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

« EU to Muslims: We're so sorry. Please don't hurt us | Main | Study Says Tequin Could Produce Diabetes »

March 2, 2006

HarryTho 3/2 Natalee Holloway Commentary

Topics: Natalee Holloway

This evening, I will continue, painstakingly, to deconstruct the Part F: Joran's First Set of Lies in the lawsuit 102254/2006. Parts A, B, C, D, And E have provided little to support, if anything, the causes for action demanded in the lawsuit.

Page 8: Part F: Joran's First Set of Lies:

Page 8-9: Allegation 51: In the first iteration of the story, Joran and others claimed that they left C&C and drove Natalee to a lighthouse because "she wanted to see sharks." Any sexual contact between Joran and Natalee, so the story goes, occurred in the car, was initiated by Natalee, and was wholly consensual. As Satish described it, Natalee "never stepped out of the car."

This allegation provides some interesting statements. The notion of seeing sharks around the lighthouse area is of concern. From the Aruban commentators on the case, sharks are not known to frequent the waters around Aruba. I believe that it would be safe to say that there would have been no sharks to be seen around the lighthouse area. Accordingly, this statement would need confirmation from the Aruban investigators.

As for the consensual sex, the plaintiffs have some wood to chop in order to disprove this statement, given Natalee's behavior within C&C.

The last statement refers to Satish Kalpoe, another suspect in the case. As described in Allegation 50, Satish Kalpoe has not been named in the lawsuit. In order for this statement in Allegation 51 to be upheld, Satish Kalpoe will need to be deposed. The Supreme Court of this state of New York has no authority to do that. What was the purpose of making this entry?

Allegation 52: Joran then claimed that Natalee wanted to have sexual intercourse with him but that she was extremely intoxicated and that he, in an act of chivalry, decided that she should go back to her hotel.

The term extremely intoxicated is subjective. Obviously, Natalee's behavior in C&C was not considered extremely intoxicated. It seems unusual that she would suddenly go from a buzz to tipsy from a car ride of five or ten minutes. In sense, it could be interpreted that Joran does not appreciate engaging sexually with intoxicated, young, American females. Accordingly, it may not have been an act of chivalry, but a case of revulsion. From all accounts, the three suspects did take Natalee back to the hotel area.

Allegation 53: Then, the trio claimed, they dropped Natalee off at the Holiday Inn, where she stumbled off until she was approached by a dark-skinned security guard wearing a Black T-shirt and holding a walkie-talkie. This fabrication ultimately resulted in two innocent men being arrested.

The word: trio, is improper in that, it connotes that the three suspects were a team. They were not. They were casual acquaintances who began chumming together a few months prior to the day in question. In Joran's last aired statement, he does remark that Natalee and he entered the Palm Beach area near the Marriott Hotel and walked to the Fisherman's Huts (formerly known as the Holiday Inn beach). Given that any statement that Joran may utter could land him back in prison, it must follow that Joran's story remains that he dropped Natalee off near the Marriott Hotel not far from the Holiday Inn.

Another misconception concerns the security guards. The two security guards arrested did not match the identities provided by the Kalpoe brothers to the Aruban police. Joran did not identify any security guards, he walked the beach with Natalee. The security guards arrested were done so as a result of Aruban police investigation. There existed compelling suspicions to arrest these two security guards. Furthermore, given the activities of the security guards, they acted as informants for the Aruban police. It is even conceivable that they were undercover agents for the Aruban police. Accordingly, this entire security guard issue remains an unknown within this case.

Lastly, had Natalee walked back to her hotel from the Marriott Beach, the scenario told by the Kalpoe brothers to the police would most likely have been realized. I would not be so quick to discount this scenario as a lie. Remember, this story emanates from the Kalpoes and not Joran. Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, the Kalpoes remain outside the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the state of New York.

Allegation 54: Joran's lie quickly unraveled. Security videos taken at the Holiday Inn revealed that Natalee never returned, and that the claims about the dark-skinned security guard were nothing more than cynical and a desperate frame job. Inconsistencies among the stories told by Joran, Deepak and Satish began to mount.

As explained in Allegation 53, the story in question was not one told by Joran. The statement "Joran's lie quickly unraveled." is without foundation. Joran never told it.

It has been well-researched that the security cameras at the Holiday Inn have limited surveillance capability. Though they do cover the front entrance, vestibule and showcase areas, they do not cover some of the other accesses to the hotel. Accordingly, given the location of Natalee's room, she could have entered the room via the beach area or the gaming room area without coming under a surveillance camera's lens. If as Joran relays that Natalee and he were at the Marriott Beach, her most probably entrance would have been from the shoreline area into her room and not via the vestibule of the hotel.

The notion of a frame job against the security guards is pure fiction. As previously discussed, the Aruban police arrested the security guards, based upon their own investigations. Furthermore, the security guards arrested did not match the description given to the police by the Kalpoe Brothers.

Allegation 55: By Joran's own admission, this tale of driving Natalee back to the hotel and leaving her there was a blatant lie.

Actually, it was not a lie. Joran did take Natalee to the Marriott Beach to an area formerly known as Holiday Inn beach, just up the shore from the Holiday Inn. Perhaps the specific point of drop off was in error, but I believe that it could be overlooked. Joran should not be so hard upon himself. After all, it seems that it was Natalee's idea to walk away from the Holiday Inn. I believe that we can extend Joran some courtesy on this issue. After all, as I understand it, he was protecting Natalee's honor by relocating their parting.

Allegation 55 should read more chivalric than malicious.

In summary, the first lie is not so much of a lie. Granted Joran felt uncomfortable being with a person who suddenly disappears, but after hearing his story, his actions are understandable. And, when we consider that after learning of the real drop off point, the Aruban investigation is no closer to resolution. What was the difference: Marriott Beach area formerly known as the Holiday Inn beach or the Holiday Inn?

Tomorrow evening I will entertain Part G: Joran's Second Set of Lies.

Also, I will report of Greta's continuing interview with Joran van der Sloot.

Posted for HarryTho

Posted by Richard at March 2, 2006 3:15 PM



Articles Related to Natalee Holloway: