Latest Entry: American Pravda and New York's Sixth Crime Family     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« Media Continue Spin On The Iraqi Vote | Main | Kennedy To The Rescue - Almost! »

October 16, 2005

HarryTho 10/16 Natalee Holloway Update And Commentary

Topics: Natalee Holloway

Thanks to readers for tolerating our weekend cutback on Natalee coverage - we've only recently started going a little lighter on weekend posting in general, in order to be a little more rested for keeping up the pace during the week.

Tonight is included in the Hyscience "light" weekend coverage, but we wanted to go over a couple of items.

Just to make sure that you don't miss it, we'll mention Dan's Saturday post on "Holloway Suspects Could Face Extradition," first. Warning, just in case you don't get it, think satire!

Moving right along, since there wasn't much on Saturday in the way of Natalee news, I thought we could review the Josie Mansur claim that Steve Croes will sue Beth Twitty rumor and apply some legal interpretations.

From Scared Monkeys on Steve Croes; "He feels that his reputation has been damaged in this case by Natalee's mother".. and Sacred Monkeys has posted that Josie Mansur claims that Steve Croes is intending to sue Beth Twitty for ruining his reputation.

Interestingly, one of the comments on the post is from someone claiming to be Steve Croes, and that someone denies Josie Mansur's statements and confirmations.

Concerning the notion that Steve Croes may be suing Beth Twitty, there exists an avenue for redress. Though many commentors, excluding Steve Croes himself, chuckle at the idea, the notion of "first at fault" does in fact support Steve Croes.

"First at fault" would come into play, if Beth Twitty, and her entourage, concocted Natalee's disappearance. In that situation, the court could find that had Beth Twitty not first lied about her daughter's disappearance, then Steve Cores would never had felt obligated to support his buddies in crime-allegation that he knew that they could not have committed. Of course, his eventual lying would mitigate some of his damages.

The rule of "first at fault" does apply in American civil courts.

At Joran Van Der Sloot (blog) a reader (annonymous) had some very interesting comments on a pilot that flew the Twittys to Aruba that first night. We need to keep in mind that this is hearsay, alleged, and third hand - uncollaborated information:

The pilot of the private McWane plane carrying Jug, Jar, Beth, chaperones, and criminal friends to Aruba (that first night of the disappearance) gave statements to the FBI and the prosecution that he was shocked at their behaviour on board, which was very abnormal for parents of a child that was missing. There was alot of joking, laughing, and partying on board. The pilot was very suspicous and disturbed by it. Infact, the way that Mrs. Twitty was acting happily on board then suddently turned that off and began acting in another character after disembarking and Arubans were around, was extremely startling. THe pilot saw Mrs. Twitty turn these different personalities on and off, on many occasions, and then laugh about her performances afterwards.

The pilot overhead them talking on board about how they were going to punish Natalee for wandering off again, and that when they found her they were going to drag her ass back to Alabama and she wouldn't see daylight for a long, long, time again.

Additionally, one of the Twitty men was insistent to arrive in Aruba only after midnght. The pilot found that very strange because everyone was on board but they purposely delayed leaving USA for that very reason, when they could have arrived earlier. The pilot overhead Jug talking on the phone to several people in Aruba, and was questioning the pilot about the airport. It is a small airport and after midnight noone is manning the towers. There is no customs or security checks and a small plane is able to land on its own without air traffic control, and without any checks on ground in, Aruba or out of Aruba.

Anything could have been on that plane before arriving in Aruba and whatever / whoever went on that plane and its compartments, left the island unnoticed and unchecked by anyone.

Interesting, early in the case, I wrote at Dan Riehl's site about a hoodwink scenario that would fit the above annonymous post. In the hoodwink caper, Natalee Holloway was whisked off inside the very plane that carried Beth Twitty and her entourage to Aruba. At the time, I felt the hoodwink could have been a distraction to allow Natalee to acquire an abortion (10% weight gain in 3 weeks). Now, after learning of the Twitty-Mansur connection, we find that it is quite possible that Natalee's disappearance could have been a ploy. Could it have been designed to embarrass and topple the current government, in order that the Mansur group could regain power and facilitate money laundering and drug trafficking (re - researched information previously presented)? Could it have been for something even more bizarre - but related? There's a lot to consider and sort through in this mystery, a mystery that appeared initially to be a simple disappearance of an American teenage girl from Alabama off on the "playground" vacation island of Aruba. Now, even the most straight forward and cursory review of the information that has since turned up, particularly about the family and ignored by the MSM, leads one to believe that there is much more to it than originally thought.

On another matter, a reader emailed in saying that she was curious about my opinion on two things related to the Holloway Case: First did I feel that "the Skeeter tapes are ligit - unedited and will be the bombshell that Beth keeps telling everyone each nite on the news?"

Secondly, she has an unrest about Dompig - why after months of the law enforcement from Aruba not talking to our media - has this guy been on the news sometimes nightly - she finds this odd.


First, I do not believe that the Skeeter tapes, or whatever they are, will be useful. Detective Ted Williams made a point that once a recording has been edited, it loses its value as evidence. Skeeter's tape has an additional problem in that it may have been recorded and then loaded onto his computer for editing. The act of loading on his computer constitutes a medium change which opens the new medium to adulteration.

Second, Police Chief Dompig just assumed his position as police chief upon the recent retirement of former Police Chief van der Straaten. I would not take anything unusual about Police Chief Dompig's representations. He just seems to be more media-friendly than the former police chief. Actually, he has not been bitten yet by the negative aspect of the American media. So, at the current time, he feels confident to explore another, more open, relationship with our media. Clearly, the police chief knows the Aruban law; however, he must be appreciating, about now, that his statements to our media will be edited. He should do fine. From what I can tell, he is presenting a secure and strong front for Aruban law enforcement. Guys like that generally uphold the law religiously and are difficult to lure into agendas.

That's it for tonight's recap, as I said earlier, it's Hyscience-light on the weekends. Just wanted to clean up a few loose ends tonight.

Posted for HarryTho

Posted by Richard at October 16, 2005 11:30 PM

I think the reason everyone is laughing at the idea of lawsuit by Croes is that the only thing supporting him is the "first at fault" possibility. It is highly unlikely, to say the least, that we are looking at a concocted disappearence on the family's part.

Posted by: DT at October 17, 2005 5:39 PM

DT:

What defies probability is that we cannot find a body in over fourth months of international-expert interrogating and searching in which the prime suspects are a group of high schoolers from an island in the Caribbean. Now, be honest, who should be laughing?

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at October 17, 2005 6:01 PM



Articles Related to Natalee Holloway: