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

« Is Russia Equiping Iran For War ? | Main | New Video On Peace Activists Threatened With Death »

December 2, 2005

HarryTho 12/3 Natalee Holloway Update And Commentary

Topics: Natalee Holloway

Before we commence tonight's editorial, we have a reminder that we will not be posting an editorial Saturday. Our next editorial will be Sunday Evening or Monday Morning.

Given the collapse of the case against the three suspects, we will explore Natalee Holloway as a runaway. With Aruba sitting in the middle of the Caribbean, it is surrounded by Spanish-speaking countries. Conveniently, we have discovered that Natalee was conversant, if not near fluent, in Spanish. Accordingly, any country in Latin America (except Brazil) would be comfortable for her.

In order to narrow down the countries of opportunity for Natlaee, we would need to check her computer hard drive, immunization record, passport or birth certificate, international driver's license (if any), credit card statements and bank accounts. Her computer hard drive, and those hard drives at her school foreign students' exchange program would detect any communication with a foreign national from Latin America. Naturally, any communication would hint at a potential accomplice to her getaway.

The immunization record, usually the Center for Disease Control (CDC) keeps records of some foreign travel immunization, will identify what immunizations Natalee received prior to her departure to Aruba. If malaria, cholera, tetanus, typhus, yellow fever or hepatitis A&B are listed, we can surmise that Natalee intended to travel beyond Aruba. If her shot record is absent, then we can cross check via her social security number with the CDC files. With a few exceptions, like the Northern coast of Venezuela hugging the Caribbean coastline, all of Venezuela has malaria. Generally, hepatitis A&B are prevalent in all Third World countries (Central America for sure). Unfortunately, most Third World water supplies contain typhus. Unless Natalee survived on bottle water, chances are very likely that she contacted typhus.

Cholera and yellow fever are a little more difficult to contract; however, there are outbreaks. Generally, personnel accompanying Natalee would warn her to sidestep any outbreak areas.

Tetanus would play a part, if Natalee bruised herself and opened some of her flesh to infection.

Her passport would indicate any visas she might have acquired prior to departing the USA. As I recall, however, he passport was located within her room at the Holiday Inn . Without her passport, Natalee could travel through Latin America, or most of it, with her birth certificate, an American ID, like a driver's license, and a makeshift travel document. Sometimes, these travel documents contain a visa that other countries just stamp as an entry permit with each country the traveler enters. Sometimes, the entry check point will issue one of their standard travel documents with an entry stamp to be employed while traveling through their country. Keep in mind that there are clandestine methods of obtaining whatever documents one desires to pass through isolate entry posts. Usually, a travel document consists of a one or two pages with your picture on it, some identification of whom you are, your country of origin and your entry permit. Travel documents, once issued, has specific expiry dates, usually 30 days from entry.

International driver's license enables a drive to use a motorized vehicle anywhere the license is accepted. Usually, the international driver's license is obtain in your country of origin; however, with suitable ID and perhaps a connection, one could process one overseas. It is just much easier within your country of origin, because the issuing agency can verify your driver's license and abstract. Each Latin American country in which Natalee registered her international driver's license should have a record of acceptance.

Credit card statements would identify where Natalee has made charges. Also, the cards would indicate if a large withdrawal into cash were recorded and where.

Bank accounts would indicate similarly whether or not large amounts of cash were withdrawn. Wire transfers would likewise be listed.

If any of the foregoing indicate activity, we should assume that Natalee dyed her hair black, cut her hair and/or curled it, has a tan and speaks fluent Spanish under a Spanish name and travel documents.

We should support Beth Twitty's belief that the call from Central America (Mexico?) was Natalee and possibly suffering from lack of immunization for one of the afflictions described above. I would guess either malaria or typhus.

This scenario would seem to correspond with the latest FBI announcement concerning Natalee Holloway. I believe that the FBI has explored this very scenario and has some reason to follow it up.

If Natalee's immunization record remained untouched, her credit cards and bank accounts absent withdrawals, no passport visas, no record of an international driver's license and her hard drives were found without leads, then the scenario of abduction should take center stage. Since no ransom has been demanded, the most logical reason for the abduction would be prostitution in the White sex slave industry.

If in the White sex slave industry, we have mentioned a number of likely locations in yesterday's editorial and past postings.

Bill O'Reilly of Fox News interviewed Geraldo. Geraldo recaped the controversy between the Aruban authorities and the Dr. Phil Show, and explained that the tapes aired by the Dr. Phil Show were edited to eliminate words and sounds in order to change a negative into an affirmative.

Geraldo presented some background of how Dr. Phil used the 8-second Beta tape to incite the American public with outrage over the three suspects' release when Deepak Kalpoe admited on the doctored tapes that the three suspects had sex with Natalee. Geraldo connected prior statements released by the Twitty-Holloway camp and others that Natalee was reported to have been coming and going out of consciousness. Geraldo concludes that Dr. Phil's tape marked the three suspects as rapists, if not murderers.

Geraldo questioned the integrity of the Dutch in this finding over doctored tapes; however, he concured with the Dutch, because he classifies them as too afraid to make such an outrageous announcement, after the tapes had been given to the FBI for concurrence.

Bill tried to pin down Geraldo as to whom the culprit may be. Geraldo hints it may be the editing room of Dr. Phil McGraw.

Geraldo classified the story as a media hit; however, it may not lead to a criminal fraud case.

Rita Crosby of MSNBC News hosted, Steve Cohen (Aruban representative), Harold Copus (former FBI agent and agent for Dr. Phil), Burt Dubrow (media specialist), Frank Piazza (expert voice analysts), Frazer Seitel (media consultant) and TJ Ward (private investigator).

Steve Cohen reviewed the results of the Dutch Forensic Institute (DFI) that one tape was manipulated and that the FBI is evaluating the DFI's results.

Harold Copus doubts that the tapes were manipulated by the Dr. Phil Show. He emphatically states that he was not present for the airing. He came on the Dr. Phil Show for the sex slave angle, only. Harold blames the confusing on Dutch incompetence.

Harold continued with Jamie Skeeter being extremely reputable, Head of the California Polygraph Institute. Also, an independent investigative institute has confirmed the authenticity of the Dr. Phil tape.

Burt Dubrow claims that the Dr. Phil Show is very reputable. He claims Dr. Phil McGraw has no motive to manipulate these tapes. He believes all will fill in right for Dr. Phil.

Steve Cohen hints that the tapes were manipulated in order to play into Dr. Phil's call for a boycott of Aruba. Burt Dubrow did not respond; he just pressed his lips and slanted his mouth.

Frank Piazza confirmed that based upon his expert voice analysis, the Dr. Phil tapes are different from the other tapes and have been edited for content and sensationalism.

Frazer Seitel accounted Dr. Phil Show's excellent reputation and mades a point that it is at stake in this tape controversy. Frazer said Dr. Phil has to determine real fast: 1) the tapes are true, 2) Jamie Skeeter altered them or 3) someone on the Dr. Phil Show production staff altered the tapes. Frazer recommends that Dr. Phil announce his results as quickly as possible.

TJ Ward discounted the sex trade option for Natalee, because he claims the FBI has done extensive investigation into the countries down there. He is concentrating his continued efforts into proving that Paulus van der Sloot was the main culprit in this disappearance of Natalee Holloway.

Rita aired some old Police Chief Dompig statements where he feels the three suspects had consensual sex with Natalee; she passed away during the sex; and they disposed of her body. TJ Ward confirmed those statements.

Steve Cohen, likewise, confirmed the three suspects are center stage, and Police Chief Dompig's statement remains the prime scenario. He stated that a Curacao prosecutor is coming in to review the case from day one to see if he can add any new options to the current investigation. Also, a very experienced investigator is coming in from the Netherlands. Steve laments that the tapes were not useful to the investigative team. It would appear that everyone is let down by the tape results from the DFI. One can almost hear their prayers that the FBI refutes the DFI results!

Rita reported that the Dr. Phil Show stands by their airing of the 8-second Beta tape as accurate and not altered in any manner.

Greta of Fox News hosted David Kock, Satish Kalpoe's attorney, and her council of Hammer, Grimm and Williams.

Greta released the Dr. Phil Show statement that they did not alter the tape in any manner and that an independent audio expert confirmed that their tape was aired accurately and consistent with the tape presented to them by Jamie Skeeter. Also, Jamie Skeeter has confirmed that the tape aired by the Dr. Phil Show is the same as the tape he gave them.

David Kock reviewed the DFI findings. He stated that the island of Aruba does not have the capability to alter a tape in the manner that was done to the Skeeter tape aired on the Dr. Phil Show. The FBI now has the tape for confirmation.

In a legal sense, despite the wording on the tape, in the worse results, they do not prove rape. The tapes would need corroboration from another source of evidence. The media on Aruba has activated to the DFI results.

Greta brought on her council: Hammer, Grimm and Williams. The general consensus is that the stakes are high now for the FBI to resolve this controversy. Greta announced the fact that the Dr. Phil Show promised her a tape to evaluate, yet they did not get it, but instead got a statement.

Williams called the statement pure spin. He calls on Dr. Phil McGraw to put up or shut up. The council wants a copy of the tape to determine for themselves. Williams discounted the expert as just another paid, court-appearance specialist.

Grimm discounted that anyone could imagine these two tapes being a mere misunderstanding in language. The tapes were doctored. The FBI needs to resolve this, quickly.

Hammer theorized on the culprit. Trying to employ as delicate a wording as possible, he feels the culprits reside within the Dr. Phil Show.

Williams ended with his experience watching the video a few times, and he claimed that he could not really see the distinct head-shaking that Arlene Ellis-Schipper mentioned, last evening.

Comment: From the foregoing, it is expected for the Dr. Phil Show to uphold their 8-second airing. If they do not uphold it, the Dr. Phil Show and all the experts are finished, completely. The statement and the expert mean the Dr. Phil Show is circling the wagons. There are some serious criminal issues to resolve here. The ball is now, firmly, in the FBI's court.

That's it for tonight, but may see some of you on the comment side. Aloha.

Posted for HarryTho

Posted by Richard at December 2, 2005 11:42 PM

Harry, do you believe the highly over touted FBI will ever come out and tell us what they think of this so called taped evidence? What was to keep Slick Skeeter from coping his final verison of the interview onto a NEW hard drive and send this to the FBI, if in fact, he ever sent it to beging with. Wouldn't this show up as a second or third generation of the actual original?

Posted by: flightoffancy at December 3, 2005 12:26 AM

Dear flightoffancy:

First, the FBI has to contend with the State Department in this fiasco. I suspect that the FBI already has evaluated the Skeeter tapes. Actually, I suspect that the FBI had the results prior to sending the tapes down to Aruba in the first place. Regrettably, due to their usual "I got a secret" demeanor, they now find themselves on a powder keg of controversy. I believe the State Department will be required to mitigate the Dr. Phil Show adventure with the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

We must recall that Jamie Skeeter taped the conversation between Deepak Kalpoe and him without Deepak Kalpoe knowledge or permission ... a crime in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The crime occurred in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. All of a sudden the extradition calls of Art Wood realize with Jamie Skeeter. In a sense, if the FBI confirms the tapes, either way, they are confirming that Jamie Skeeter conducted the illegal taping in Aruba. Now comes the forgery issue aired all over the world. Via the USA - Kingdom of the Netherlands Treaty on extradition, the State Department may be compelled to offer Jamie Skeeter up to the Aruban authorities. Wouldn't this be a mess?

Lastly, maybe you could consider lowering the bar on the miraculous in the case of our FBI.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 12:53 AM

Hi Harry,

I also remember hearing Jamie Skeeter mumble on one of his many tv appearances that he did not acquire Deepak's signature to air this tape, so this could then present a problem also with Dr. Phil airing something not being consented to by anther person, right?

Posted by: therose at December 3, 2005 1:08 AM

SNIP: This scenario would seem to correspond with the latest FBI announcement concerning Natalee Holloway.

What announcement was that?

Posted by: Max at December 3, 2005 1:16 AM

Since there has been NO official statement put out BY the FBI that they did INDEED receive these tapes, HOW do WE know they did?

Aruban/Dutch I think are ONLY going on the WORD of Jamie Skeeters that he sent his hardrive/tapes TO the FBI.

The only way that I will personally believe that the FBI, has the hard-drive or the tapes, IF Holland or Aruba sent the hard-drive/tapes to them.

Does anyone KNOW if that is the case??

Arlene asked the question..."I thought Jamie already sent the hard-drive to the FBI". So that makes me question...............does the FBI have the hard-drive or tapes to even TEST anything?

Posted by: Donna at December 3, 2005 1:21 AM

SNIP: Arlene asked the question..."I thought Jamie already sent the hard-drive to the FBI". So that makes me question...............does the FBI have the hard-drive or tapes to even TEST anything?

Posted by: Donna at December 3, 2005 01:21 AM

That is an excellent question, Donna. And, one I would like to have answered by someone other than that lying Skeeter.

Posted by: Max at December 3, 2005 1:29 AM

Since there has been NO official statement put out BY the FBI that they did INDEED receive these tapes, HOW do WE know they did?
Posted by: Donna at December 3, 2005 01:21 AM

I'm with you Donna, HOW do we know if they even have this so called hard drive. Which I'm sure Jamie Skeeter pulled a fast one and down loaded a mulnipulated version onto a new hard drive, if he sent one at all. What I wanted to know was whether an expert can tell if it's a first, second or third generation verison. I'm not savey enough to know what they can tell and what they can't. But I've read enough fiction books that imply they can, so I wanted to know if this is in fact true.

Posted by: flightoffancy at December 3, 2005 1:35 AM

Harry,

let me remind that there are some customary conditions in extradition practices usually written down in respective treaties. One of them usually is that an alleged offence must be also a crime in a contry where an indictee is currently present. Additional more stringent requirements have to be met when a country would extradite an own citizen, I think in USA an alleged offense would have to be at least a felony per federal or pertinent state law; I doubt if it is a case with Skeeters.

Posted by: George at December 3, 2005 1:37 AM

let me remind that there are some customary conditions in extradition practices usually written down in respective treaties. One of them usually is that an alleged offence must be also a crime in a contry where an indictee is currently present. Additional more stringent requirements have to be met when a country would extradite an own citizen, I think in USA an alleged offense would have to be at least a felony per federal or pertinent state law; I doubt if it is a case with Skeeters.

Posted by: George at December 3, 2005 01:37 AM

How could it not be a felony, George?

Posted by: Max at December 3, 2005 1:43 AM

Dear George:

You bring up an interesting and touchy point. Clearly, forgery is a felony. If an extradition were considered, then it would be under the cognizance of a process known as "merger of crimes." The person, violating Deepak Kalpoe's rights in Aruba, went on to forge the document and subsequently publish it to others who, in turn, aired it internationally. The touchy part comes whether one is allowed to cross international jurisdictions during the evolution of a crime: rights violation to forgery to publishing.

The senior crime here is forgery. Publishing and rights violation could be incorporated into the forgery. All the crimes are founded on the illegal taping. Without the initial crime, the felony could not have been activated. One could argue that the crime site of Aruba enabled all the other more serious crimes to unfold.

As a note to your comment, I am uncertain if the USA federal laws on taping conversations apply similarly in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. If they do not, then the culprit would be excused from extradition for the rights violations. And, I suspect, he would avoid extradition altogether. This would be a tough study for the US State Department and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in the Netherlands.

Whichever the case, the taper would sooner or later have to travel to Aruba for cross-examination in order for the tapes to be allowed in any legal procedure. He becomes en pris as soon as he enters Aruba. Of course, he would not do that, because he tapes himself lying to Deepak Kalpoe, lowering his credibility.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 2:40 AM

Dear Max:

Here is the link to the FBI announcement.

http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/seekinfo/holloway.htm

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 2:58 AM

I emailed Jamie Skeeters the day after the Skeeters tape show aired on Phil McGraw. In his reply he indicated that he had 3 hours of tapes. Where is the other hour? Could they have been used as outtakes to edit into the master copy? With his expertise and the availablity of editing experts aroud him, I think that may be possible. I personally don't see how anyone could not think the tapes were manipulated, but to each their own. And why haven't we heard any of the conversations of Deepak theorizing on Natalee's demise?

Here is my email and Skeeters reply:

Dear Mr. Skeeters,

I watched Dr. Phil yesterday and listened to the interview you did with
Deepak Kalpoe. There seemed to be a flutuation in the voice levels during the interview, between questions asked and questions answered. Was this tape edited in anyway? Or was the tape played the complete unedited interview?
Thank you for your response.

*******************
You're right, the tape was edited for the TV show. The interview took place over a three hour period. Deepak did make some additional statements as to who killed Natalie, in his opinion.

I was told that more will be shared if there is a part two regarding this issue.

Take care,

Jamie

Posted by: pathenry at December 3, 2005 4:17 AM

Turning to your thoughts that NH may be conversant, if not fluent, in Spanish, I think that this is based on NH taking high school Spanish, being a member of the Spanish Club, and having some connection, as I recall, with a foreign exchange student. It is hard to see that this adds up to being able to get along in a Spanish speaking country.

The Spanish Club, discard right away. Application padding, with an eye to diversity.

And hate to say it, but 2 or 3 years of high school Spanish really doesn't get you far. It may get you the ability to speak slow, basic sentences. It doesn't get you fluency, or much capacity to understand spoken, idiomatic Spanish--which has regional variations as well! As for the exchange student, I'm not sure what that adds.

An International Driving Permit (usually obtained at AAA) gets you the right to drive in foreign countries--in combination with your own driving license, and is worthless without a valid driving license. In practice, it is worthless except in a few contries, since most will take a foreign license for a limited period. I haven't bothered to get an IDP in years.

I am not sure what you mean by a travel document. Most South American countries require a passport from US citizens; Brazil (yes, I know, Portuguese) requires an advance visa as well. I think that if she's there, she's in the country she illicitly entered, or else she snuck into a neighboring country. Guyana speaks English, you know!

Posted by: Gary at December 3, 2005 5:32 AM

Oh, and if the CDC keeps immunization records, that's news to me. Usually, you get immunizations from a family doctor, or else from a health clinic, which may or may not keep a record with your name on it. I've never heard that the records of your getting one go to Atlanta. Any source on that?

Posted by: Gary at December 3, 2005 5:41 AM

It makes me sad that some experts now doubt the credablity of the DFI. Just because the results aren't the results they want to see? What happens if the FBI agrees with the findings of the DFI? Will they argue that the FBI is incompetent? Or will they argue that those corrupt Aruban/Dutch have concoted their own tape and send that to the FBI?

Furthermore it saddens me that people put their trust in a journalist who has lied to the US audience and put US troops into danger!

But thats me venting of some steam. I would like to point out two things I thought of the last couple of weeks:

1) I remember reading somewhere that mr. Skeeters said he offered the harddrive to the FBI, but that the FBI hadn't come by and collected that from him! Question: Why didn't he take the HD to the nearest FBI office?

2) I wonder if the FBI has put Natalee on their priority list. Natalee has disappeared on foreign soil, so it is not in the jurisdiction of the FBI. Within the US there are a lot of cases that need the attention of the FBI, cases with more urgency like terrorism for instance.

Well these are my two (euro) cents,

Goodnight or Goodmorning (depending on where you are right now!)

Posted by: Also_Dutch at December 3, 2005 9:20 AM

Dear Also_Dutch:

Let me respond to you first.

First and foremost, the authority in the Natalee Holloway case is the Dutch Forensic Institute (DFI). In a sense, when we say "the DFI has determined ..." that should equate to "The Lord Has Spoken!" Any correspondence with the FBI constitutes a measure of courtesy only. From my editorials, I may not have made that clear. I would have thought that my early conclusions that the Dr. Phil Show erred in their airing and subsequent proclamations would have triggered that acknowledgment.

As for your questions: first, all we have is Jamie Skeeter's word that he dropped off his hard drive with the Ventura Office of the FBI. Second, all I have on the FBI announcement on Natalee Holloway is what I posted: the announcement itself. After reading the announcement, I presume Natalee is not a high priority item. The announcement, to me, reads more like "Hey, if you happen to see her, give us a ring when you get the chance."

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 12:14 PM

Dear pathenry:

Thank you for your post and inquiry to Jamie Skeeter. I truly appreciate your effort.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 12:16 PM

Dear Gary:

Seems you have been busy!

First, let us discuss the Spanish issue. My comments emanate from my experience with foreign language learning. Also, I point out that Natalee was not just an average Spanish class student. She was an Honor student. In my personal experience, I studied another language in high school, and I became conversant by my senior year. Years later, I was able to speak reasonably well when I interacted with people from that country wherever I met them. Additionally, I could converse (haphazardly) with Spanish-speaking people (in southern Spain), because of the similarity of the roots of the romance languages. (I had a good time in Spain!) Now, I was no honor student by a long shot. Accordingly, I would surmise that as an honor student Natalee Holloway knew as much Spanish as I did (I never studied Spanish). Studying a foreign language is relative to what a person wants out of it. In my editorial, I took the position that Natalee wanted to learn Spanish and not just acquire a college prep credit.

Second, travel documents are employed in lieu of passports. They are as I described. Normally, a travel document resembles an individual visa for a person without a passport. If you lose your passport, a consulate will issue you a temporary travel document, if they cannot replace your passport. Now, foreign authorities may issue you a travel document in order to travel to the nearest US territory (includes consulates). I issued a number of them to people who lost their passports. The travel document essentially certifies that you have been issued an entry permit to travel in the country in question. Let me just explain the difference between a visa and an entry permit. A visa (from the French word viser: to see) means a consular officer reviewed your application to enter a country and approved it. When you appear at an entry check point (immigration office) to a country, they either overview your visa or check your credentials (if without a visa). If all is in order, then they stamp your visa (or passport, if without a visa) with an entry permit. The travel document provides the immigration officials with a piece of paper with which to stamp the entry permit.

Third, the more sensitive immunization records are kept by some central body. Of course, it is not a perfect system. And, I am unsure if it is, in fact, the CDC that provides that function. When I traveled to foreign countries that required certain immunizations, they could extract from my passport information (or visa info) that I had the required immunizations. Also, when I acquired the more sensitive immunizations, the persons checking my immunization record would do so by my social security number, and a list of my immunizations, with dates and expiry, would appear on a computer monitor. From your comments, your town doctor may just be entering the immunization into your shot record (the yellow immunization record that formerly accompanied your passport when you traveled overseas).

Fourth, the International Driver's license is not difficult to acquire. If Natalee had acquired one prior to her travel to Aruba, I would find it telling that she intended to travel further than Aruba. This comment in the editorial was more in line with Natalee's penchant for meticulousness.

I think I addressed them all.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: Harry at December 3, 2005 1:04 PM

Why not use INTERPOL for verification of the entire set of tapes. INTERPOL does not have a political stkae in the contest. The old FBI agent Van Zandt has already been in the house and directed his cronies as to what not to find.

Notice that ArubaGetAGrio has discontinued translation except on ScaredMonkeys which is a pro boycott site. The last message on GetAGrip was a rousing indication that Jossy Mansur was the most unbiased journalist involved in the case. Was the site put up by Jossy or the Twitty Holloway Mammama clan. The site has quite a bit of Jossy claiming the Kalpoes are guilty. I susopect the first lawsuit will be against Jossy - hes close and culpable and was in on the development of "intelligence" that no one but the Twitty clan seems to have seen.

Posted by: paul at December 3, 2005 1:21 PM

Dear Paul:

I believe the blogger operating the site Aruba Getagrip has decided to move on to other endeavors. As I understand, she was a Canadian. It is ski season up there.

What most sites do in order to remain in good standing with sources of information is to simply republish what they are fed. It does work. Many governments employ media outlets (public relations offices) in order to keep their loyal, foreign journalists employed. In a sense, they hand feed them articles for publication. It is a wise game to play, if you intend to be around for the long haul. You will note that none of these media sources provide us with any articles (they know better!).

I believe, after following this case for months, we can pretty predict whatever will be said by the main players in the case. And, we can pretty much assess their credibility. Accordingly, having an inside track to these characters ranks up there with the Rita Crosby's psychic. I will pass on the chicken bones!

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 2:02 PM

Dear therose:

Sory, I missed your question earlier.

The issue has to do with the laws regulating who can publish on a conversation that was taped. Clearly, the taping in Aruba was illegal. However, it was not aired in Aruba or any other part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. All I can surmise is that Dr. Phil's legal staff found that if one party to the conversation agreed to the airing, it was satisfactory.

We have a similar Hollywood celebrity scenario unfolding where one party, a well-known, male actor, is attempting to quash an airing of an intimate encounter with a famous lingerie model. The courts have yet to decide if a one party airing is permissible. Now, in this actor-lingerie model scenario, both parties agreed to the taping of the sexual encounter.

The question is touchy. In the Dr. Phil scenario, Deepak Kalpoe never surrendered his rights to the taping, much less the airing of the illegal taping ... and much less to the forgery!

I find this entire publication by the Dr. Phil Show extremely difficult to defend. But for the right price, America will produce an attorney, with a keen eye of justice, in order to extricate Dr. Phil McGraw from outrage worse than death.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 2:27 PM

Monsieur Harry,
About the honor student, I think Natalee can move in any country with the basics. As you mention you do not need to have a Master. However, I think in any Country that she goes even thought she shaved; she still can be recognizable and she has a price. I do not imagine that they will not turn her because they want to help her.
UNLESS there is somebody afraid, that she will talk after her release.
What about if they find that the responsible persons are from MB ? You said that the crime was not committed in the US soil.
Well about, the tapes even thought they had or they did not have intercourse, does not mean they made something wrong. Gosh! If they start with that, they will not see the end soon. But, Mrs. Dubois could be handy in this, she can find out who is the tape perpetrator.
By the way viser= focus.
Merci pour votre excellent travail,
Antoinette


Posted by: antoinette at December 3, 2005 3:43 PM

Mademoiselle Antoinette:

You are correct, the verb is "voir" and "visa" conjugates from that verb and not "viser" My French is rustier than I thought. Please correct me if I am wrong, but "visa" refers to third person singular in the past tense, is that correct?

According to the tapes (the DFI correct version), the three suspects did nothing to Natalee Holloway. There has been no crime committed by them.

To us in America, and perhaps some other English- or Dutch-speaking countries, the case is nightly news. However, I doubt that it even gets aired in Latin America. So, people encountering Natalee, in disguise, would not recognize her; especially, if she carried travel documents indicating she was someone else.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 4:13 PM

When did Geraldo get anything right? Yeah right. Some people are mislead because they want to be.

Posted by: Allan Author Profile Page at December 3, 2005 5:59 PM

Now the President of a Polygraphs in California. With a confirmation that there are other copies, and they are originals. My next question will be: How many computers he has?.
Visa (verb.) the 3rth person of the singular (passé simple) but in means something else.
Your French is not rusty the only thing is that the words are the same.
Well is not only news in the USA. Some other countries We are sharing your news.
The job you are doing is great, merci.
Antoinette

Posted by: antoinette at December 3, 2005 6:49 PM

Mademoiselle Antoinette:

The number of computers owned, or controlled, by Jamie Skeeter is really unimportant. Components in a computer, especially a hard drive, will have traceability identification built within them. Part of that product traceability will included dates: i.e, purchase, loading, etc. Anyone swapping a hard drive will be detected from the product traceability data (product ID number). Also, each computer will have an inner clock that records usage. Someone trying to copy years of data from one computer hard drive onto another will be exposed by the sudden activity in the new computer hard drive.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 4, 2005 12:32 AM

Harry,
Escellent job as always.

"OH WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE WHEN FIRST WE PRACTICE TO DECEIVE"

Posted by: Little Bo Peep at December 4, 2005 4:36 AM

Harry, although the presequisites for a naive 18 year old girl planning an escape to South America may almost look convincing to some individuals, I have to disagree with your theory of her running off south of Aruba. For starters, we've all seen the footage of Natalle Holloway on the tabloid shows. As a father of two, with some experience in life, this girl was too naive, almost too shy to plan something like this outside her own country. If she had wanted to leave her family, she could have done it at home in the US without causing her family so much pain.

Let's just face it. This girl didn't make it to her morning flight home for one of two reasons; She's dead. Or she's been involuntarily moved off the island.

Why should we try and delve into alternate theories here.

This case was over on September 3d of this year.

It's over.

Posted by: Jim Hanson at December 4, 2005 5:52 AM

Natalee Holloway had made plans to attend a university in Alabama. She'd already sent her enrollment application. I truly doubt, given the unlikelyhood of her disengaging from her upbringing, that she'd "run away". I agree with the previous post that she's either dead or been kidnapped. For some odd reason I truly believe that one day this case will break wide open. I'm thinking that these young boys aren't emotionally or mentally equipped to walk around with such intense details of Natalee running loose in their minds. They're simply too young to deal with something like this. The old conscience will eat at them till they snap. When some of the "regular girls" of Aruba who were at the nightclub on the evening of Natalee's disappearance were interviewed they made comments which would implicate Joran van der Sloot's motives as he'd been there before 'preying' on girls. If you've lost a daughter then you know exactly how Beth Twitty must feel. I've lost a sister so I can somewhat know how she feels. One day this will come out. Does anyone have anything to say about the incident involving a private detective who specializes in finding kidnapped children who went to Venezuela, I think it was there, and he was attacked in his hotel room telling him to STOP looking for "white girl teens". They stabbed him in the upper chest. He was one of the guys with Jamie Skeeters and some others. They also found that "haven for flesh" place on one of the islands and filmed it using night vision. Security in that place was unreal.

Posted by: dr_usa_23 at December 4, 2005 12:27 PM

I've been reading your reports on Natalee Holloway and I also agree with the previous two posts that she is dead or was kidnapped. IMO those 3 young men and the father know the truth. Of course if she is dead there is no evidence because they had 10 days to destory it. As for people bashing the Holloway & Twitty's they should stop and think how they would feel if this was their child. They did not ask for this to happen and would rather have Natalee back instead of all of the media coverage.

Posted by: Cherie Jarrell at December 4, 2005 2:24 PM

To All the "dead or kidnapped" theorists:

The very attributes that you quote with respect to Natalee are the very ones that could be employed to point to her capability to runaway. The root of the matter would reside in the motivation.

Were Natalee's medical aspirations hers or her mom's? Was she living her life or one her mom desired for her? Also, we need to address why Natalee gained some 10% body weight from her prom picture to her time in Aruba (three weeks).

I believe Natalee Holloway was under some kind of stress, and it was that stress that provoke her to flee. Young, naive girls have fled for less, and to other countries, if they had what they believed to be an accomplice.

As for you hunches for the three suspects, there exists no evidence to suggest that these kids have done any harm to Natalee. After six months ... some three months of constant interrogation by experts .... no evidence or incriminating declarations have been forthcoming. And, I reference your less than admirable appraisal of their mental capabilities.

Lastly, as for the lying of the three suspects, I believe, the recent few months of airing by the cable news networks have authenticated that the three suspects do not maintain a monopoly on lying.

With Aloha,

Harry

Posted by: harry Author Profile Page at December 4, 2005 4:58 PM

Harry,
Wonderful explanation for running away.
One of the aspects of this case that has been driving me crazy for months is the fact that the most ardent "supporters of the family" have consistently come up with some of the most hideous scenarios to prove that the young woman is deceased.
I often find myself reading this "crap" and I think, "don't they realized a family member could be reading this" and, they claim to be "supporting the family". Their behavior, juvenile as it is, makes absolutely no sense.
From the first week I have consitently posted that there was no evidence to "prove that the young woman was dead". Of course, despite a preponderence of evidence to the contrary, I have been chastised because "they believe that evidence was lost and compromised". I also view the suspect's differently. They may know something but their behavior doesn't belie the heninous crimes of which people are accusing them.
Sadly, anytime you post something questioning the "appointed scenario" or "the family and fellow travelers" you are immmediately jumped on and accused of the most horrendous crime of all "Beth bashing". Believe me, this effectively stops those posters right in their tracks. They begin to refrain from posting as they know the pavlovian result.
I have always felt that she was alive. I sincerely hope that she is alive of her own volition. If she is a victim of these "traders" I sincerely hope they are actively looking for her and will bring her home.
Ultimately, the FBI will probably be asking the same questions as have been asked on all these blogs. Without a doubt, the family and fellow travelers and chaperones and any extra parents who just happened to be down there enjoying a parallel vacation in either a hotel or their condo will have to be questioned. Oddly enough, it seems these people want to be questioned so the FBI should just get on with it and ignore the one person who doesn't want anyone questioned and who doesn't want any other suspects but the "three".
That attitude, in and of itself, speaks volumes.
You've compiled all the facts Harry. A few other bloggers have compiled all the facts too. The road they have followed thus far, just hit a brick wall. They have to regroup and start off in a different direction. Thus far you have suggested many approaches for them to follow. You have pointed out many things that need consideration and checking. My fervent hope is that "they" are reading this and using the information to find this girl
Thanks so much for your heartfelt, obvious caring and your committment to finding out the truth. Thanks also to Hyscience for this ever interesting site.

Posted by: researcher at December 4, 2005 5:28 PM



Articles Related to Natalee Holloway: