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

« Iran: Christian Convert Stabbed To Death | Main | Server Change (Update) »

November 29, 2005

HarryTho 11/29 Natalee Holloway Update And Commentary

Topics: Natalee Holloway

Tonight lets start off with a follow up on last evening's editorial, and then move on to a few inputs and commentary. What I want to discuss this evening is a phrase that I have employed a few times. Since none of our readers has questioned it, I thought I would discuss its use in the Skeeter tape controversy. The phrase is "culpable inefficiency."

Culpable inefficiency reflects upon a person's accredited (assumed/granted) capabilities inherent in a position with which he acts. Succinctly, a person is assumed to have the capability to perform the function for which he is employed. For example, a surgeon is assumed to have knowledge of the human body; and a judge is assumed to have knowledge of court procedure.

Culpable inefficiency describes a failure to perform a function under which a person is assumed to possess this accredited knowledge. For example, a surgeon cutting the wrong artery cannot claim ignorance of the cardiovascular system. What I want to point out here is that the actual ignorance of the person in the wrongdoing is unimportant. The fact that he holds a position that requires the knowledge in question constitutes sufficient grounds for culpable inefficiency. In our modern day bureaucracy, few executives understand this implication.

As I hinted in last evening's editorial, Jamie Skeeter may employ a defensive strategy that he turned over his VHS tape to Dr. Phil McGraw who in turn had his technicians "edit" the VHS tape and create the 8-second Beta tape without Skeeter's participation. It is an interesting defense, and one that seems promising, at first. I would suspect that the average American would grant merit to such a defense. Why, because the average American has been in a similar situation in which he has been cited for a wrongdoing of which he had no knowledge. Traffic anomalies are a prime example. How can we possibly know all the traffic laws?

Clearly, there are instances when one does not know that a traffic law is being violated. Of course, when it comes time for the hearing, the traffic judge will stamp the usual "ignorance of the law is no excuse" phrase and issue a fine. Affectionally, these (most often district level) judges are referred to as the jokers of jurisprudence. You will note that these judges do not advance up the ladder of seniority in jurisprudence. They just get eased off the bench when their term is up. Why, because ignorance of the law can be an excuse for an average American.

Culpable inefficiency differs from "ignorance of the law is no excuse" in that the prerequisite for the position warrants that the person holding the position possesses the knowledge and necessary expertise in order to perform the functions of the position. This individual is handled quite differently, in a legal sense, than the average American.

In last evening's editorial, I elaborated somewhat on Jamie Skeeter's credentials: police chief, career law enforcement officer and polygraphist. These credentials confirm that Jamie Skeeter's has reasonable knowledge of the duties with which Dr. Phil McGraw hired him to perform. Jamie Skeeter should have known every reasonable aspect of the law and procedure with which he employed to tape the conversation between Deepak Kalpoe and him. Given his accredited expertise, Jamie Skeeter would have been knowledgeable of every aspect of conversation recording.

Accordingly, for Jamie Skeeter to claim that he never listened to DVD or the VHS tape that he downloaded from his computer hard drive for submission to Dr. Phil McGraw for editing would constitute culpable inefficiency. Jamie Skeeter should have perused his work for correctness prior to submission for publishing.

Second, for Jamie Skeeter to claim that the Dr. Phil McGraw's editing took place without his participation, likewise, falls under culpable inefficiency. Upon hearing the error in the 8-second Beta tape, he was obligated to inform Dr. Phil McGraw to cease production. In this case, his non-performace is omission. Although, if he originally neglected to peruse his downloads for accuracy, this omission could be mitigated. But nonetheless, the non-performance falls back onto the original culpable inefficiency of not preusing his work for accuracy.

As for the case of Dr. Phil McGraw, clearly, he does not possess the same qualification as Jamie Skeeter; however, he oversees a media publishing outlet. By his position as leader of this media publishing outlet, he is accredited to possess all the required knowledge and expertise in order to operate that outlet. Now, Dr. Phil, personally, may not possess all the knowledge and expertise himself, but he has the resources available to provide such knowledge and expertise.

Hence, Dr. Phil McGraw cannot claim ignorance of the contents of the DVD and VHS tape submitted by Jamie Skeeter. Dr. Phil McGraw had all the resources available, legal and technical, with which to evaluate the 8-second Beta tape with Skeeter's DVD and VHS tape for conformance. Furthermore, Dr. Phil McGraw cannot claim ignorance of the manipulation of the tape by his technical staff, because he, as their boss, is responsible for all their actions and, likewise, had all the resources available to check their work prior to airing.

Neither Jamie Skeeter nor Dr. Phil McGraw can shake the yolk of responsibility or liability for the erroneous 8-second Beta tape. Both possessed the knowledge and expertise available in order to prevent the airing of the 8-second Beta tape. Even if they were both truly ignorant that the 8-second Beta tape was manipulated, both are en pris by culpable inefficiency.

Rita Crosby of MSNBC News escapes this category of culpable inefficiency, because MSNBC News never received a copy of the DVD or VHS tape in order to detect the manipulation. MSNBC News is a victim of publishing.

More coming a little later this evening...

Posted by Richard at November 29, 2005 7:06 PM

Greta update:

Greta of Fox News airs the unedited CD-ROM of the conversation with Deepak Kalpoe. Deepak says: "No, she didn't." And, the other statement actually reads: "You'd be surprised how easy it would have been that night." So, the second statement has been manipulated, as well. Also, Arlene Ellis Schipper commented that the video shows Deepak Kalpoe shaking his head "no" when he says "No, she didn't." On the 8-second Beta video, Dr. Phil's technicians froze Deepak's head by a spit-frame technique in order to camouflage the head movement.

Comment: The 8-second Beta tape was complete forgery!

Greta and Arlene discussed a better quality from the hard drive. The Aruban authorities have been waiting two weeks for the hard drive from the FBI.

Greta interviewed Beth Twitty (in Seattle). Beth stands behind Jamie Skeeter. She says the tapes are accurate. She feels that the Aruban police should be checking their video/audio tapes of the interrogations instead a twenty second tape produced by the Americans.

Comment: I suspect Beth Twitty is involved, in some manner, in the manipulation of the 8-second Beta video.

John Q. Kelly has been hired as a liaison between Beth and Karin Janssen.

Comment: After the foregoing statements by Beth Twitty, I suspect John Q. Kelly may have an additional defensive function to protect and/or claim against Dr. Phil and company.

Beth says Karen Janssen has been dishonest with her, because no video-audio of the interrogations have been handed over to the FBI.

Beth hits her groove with Joran raped, murdered and buried my daughter. Greta just cuts her off.

Greta holds her council: Hammer, Williams and Grimm.

Incredible as this is to read, Jim Hammer claimed that this airing of the CD-ROM essentially ends the case.

Ted Williams downgrades the interviewer on the tapes for not allowing Deepak Kalpoe to respond to the questions. He claims that the interviewer had no skills whatsoever at interviewing. The tapes are an embarrassment. Jim Hammer agreed with Ted.

Grimm considered the tapes laughable. He agrees with Arlene Ellis-Schipper on the shaking head motion as a confirmed negative to the most important question. Greta and Grimm explored the fact that Dr. Phil McGraw could go to jail. Without question, had this occurred in a courtroom, Dr. Phil would be incarcerated.

Ted Williams claims that Dr. Phil McGraw took serious advantage of Beth Twitty. He cautions that Beth Twitty and the entire Holloway family has to be alert for parasites out there eager to take advantage of them.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at November 29, 2005 10:48 PM

I don't think this John Q. Kelley was hired today, for the sole purpose of being a liason between Karin Janssen and Beth Twitty.

I believe that Beth knows that she willfully participated or had knowledge of the manipulation of the Dr Phil show, and feels she needs to lawyer up. I bet that Joe Mammana paid for this attorney.

I do not believe this is a woman is being taken advantage of. I believe she is conniving, manipulative, and controlling enough to be involved in this WHOLE theatrics put on by Dr. Phil.

Jamie Skeeters, Dr. Phil, Beth should all have to have charges brought upon them. Maybe she will KNOW how it feels to be found "guilty" of LYING, before SHE has her day in court, by public opinion.

She was on the Barbara Walters special tonight. When asked by Barbara, what is the ONE thing that you would like the world to know about your daughter, SHE couldn't even ANSWER! She stalled, put her head down, was thinking, and then spouted out..."She was normal". "Thats all she was just normal" HELLO? No mention of what a beautiful human being she was, and how she worked to help others, how she wanted to become a Dr? Nothing like that? Just that she was NORMAL?

My 16yr old daughter watched this show..she couldn't believe it. She spoke up and said, that woman is hiding something, look how she has to close her eyes anytime a question is posed to her.

Posted by: Donna at November 29, 2005 11:06 PM

It was interesting listening to Greta tonite - haveing Shipper on who actually listened to the tapes - and said not only did Deepak not say yes they did - she said you can see him saying NO and shaking his head NO!! She says there is nothing on these tapes that would anyway cause Aruba LE to want to talk to these 3 again. Even Greta's 3 talking heads said Skeeter was a terrrible investigator and did not ask the right questions, and that these tapes are a waste of time to even be talking about now! Skeeter and Phil should suffer some repercussion for taking us down a false pathway!

Posted by: Jan at November 29, 2005 11:42 PM

Thank you yet again, Harry, for an intelligent, reasoned read on the evolving situation.

Donna wrote, "I bet that Joe Mammana paid for this attorney."

Donna, I feel certain that Beth has more than enough donated money available to her to enable her to hire squads of America's highest-priced lawyers. That doesn't mean that she wouldn't accept any assistance offered by Velcro Joe (or anyone else, IMO), but there is no doubt in my mind that there is no pressing monetary need for her to do so.

Posted by: Dayo Gould at November 29, 2005 11:48 PM

I agree with Donna's 16 year old daughter, Beth is hiding something, and I for one would like to know what it is. She definitely was in on the manipulation of the tapes. She claims she didn't hear the entire tape, that is bull and everyone knows it. She demands that the ALE give her every piece of information they have for her to look it over, don't tell me she didn't want to hear every single word that Deepak said. She knew he didn't say he had sex with her yet she let Phil and Skeeter put that tape on the air and vouch for its crediblity. This woman needs to go to jail for trying to frame an innocent person.

Posted by: flightoffancy at November 29, 2005 11:48 PM

Hi Flight..nice to see you here!

I agree, she has manipulated this media blitz from the start. All her "breaking news" stories to get her on TV. None of anything has panned out or has been the TRUTH.

IMO, Beth needs to be right. She will do or say ANYTHING to prove that she is right.

Not that she wants the REAL perps caught, in her mind she NEEDS to be right. This is a sign of a controlling and manipulative person.

Now she says on Greta that the prosecutor has a TAPED interogation of Deepak admitting to burying Natalee? Come on!! Greta cut her right off.


IF such evidence like that existed, NO judge, in his right mind, would of allowed him to be released!

Now she is in Seattle? WTF is in Seattle? Is Joe$$Felon in Seattle?

This woman needs to go home, take care of her son, and her husband. Get some type of therapy. And try to move on somehow. YOU can always have hope...and you can always have faith. But IF she has already buried Natalee in her mind since June 10th..then what is this mission she is on? Why keep it going in the media? What is her driving force? Vengence?

Hatred, Anger, Revenge and Vengence is only going to eat her up inside. She needs to let go. Sometimes families of murdered victims do NOT get answers. It isn't because the police are corrupt..or protecting anyone, its just that there isn't enough evidence to convict anyone.

Just ask Taylor Behls mother!

Posted by: Donna at November 30, 2005 12:25 AM

You know there are some people that think money can buy anything. Do you think money can buy manufactured evidence? Can money buy a bunch of without a clue Governors? What can money buy? Think out of the box, let your imagination run off for a moment. Scary thoughts, arent's they?

I have never criticized this woman but, somehow I thought she was wearing her duaghter's turtle neck and her daughter's Tiffany heart tonight. They jst didn't look right on her to me. Then someone watching with me, who doesn't follow this at all, said "I thought she was married, wonder who gave her the heart?" This caused me to wonder. What is the rest of the wrold thinking about this? Of course, I went to her defense, as I always do, but, what are people thinking?

Thanks Harry for all your hard work.

Posted by: Little Bo Peep at November 30, 2005 2:19 AM

I posted something a few days ago on the 25th update . I was wondering why (not wondering actually) why "Skeeter" didn't run off to Aruba last week when he was invited to listen to his original interview with Deepak Kalpoe. I was also wondering (not really wondering) why the FBI is taking so long to corroborate the identical A/V material that the DFI has in their posession. In that post, I also mentioned that I thought I knew, but would not elaborate for the risk of sounding like so many people that scream "gang rape, murder etc" with no proof.

I suppose I could say what I thought a few days ago, but there's no need to, is there.

Posted by: Jim Hanson at November 30, 2005 4:36 AM

Why has Twitty and all her henchmen been so intent from the beginning to zero in and convict Joran & the Kalpoe brothers?

The ongoing daily media campaign by her, getting her face in front of any camera, in any City to denegrate, accuse and convict the 3 boys of gang rape, being sexual predators and probably murderers as well as expert body disposal experts?

Culpable inefficiency -- what a beautifully concise phrase. It's also a fact that Phil McGraw was employed in a law firm for some time, as a consultant of some description. So, I'd say McGraw is not entirely unfamiliar with legal matters.

I simply don't know whether Joran et al had anything to do with Natalee's disappearance. I do know that there has been a Twitty conspiracy from the beginning to zero in exclusively on these boys and extraordinary means have been employed to convict them on international media.

Paul van der Sloot has shown us that he is quite prepared to seek his legal remedies with regard to his wrongful detention and position as a suspect in this case. I have said all along that at the appropriate time, the van der Sloot family will seek all of it's legal remedies against Beth Twitty in particularly as well as others, which may very well include media personalities in my humble estimation.

The exposure of the Skeeters/McGraw affair should be an alert to all in my opinion, that the coverup and corruption is perhaps not at all with ALE and the Prosecutor nor even The Hague, as Twitty often states, but right smack in Mountain Brook, Alabama and most decidedly the concerted effort of Beth Twitty, who has become a rival to Gloria Allred in her affinity and love of the camera and public exposure. Ugh, this case is so ugly.....

Thanks Harry, for your ongoing refreshing as well as intelligent contribution to the discussion. Bravo!

Posted by: Heli at November 30, 2005 9:23 AM

Culpable inefficiency particularly in case of an ex cop of Sketter's years could be overcome by the admission that actual police practice now and for decades prior to Skeeters seperation from actual police force routinely involves manufacture of evidence, mishandling of evidence, misplacement of evidence in cooperation with and at the direction of the prosecution. Since such criminal behavior is the accepted norm (accepted by the court functionaries and DA as well as citizens who want a conviction and judges elected on conviction rate)the chances that a US jury (selected for its manipulability)would convict a venerated and august old cop doing his best to help the poor ditressed mother of a lost child is slim.

Second line of defense - where was the evidence "manufacture". IF manufactured evidence is produced thta indicate evidence was manufactured outside US then no jurisdiction.

Better line of defense. Name the damaged party.
The damaged parties are not US citizens - no right to council, no bill of rights. Seek redress in your own country. Reciprocity by the US when a US citizen is the culprit (especially a heavy campaign contributor like Am South or Ophrah) can be an ages long process. Just ask th Jews about former Nazis. It took them 40 to 50 years.

Aruba will not prosecute. What advantage is prosecution when media and Twitty do themselves in.

This Skeeters Dr Phill business will never go to court. Except the kangaroo court of public opinion which by the time fact (no truth please) is revealed will have gone on to another story.

Posted by: paul at November 30, 2005 10:39 AM

I have a question, can anyone answer it for me?

On the day the Dr Phil show aired, was Jamie Skeeters on that show at all?

Did he actually sit there and listen to this "sliced and diced" tape of his?

And if he was, then I will say he was culpable, of manufacturing of "evidence". IF this man had any integrity, he would of stated, Wait....that wasn't on MY original tape. Stop this tape, its been edited, MY credibility is on the line here...I won't be connected to this at all.


Posted by: Donna at November 30, 2005 12:55 PM

Dear Paul:

What you bring up in your post, unfortunately, may be too true. I believe many of our readers can envision that in order for Jamie Skeeter and Dr. Phil McGraw to engage in such conduct, it could not be merely a novice attempt. Both gentlemen appeared professional, as they narrated the taped conversation with Deepak Kalpoe and its implications with their TV audiences. One might even extend their behavior to a mild form of arrogance. Regrettably, it would appear that Jamie Skeeter and Dr. Phil McGraw knew precisely what they were doing.

Thank you for your post. I should do an editorial on this issue.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at November 30, 2005 2:44 PM

The next big Explosion that Beth Twitty will be announcing...

Is that she is filing a multi-million dollar lawsuit against Aruba. Her lawyer? None other than the high priced civil attorney John Q Kelley.

Mark my words..this will be next weeks news!

Posted by: Donna at November 30, 2005 6:32 PM

Harry, do you have an answer for me? Or do you just get deleted when Harry doesn't want to answer?

Posted by: jewels flem at November 30, 2005 7:34 PM

Dear jewels fiem:

Are you auditioning for something?

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at November 30, 2005 9:24 PM

Whatever happened to the International attny that Beth and Joe were talking about they were consulting awhile back?

Posted by: CSI at November 30, 2005 11:18 PM

Dear CSI:

As I understand, Joe Mommana and Beth Twitty were exploring the possibility of a lawsuit against Aruba in the Kingdom of the Netherlands, at the time. Apparently, the idea failed.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at November 30, 2005 11:57 PM



Articles Related to Natalee Holloway: