness statements, case summaries from LE and the OM's office - it can't get any clearer that the Dr Phil show did NOT defame Deepak and Satish.

Because all over in those case documents it discusses what charges they were detained under suspicion of, and supportive information for those detentions.

Comparisons of the hard drive to the airing on the show is just icing on the cake.

Also remember - Jamie sent his hard drive directly to the FBI for an analysis to be done by them.

I'd bet my left arm the defendants have those results in their back pocket. 

Or maybe they are in cahoots with JQK and are attempting to gain access to documents and statements to this date are unseen by Natalee's family.

That would make sense but ... who is funding this extention of the defamation lawsuit that has nothing to do with the case documents.  Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed portion of Phil McGraw case are all that is necessary if the McGraw tape was not manipulated.

Hey ... the judge has complied with the McGraw's attorneys request that the case documents are necessary.  This further confirms my suspicions that something did not add up when the  two recordings are compared.

Janet

[jen3560]

I know the following transcript negates my theory but ... something is not right when it is considered that Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of McGraw's tape cannot stand alone in this defamation lawsuit.

Janet

+++++++

 'The Abrams Report' - December 1, 2005

DAN ABRAMS, HOST:  Coming up, the Aruban government now claims that a crucial piece of videotape evidence in the Natalee Holloway investigation has been doctored and that one of the suspects did not say that he had sex with Natalee Holloway.  We have got all the versions of the tape ...

Transcript
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10294603/
 

Janet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is the show I was speaking of in my post above.  Thank you!!!!!  Only I had it remembered as being only two versions that Dan had - I had forgotten he got a copy directly from Jamie as well.

With the recent court ruling in mind - that there was no tampering with Skeeter's recording - it makes it even clearer just WHERE the doctored tape came from - ARUBA.

ABRAMS (voice-over):  Three of them, one that aired on the “Dr. Phil” show, one that the polygraph expert who appeared on that show says is the original and one the Arubans say makes it clear that someone played with the tapes.  You can listen to them and decide for yourself and we get reaction from Natalee‘s mother, Beth Holloway Twitty.

And now you can try to figure it out along with us.  Now listen very carefully.  First, the portion of the interview as played on the “Dr. Phil” show.  This is the one that initially caused the controversy. 



(BEGIN AUDIOTAPE) Dr Phil Recording

JAMIE SKEETERS, POLYGRAPH EXPERT:  And the question I‘ll ask you is, if you intentionally killed her? 

DEEPAK KALPOE, SUSPECT IN NATALEE HOLLOWAY‘S DISAPPEARANCE:  No.

SKEETERS:  If it was an accident, I can help all of you and if you guys were partying, even if somebody had given her a date drug—I‘m sure she had sex with all of you. 

KALPOE:  She did.  You‘d be surprised how simple it was.  

(END AUDIOTAPE)



ABRAMS:  All right, next here‘s a portion of the interview provided to us by Jamie Skeeters, the polygraph experts who was the one who actually interviewed Kalpoe.

(BEGIN AUDIOTAPE) Jamie Skeeters recording - found by court to be NOT tampered with

SKEETERS:  Nobody told her that you can‘t (EXPLETIVE DELETED) her. 

You know?  I mean and I‘m sure she had sex with all of you. 

KALPOE:  She did.  You would be surprised how simple it was that night.
(END AUDIOTAPE)



ABRAMS:  And now this.  Just hours ago e-mailed to us from the Aruban authorities.

(BEGIN AUDIOTAPE) Aruba's recording

SKEETERS:  Nobody told her that you can‘t (EXPLETIVE DELETED).  You know?  I mean and I‘m sure she had sex with all of you. 

KALPOE:  No, she didn‘t.  You would be surprised how simple it would have been.

(END AUDIOTAPE)

ABRAMS:  Wow! I mean it sounds like exactly the opposite and these are supposed to be the same tapes.  This is crucial.

[jen3560]

Janet - I just can't tell you how tickled I am that you have the link to that show.  That show told the whole story back in 2005 - and now this PhD's findings, and those of this expert analyst, are being borne out and upheld by a US Court of Law.


RICHARD PARTON, PH.D., VOICE ANALYST

PARTON:  Thing is Arlene is concerned that there is manipulation of the “Dr. Phil” or the Skeeters tape. 

ABRAMS:  Right.

PARTON:  The thing is the waveforms where we show the words coming down where she said she did, there was no—the waveform wasn‘t clipped.  It would have—if he said didn‘t, it would have shown a clipping there. 

It didn‘t.  It was tapered down...

ABRAMS:  So what‘s the explanation as to why this sounds different? 

PARTON:  I have none of why the Aruban tape is sounding differently other than you know when you transfer files over Internet you know there are compressions and decompressions and there is some degradation of the files that exist. 

(CROSSTALK)

PARTON:  But she‘s concerned about what‘s happening on the live tapes in Aruba.  And that‘s what needs to be you know looked at and why—what specifically and not from the ear...

ABRAMS:  Yes.  Mr. Ginsberg, don‘t these sound different to you? 

GINSBERG:  Well I just wanted to say that there is a simple way to tell.  Because we can take in the laboratory and compare it to the microsecond...

ABRAMS:  Well they said they did that. 

(CROSSTALK)

GINSBERG:  ... the different versions and see whether they track each other...

ABRAMS:  That‘s right.

GINSBERG:  ... from the beginning to the end. 

ABRAMS:  And that‘s Arlene‘s point is she says that they—that that was done in Holland and as a result of that particular analysis, they are convinced that the tape was manipulated. 


PAUL GINSBERG, PROFESSIONAL AUDIO LABORATORIES

GINSBERG:  If there is tracking from the very beginning to the very end, then there was no manipulation.  It‘s as simple as that.  I truly believe that this is a matter of interpretation and suggestion.

[Anna]

The lawsuit is not just about the tapes.  Should Dr Phil's match Skeeters perfectly, Kalpoe Plaintiffs would just say that things were said on the program that defamed them as well. 

[Keepthefaith]

Me personally.I just want the 2poe's to have to come to an American courtroom and get "GRILLED",for hrs,in regards to what transpired....That would be a GodSend! 

[bastibro]

I know the following transcript negates my theory but ... something is not right when it is considered that Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of McGraw's tape cannot stand alone in this defamation lawsuit.

Janet

+++++++

 'The Abrams Report' - December 1, 2005

DAN ABRAMS, HOST:  Coming up, the Aruban government now claims that a crucial piece of videotape evidence in the Natalee Holloway investigation has been doctored and that one of the suspects did not say that he had sex with Natalee Holloway.  We have got all the versions of the tape ...

Transcript
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10294603/
 

Thats right.
ALE had it tested by Dutch NFI.

[jen3560]

Now here's a funny for everyone!

In that show, Abrams actually plays TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS that he received from ARUBA


And here is where he tells us how he got two versions from them:

ABRAMS:  Yes.  We got that from the Aruban authorities both via e-mail and via the phone.  The weird thing is that version sounds clearer almost than does the other one that was on the “Dr. Phil” show.



First one he airs on his show, that I posted earlier:


1.
 
ABRAMS:  And now this.  Just hours ago e-mailed to us from the Aruban authorities.

 

(BEGIN AUDIOTAPE)

SKEETERS:  Nobody told her that you can‘t (EXPLETIVE DELETED).  You know?  I mean and I‘m sure she had sex with all of you. 

KALPOE:  No, she didn‘t.  You would be surprised how simple it would have been.

(END AUDIOTAPE)



And now the second Aruban version that he played later in the show:

2.  (BEGIN AUDIOTAPE)

SKEETERS:  Nobody told her that you can‘t (EXPLETIVE DELETED).  You know?  I mean and I‘m sure she had sex with all of you. 

KALPOE:  No, she didn‘t.  You would be surprised how simple it was that night.

 

(END AUDIOTAPE)



 

Them thar's some sneaky Arubans!!!!  Betcha they were hoping that no one caught on to their TWO DIFFERENT versions that it appears they accidentally sent to Dan Abrams - one via phone, and one via email.

 
 

[jen3560]

I know the following transcript negates my theory but ... something is not right when it is considered that Skeeters' hard drive and the disputed segment of McGraw's tape cannot stand alone in this defamation lawsuit.

Janet

+++++++

 'The Abrams Report' - December 1, 2005

DAN ABRAMS, HOST:  Coming up, the Aruban government now claims that a crucial piece of videotape evidence in the Natalee Holloway investigation has been doctored and that one of the suspects did not say that he had sex with Natalee Holloway.  We have got all the versions of the tape ...

Transcript
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10294603/
 

Thats right.
ALE had it tested by Dutch NFI.

 

Are you sure about that?

And if so - which of the THREE versions did they have tested?

The original from Skeeters?

Or one of Aruba's TWO DOCTORED recordings?

[Keepthefaith]

Now here's a funny for everyone!

In that show, Abrams actually plays TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS that he received from ARUBA


And here is where he tells us how he got two versions from them:

ABRAMS:  Yes.  We got that from the Aruban authorities both via e-mail and via the phone.  The weird thing is that version sounds clearer almost than does the other one that was on the “Dr. Phil” show.



First one he airs on his show, that I posted earlier:


1.
 
ABRAMS:  And now this.  Just hours ago e-mailed to us from the Aruban authorities.

 

(BEGIN AUDIOTAPE)

SKEETERS:  Nobody told her that you can‘t (EXPLETIVE DELETED).  You know?  I mean and I‘m sure she had sex with all of you. 

KALPOE:  No, she didn‘t.  You would be surprised how simple it would have been.

(END AUDIOTAPE)



And now the second Aruban version that he played later in the show:

2.  (BEGIN AUDIOTAPE)

SKEETERS:  Nobody told her that you can‘t (EXPLETIVE DELETED).  You know?  I mean and I‘m sure she had sex with all of you. 

KALPOE:  No, she didn‘t.  You would be surprised how simple it was that night.

 

(END AUDIOTAPE)



 

Them thar's some sneaky Arubans!!!!  Betcha they were hoping that no one caught on to their TWO DIFFERENT versions that it appears they accidentally sent to Dan Abrams - one via phone, and one via email.

 
 

What a very SAD group of Humans..Truly!Aruba & Ahata are what they are P.O.S..PERIOD!

[jen3560]

JANET

I got an email from Grandpa - he said to tell you hello.

[Tamikosmom]

Me personally.I just want the 2poe's to have to come to an American courtroom and get "GRILLED",for hrs,in regards to what transpired....That would be a GodSend! 

We all would but in my openion ... it ain't gonna happen.

If the Kalpoes are put in a position of being required to testify under oath in regards to anything that would incriminate them or Aruba ... they will both just drop the lawsuit.  However ... considering their backers are unknown and ... the Kalpoes are adults without means ...  Phil McGraw's attorneys are going to receive zilch in a frivolous lawsuit claim.

If the defamation lawsuit is dropped ... the financial backers will pay the Kalpoes' attorney fees and other costs Deepak and Satish may have occurred.  The Kalpoes may receive an already negotiated settlement from the financial backers for their participation.

It is the financial backers of the defamation lawsuit who will reap any monies awarded through an anticipated negotiated settlement with Phil McGraw.

IMO

Janet