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

[texasmom]

http://www.amigoe.com/artman/publish/artikel_56578.php

Google translation:

[Tamikosmom]

Roger from SCRUX kept flip flopping on the origins of the tape of the Deepak/Skeeter's interview he came in position of.

I am not sure if the links are still valid.

When all is said and done ... it is the comparison of the Phil McGraw taped audio recording that his TV view audience were privy to and ... Skeeters' hard drive audio recording ... that will affirm if any deceptive manipulation occured on the part of McGraw ... that will affirm if Deepak has a basis for his defamation lawsuit..

Janet

+++++++++

1.  ORIGINAL CLAIM

Roger - January, 2006

"This is the real thing, uncut and unedited. What was broadcast on the Dr. Phil show was edited, censored, cut and pasted, to give a distorted view of what Deepak had to say. You will be amazed at the differences."

The entire Skeeters Deepak interview video and transcript

Here are links to the entire video. This is the exact original as tested by the NFI ...


2.  REVISED CLAIM

Roger - January 30, 2006

I only know what I have been told. I received the recording directly from the Aruban Police Department. I was told that it is exactly what was provided to the NFI (Netherlands Forensic Institute) and verified as having not been manipulated in any way.

<snipped>

Some people have speculated that I probably got this from a defense attorney or maybe one of the Aruban public relations groups. I did not get a copy from any of those sources. I simply would not have hosted the recording if it had come from anyone other than the proper authority. Receiving this directly from the Aruban Police provided me assurance and confidence that it was exactly what they maintained it to be.

http://www.scrux.com/discuss/viewtopic.php?t=118

 
3.  REVISED, REVISED CLAIM

Roger - February, 2006

While this must be regarded as unsubstantiated information, it appears to be the real thing, uncut and unedited. What was broadcast on the Dr. Phil show was edited, censored, cut and pasted, to give a distorted view of what Deepak had to say. You will be amazed at the differences. However, we must say that we have not had the version we are hosting tested. We think that it is real. However, no one can know for sure, unless we are able to have a professional, forensic, audiology laboratory check the recording to see if this version has been altered. I have not had such a test conducted, but I would welcome just such an evaluation

The entire Skeeters Deepak interview video and transcript

Here are links to the entire video. This was represented to us as the exact original as tested by the NFI (although that is unsubstantiated) ...

http://www.scrux.com/natalee/deepakskeetersvideo.htm

 
4.  REVISED REVISED, REVISED CLAIM

Roger -February, 2006

Here are links to the entire video. This was represented to us as the exact original as tested by the NFI (although that is unsubstantiated). The whole file is so large that it is impractical to put up on the net, but I divided it into manageable segments. Each one is ten minutes. After the first, each subsequent segment also includes about 30 seconds of over lap (the last 30 seconds of the previous one is included on each segment) for continuity.

There has been no further encoding (as is done to make videos web presentable). This is the exact original which Aruba and subsequently, the NFI, tested and reported as being unaltered (not manipulated).

http://www.scrux.com/natalee/deepakskeetersvideo.htm

[Keepthefaith]

http://www.amigoe.com/artman/publish/artikel_56578.php

Google translation:

How do so many people go missing on such a small island?

[Buckeye]

THE DEFAMATION LAWSUIT

Considering the ruling of the judge in the defamation lawsuit has given Skeeters' audio recording a pass in regards to any manipulation ... the question now is the Phil McGraw's "edited" recording heard by his TV viewing audience.

It is my contention IF the disputed portion of Phil McGraw's audio recording was not deceptively manipulated ... it could stand alone in a court of law in regards to the defamation of Deepak when it is compared to Skeeters' audio recording.  In other words ... no backup case documents should be necessary?

I contend that the disputed segment of the Phil McGraw's copy of the audio recording may have been deceptively manipulated and ... that is the reason backup documents have been requested by his attorneys.  McGraw has to proved that he did not defame Deepak in front of America.

IMO

Janet

This may have been addressed.  I am on page 72 and we go to 76.

The documentation is not backup.  When one files for damages, there is a difference between a "private" citizen and a "public" figure.  Documentation is needed to first of all prove that the case is newsworthy and that the K2 are to be treated as public figures.  Even if we all know it, there must be documentation. They are not just claiming the tape was manipulated.  They are claiming malicious intent and injury. It makes a difference if they say they have been injured but there communications show otherwise. IMO

[Buckeye]

Klaas

There is a new document from 5/11...Miscellaneous..

[Buckeye]

Even if the tape was altered, which I do not believe, is it defamation to say the truth? If Dr. Phil can show K2 communicated that info, to others, can K2 claim they were defamed or slandered?  The suit does not say we are suing for tape manipulation.

[klaasend]

Klaas

There is a new document from 5/11...Miscellaneous..

I'll check, hold on

NOT AVAILABLE YET

There were 2 documents already from the 11th.  One was the one I posted on the computer stuff and the other was the proof of service for the same.  This 3rd is a response by the defendants on a stipulation thingy...lol   

Anyway, I'll check it out when it becomes available. 

[klaasend]

Even if the tape was altered, which I do not believe, is it defamation to say the truth? If Dr. Phil can show K2 communicated that info, to others, can K2 claim they were defamed or slandered?  The suit does not say we are suing for tape manipulation.

Exactly the point I keep trying to make. 

[Tamikosmom]

Even if the tape was altered, which I do not believe, is it defamation to say the truth? If Dr. Phil can show K2 communicated that info, to others, can K2 claim they were defamed or slandered?  The suit does not say we are suing for tape manipulation.

If the Phil McGraw tape was deceptively altered and Deepak appeared to be defamed ... THEN I can understand why McGraw's attorneys are requesting documentation to prove that Deepak was not defamed ... documentation that proved Deepak had defamed himself ... documentation that proved that the spokesman for the investigation had defamed Deepak and ... documentation that proves that the Prosecutor of the case had defamed Deepak.

However ... if the Phil McGraw tape was not deceptively altered ... then the words within should concur when compared with the audio recording from Skeeters' hard drive and ... therefore case documents are not required.

Considering Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents causes me to speculate that the McGraw tape was deceptively altered.

IMO

Janet

[Tamikosmom]

are not requested s/b are not required in the above post.

Thanks

Janet

[texasmom]

http://www.amigoe.com/artman/publish/artikel_56577.php

Google translation:

[Buckeye]

Even if the tape was altered, which I do not believe, is it defamation to say the truth? If Dr. Phil can show K2 communicated that info, to others, can K2 claim they were defamed or slandered?  The suit does not say we are suing for tape manipulation.

If the Phil McGraw tape was deceptively altered and Deepak appeared to be defamed ... THEN I can understand why McGraw's attorneys are requesting documentation to prove that Deepak was not defamed ... documentation that proved Deepak had defamed himself ... documentation that proved that the spokesman for the investigation had defamed Deepak and ... documentation that proves that the Prosecutor of the case had defamed Deepak.

However ... if the Phil McGraw tape was not deceptively altered ... then the words within should concur when compared with the audio recording from Skeeters' hard drive and ... therefore case documents are not required.

Considering Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents causes me to speculate that the McGraw tape was deceptively altered.

IMO

Janet

The documents were requested a long time ago.  Who knew how the judge would rule. Also, when reading the original document.  They do not deny having sex with Natalee.  They only deny non-consensual sex.     

[texasmom]

 

http://www.amigoe.com/artman/publish/artikel_56575.php

Google translation:

[klaasend]

Packed

[texasmom]

Packed

 

[klaasend]

Not sure if we already posted this translation:

http://www.aruba-bb.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=71016

Post subject: Bad News from the DiarioPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 10:51 am 

pendell
 
Senior

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:35 pm
Posts: 147

Location: NJ, Aruba  The following is an exerpt from the local newspaper, The Diario, which has been translated into English:

It is a very sad case, which happened ..the evening of April 29.
A group of brown skin young men , ages 14 to 20, had brutally attacked a senior couple(him 73, her70) , on the beach between L.Cabana and Amsterdam Manor.
The Police is pleading with the public/newspaper to help apprehend this 'bunch'.
The man received severe trauma , is still in critical condition in the hospital.
The incident started with the group grabbing the lady"s purse.
<<<<<<The next article in that same diario....is showing how a terrible situation is becoming an ever increasing problem..."wild uncontrolled young people".
It is my opinion, that these young people are those brought in as young kids by the immigrant parents(hotel workers)...they are basically left to their own ...as the parents are struggling to make a living.
As such, those of same nationality/background are joining into gangs/violence.
Aruba, is undergoing a terrible situation, now that employment is becoming a problem, along with guns and drugs...
The government is SLOW in waking up, but there is a sign of realization that something must be done.....now.
 
 

[Tamikosmom]

Even if the tape was altered, which I do not believe, is it defamation to say the truth? If Dr. Phil can show K2 communicated that info, to others, can K2 claim they were defamed or slandered?  The suit does not say we are suing for tape manipulation.

If the Phil McGraw tape was deceptively altered and Deepak appeared to be defamed ... THEN I can understand why McGraw's attorneys are requesting documentation to prove that Deepak was not defamed ... documentation that proved Deepak had defamed himself ... documentation that proved that the spokesman for the investigation had defamed Deepak and ... documentation that proves that the Prosecutor of the case had defamed Deepak.

However ... if the Phil McGraw tape was not deceptively altered ... then the words within should concur when compared with the audio recording from Skeeters' hard drive and ... therefore case documents are not required.

Considering Phil McGraw's attorneys are requesting case documents causes me to speculate that the McGraw tape was deceptively altered.

IMO

Janet

The documents were requested a long time ago.  Who knew how the judge would rule. Also, when reading the original document.  They do not deny having sex with Natalee.  They only deny non-consensual sex.     

IF the Phil McGraw tape was deceptively manipulated ... the McGraw attorneys would be planning the defence from the get go ... the defence to prove that Deepak was not defamed by the deceptively manipulated tape ... the defence that Deepak had already had defamed himself ... the defence that others withn the investigation had defamed him.

Buckeye ... I do not know.  I could be way off base and ... will be required to eat crow.

My gut feeling was right concerning Hans Mo when many thought he was a knight in shining armour.  My gut feeling was right concerning Capslockwizard when others implied he was a "good guy".  My gut feeling was right regarding the Persistence Kyle Kingman niavity when he informed us all that the Aruban and Persistence had the same goal ... justice for Natalee Holloway.

Buckeye ... I do not know.  I could be way off base but ... I do have that gut feeling and ... I have backed up to the best of my ability why I have that gut feeling.

Hey ... I will eat an entire crow pie if I am wrong if the rest of ya will each eat an entire crow pie if you are wrong.

 

Janet

[Buckeye]

Janet

The suit includes what Beth said during the program and comments after the program.  They are suing for more than the tape. The big question is if they would be in the same situation if the whole program had never aired.  If Dr. Phil can prove yes then there is no injury claim.  It was a newsworthy case and they were public figures...before and after...the tape.

You don't need to save room for crow.  A discussion is a discussion.  I can see your point.  I just think there is more involved.

[caesu]

Bram Moszkowicz was last night at Pauw/Witteman.

he was asked about Holloway-case.
he isn't doing the civil case anymore for Beth.
he didn't want to give a reason.

http://player.omroep.nl/?aflID=9486462 (right at the end)

[Keepthefaith]

Bram Moszkowicz was last night at Pauw/Witteman.

he was asked about Holloway-case.
he isn't doing the civil case anymore for Beth.
he didn't want to give a reason.

http://player.omroep.nl/?aflID=9486462 (right at the end)

Thanx Caesu!Hope all is well....