February 22, 2006
HarryTho 2/22 Natalee Holloway CommentaryTopics: Natalee Holloway
This evening, I thought I would continue on with my deconstruction of lawsuit 1002254/2006. In last evening editorial, I determined that some shortcomings may exist in the manner in which the Index number: 102254/2006 was obtained in order to commence the judicial proceeding. This evening, I will skip the Preliminary Statement on Page 1 and proceed to Page 2.
Page 2 identifies the Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue. The Parties are identified as Beth Twitty and Dave Holloway as the plaintiffs. The Defendants are Joran and Paulus van der Sloot. The purpose of identifying the parties is to provide specific information for service of the documents presented to the court during the judicial procedure.
"... name and address or whereabouts of each defendant."
Clearly, the complaint should likewise provide the location of the plaintiffs for the same reason ... the defendants need to know where to serve their response other than the Supreme Court of the state of New York.
Yet, the location of the plaintiffs could be summed up as somewhere in Alabama ... Mississippi ... while the defendants are described as somewhere in Arnhem, Netherlands ... somewhere in Aruba. I can only presume that Chadbourne & Parke LLP's representation with their nomadic clients in Almaty, Kazakhstan is shinning through here. It is probably accepted practice to just identify a client as Abdullah Changa, somewhere in Karachanganak or Osama bin Laden, somewhere in South Asia or Mohammed Atta, somewhere in the World Trade Center.
Clearly, the author of 102254/2006 did not know the whereabouts of the plaintiffs nor the defendants, nor do I suspect that he cared. He just filled in the slot for Parties.
It seems clear the author of 102254/2006 was not aware of territorial, personal, subject matter, in rem nor compliance jurisdiction. Nor was he aware of an issue of convenience for a forum in the state of New York. The author, likewise, was oblivious of the diversity of jurisdiction with plaintiffs somewhere in Alabama and somewhere in Mississippi, as well as, defendants somewhere in the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Aruba. Federal jurisdiction over diverse jurisdiction cases escaped this author completely. I can only conclude that the author of 102254/2006 seemed to be a novice in litigation matters.
Under the section for Venue, the author of 102254/2006 avoided all deliberation and simply placed his bet on the fact that the defendants were served in the state of New York with a Summons and Complaint, identified and authorized with Index number 102254/2006. He references a section of the New York Civil Practice Laws and Rules which in a sense allows open selection of venue when none of the parties reside in the state of New York. In this referencing, the author of 102254/2006 appears to assume a sovereignty status to the state of New York in extending its influence over the country of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Aruba. The allegation of sovereignty reminds him of the diversity of jurisdiction, but he discards it.
In this regard, the service of 102254/2006 occurred, once, in a Delta Airliner on the tarmac at JFK Airport in New York. Since Joran had not yet entered the United States of America, he had not yet stepped into the state of New York. The second service of 102254/2006 occurred within the JFK terminal outside the US Customs area. Since the JFK terminal is now under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security and patrolled by Federal police, this second service occurred within the United States of America but not in the state of New York.
"The position of Federal Security Director was created by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, signed by President Bush on Nov. 19, 2001. That legislation created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) within the U.S. Department of Transportation to centralize transportation security responsibilities under the newly created position of Under Secretary of Transportation for Security. FSDs are a new category of federal law enforcement within TSA ... will oversee federal security operations at the nation's airports."
FSDs will be responsible for a full range of airport security, enforcement and oversight, including:
Secretary Mineta Names Federal Security Directors For Nine Airports
It seems clear that the only kind of summons that can be served within an Airport Terminal is one authorized by a federal court. The summons attached to 102254/2006 was issued from a state court. Accordingly, the result of all the Al-Queda-like plotting by the John Q. Kelly and his persons incognito, taunting and harassing actions committed upon Joran van der Sloot and interference with the operation of US Customs by Bo Dietl ... leaving an Easter basket of felonies in his wake ... resulted in improper service.
With relief, I understood from Bo Dietl's narration on the cable news shows, last evening, of his deeds at JFK Airport that no other service of 102254/2006 was attempted. Here I was thinking that Bo had pizza delivery boys scurrying around Manhattan with copies of the summons and complaint still looking for Joran van der Sloot.
From this multi-service adventure, I suspect that the authors of 102254/2006 have no idea where the territorial boundaries state of New York reside.
I will continue deconstructing 102254/2006 in tomorrow's editorial.
In anticipation of tomorrow's ABC News broadcast, I would like to state an interesting observation from one of our emailers. In tomorrow's airing, if Joran van der Sloot makes any statements which contradict his testimony now of record with the Aruban authorities, he could be re-interviewed and re-imprisoned for at least another 3 months. Accordingly, what Joran states in the ABC interview is what is on record with the Aruban authorities.
In contradistinction, what is being aired by plaintiffs of 102254/2006 is under no such penalty. They are free to voice anything, as they have been, without any regard to reality, truthfulness, real life events and to the far extremes of their imaginations. Furthermore, these outrageous statements, emanating from the plaintiffs of 102254/2006, find easy conduits into the international media from Fox News, CNN and MSNBC News. No one is held accountable, despite attracting parasitic and opportunistic creatures from every imaginable spectra of social lunacy, reminiscent of the horrors of the Middle Ages absent the Auto de Fe.
I pray that the audience of the ABC News telecast juxtaposes the credibility of Joran van der Sloot with the peripheral allegations of those embraced by the cable news media: CNN, Fox and MSNBC News.
On cable news tonight - Rita interviewed Julia Renfro, Steve Cohen and Vito Calucci. Julia reviewed the video of Natalee and Joran in the Excelsior Casino. Natalee sat two girls away from Joran. There was little contact. Joran sat at the table first and within 5 minutes there were a bunch of Mountain Brook teens '.
Concerning Police Chief Dompig's statement about a new lead, Julia Renfro reports that she spoke with Arlene Ellis-Schipper who spoke to Police Chief Dompig, and according to Arlene, Police Chief Dompig never said that he had a new lead. This entire new lead is a product of journalistic imagination.
Steve Cohen reveals that the video of the Excelsior Casino was illegally leaked to the media. Steve blames the agendas of Beth Twitty, Dave Holloway and Larry Garrison for the leak. He states that the tape is of no help. Likewise, he reports that all information that they needed from Kingdom of Mountain Brook has been acquired, despite some airing on the Abrams Show by a chaperone named Bob Plummer, stating that the chaperones were not baby sitters for the students. Steve says that the focus remains that one of the suspects is the culprit.
Vito Calucci closed with a statement that there was no value to the Excelsior Casino video. Then, he embarked on some old news, previously discredited earlier by Julia Renfro.
Greta of Fox News interviewed Chris Cuomo of ABC News. Chris claims that Joran's story is consistent with what he has been saying. Joran feels it is time to tell the truth. When he met Natalee at the Excelsior Casino, he had no interest in her. He had an interest in one of her girlfriends. The Excelsior Casino video supports Joran's story.
Deepak & Satish took Joran to C&C. He refers to them as friends.
Natalee and Joran engaged in C&C and made plans as a couple after C&C. The intent was to go to Joran's home (house) for sex. But, rethinking his situation at home, they decided on the Holiday Inn ... Natalee's room. Natalee was drunk, but she was not out of control by any means. They ended up on the Marriott Beach.
It was Deepak's idea to keep Satish out of the story when it came out that Natalee was missing.
Joran provides a timeline, but he had no watch on that evening. So, the times are estimates. But, they do seems to gravitate about 2:00 AM.
Chris feels that Joran is brave to come on the show. Chris feels that Joran has been caught up in a media maelstrom and feels he has to speak out. He dislikes the labeling as murderer and rapist that the media has branded upon him.
In response to his lies, he said that he was sacred when he heard that Natalee was reported missing. The Twitty family showing up at his house intimidated him. It was the Kalpoes idea to say they dropped Natalee off at the Holiday Inn.
Chris reports of turmoil within the Van der Sloot family. Joran addresses the allegations in the lawsuit. Joran was upset with the service on the tarmac in the airplane.
Greta holds her council of Mike Cardoza, Ted Williams, Bernie Grimm and Jim Hammer. Mike feels that Joran exposing himself to the media is dangerous to him. He feels that a cross-examination will hard on him. Mike strongly encourages his lawyer to tell Joran to remain quiet.
Bernie seems more supportive of Joran. He understands his response to ABC News.
Ted Williams agrees with Mike, as does Jim Hammer. Ted feels that Beth Twitty will get some closure about what may have happened to Natalee from the Excelsior Casino video. Ted closes with serious concerns about criminal charges being filed against Bo Dietl from his statements last evening on Greta's show. Ted feels a lawsuit is coming, as well, against Bo.
... until tomorrow evening ....
Posted for HarryTho
Posted by Richard at February 22, 2006 9:54 PM
Articles Related to Natalee Holloway:
- HarryTho 2/22 Natalee Holloway Commentary - Feb 22, 2006