Detailed Timeline.... February 1 - 28, 2006.... the start of the long road of the assassination of Aruba - Dutch "justice"

The Natalee Holloway Timeline

of her vanishment while in Aruba

detailing persons, places, organizations,

deliberate & accidental actions & in-actions,

events & supposed events, witnesses,

known suspects, outright lies,

corruptions, and crimes

2-1-06

On 2-1 the “Birmingham News" reported:

(QUOTE)

Aruban Police Interview Students Here, 2 Other States

Aruban Police completed their interviews of friends of missing Mountain Brook teen Natalee Holloway and flew back to the Caribbean island Tuesday.

The team of two Investigators spent a week and a day in Birmingham and traveling to interview students in school elsewhere in Alabama, in Mississippi and in Tennessee, according to F.B.I. spokesman Ray Zicarelli. F.B.I. agents accompanied the Arubaans and provided support.

"They finished the interviews and left this morning on their way back to Aruba," Zicarelli said Tuesday. Some of the voluntary interviews were conducted at F.B.I. headquarters in downtown Birmingham, while others were at or near colleges attended by the graduates, including "a few" students who were talked to in rooms provided by campus Police officers, Zicarelli said.

The F.B.I. spoke with many of the Mountain Brook high school graduates in the weeks after Holloway, then 18, disappeared May 30 on the Caribbean island. Aruban Police asked to return to fill in gaps.

Aruban Deputy Police chief Gerold Dompig said last week that his team had a "wish list" of 21 people to talk to. Zicarelli said Tuesday that he didn't know how many of those interviews were completed.

Aruban Police could not be reached for comment.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-1 the “Philadelphia Enquirer” reported:

(QUOTE)

Local Tiff Over Missing Teen

IT'S ALL bare teeth and snarls between two local men with opposing interests in the case of Natalee Holloway, the Alabama teen who vanished in Aruba last May.

Dairy mogul Joe Mammana has been helping Beth Holloway-Twitty, Natalee's mother, with legal bills since July, and has offered $100,000 for anybody with info leading to a conviction in Natalee's disappearance.

Mammana wants the "cowardly punks who hurt Natalee to know they still have me to contend with," he told the National Enquirer recently. Mammana was shown wearing brass knuckles and wielding a baseball bat, standing before a poster that read, "It's not about justice, it's about revenge," the Enquirer reports. This isn't helping anything, says John Pauly, a veteran TV news producer who worked as a reporter in the 1980s at WCAU.

He's the media adviser to the Aruban Strategic Task Force.

"Mammana's threats are just the latest stunt by a blowhard publicity hound," Pauly says. "If anyone took this guy seriously they would be over at the D.A.'s office discussing a terroristic-threat charge against him."

Mammana, an ex-con turned philanthropist, served eight months in jail for aggra6ated assault for nearly killing an ex-wife in October 1991, and after that served a year for car thefts in Jersey, according to a June 2004 profile in Philadelphia magazine.

He acknowledges his questionable past, but says he's changed.

"I've done more than anybody else in this city to help people," Mammana says. "I've turned down hundreds of interviews, and I've been doing this [offering reward money] for 10 years with the Citizens Crime Commission," Mammana said, denying that he's out for publicity.

Mammana calls Pauly "a coward and a punk," for working with the Aruban government.

Pauly says Mammana is "trying to cash in on a missing person case for his 15 minutes of fame. It's all theater to him."

(END QUOTE)



On 2-1 the Internet blog "Aruban Boycott Blogspot" wrote:

(QUOTE)

Koen Gottenbos. Joran's best friend. Friends since they were babies. Koen lied for Joran when he was interviewed by the Police during the first week of June. Ms. Flanigan the Assistant Prosecutor who quit this case did so because the Police and Karin Jansen would not put pressure on Koen to solve the case.

Koen made a fake alibi for Joran and it was Flanigan who discovered the lie and insisted Koen be re-interviewed.

Koen's father is a wealthy Dutch businessman who the Police are afraid of. Instead of interviewing Koen they talked to the father who refused access to the son.

Koen has a boat, 22ft center console, the word among the teenagers on Aruba is that Koen used the boat to help Joran and Deepak Kalpoe to get rid of the body during the night time hours of May 30 the evening following Natalee's disappearance.

Koen and Joran continue to e-mail each other on a daily basis and Koen is so afraid that he sometimes has to sleep with his mother. Koen Gottenbos wants to go to college in the U.S.

U.S. Authorities are just waiting for him to arrive to interview him and solve this case.”

(END QUOTE)



On 2-1 the ARUBAAN's news-source "Aruba Tradewinds Times" reported:

(QUOTE)

Less Passengers Processed at Airport in 4th Quarter 2005

Less Passengers, More Aircraft Movements In 2005

ORANJESTAD-The amount of passengers processed at Queen Beatrix International Airport fell by 7.4 percent in the 4th quarter of 2005 in comparison to the same quarter in 2004. The amount of flights to Aruba fell by 0.5 percent in the 4th quarter of 2005.

There were less passengers from the U.S. (including Puerto Rico). The amount of passengers from Europe and Latin America remained unchanged.

The same factors that contributed to the decline of passengers in the 3rd quarter of 2005 are used for the 4th quarter. Aruba Airport Authority blames the decline on the very active hurricane season, the high price for jet fuel and the negative publicity on the disappearance of Natalee Holloway.

Carriers with additional flights in the 4th quarter are Arke Fly and Continental Airlines. Arke Fly an airline from Europe's biggest tour-operator TUI operates 2 weekly flights from Amsterdam. Continental Airlines added a weekly flight from La Guardia in December.

The amount of passengers processed at the airport fell by 1.1 percent in 2005 in comparison to 2004. Aircraft movements at the airport grew slightly by 0.3 percent in 2005.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-1 the ARUBAAN's news-source "Aruba Tradewinds Times" reported:

(QUOTE)

Aruba Tourism Authority Privatized by June 2006

ATA Independent

ORANJESTAD- The Minister of Tourism and Transportation Edison Briesen said that the privatization of Aruba Tourism Authority (ATA) will be a fact in June of this year.

At present the government is responsible for the finances of ATA. A privatized ATA will function more efficiently and can better promote Aruba abroad.

At present the last procedures are being made for the privatization process. The privatization of ATA will be discussed in the island council prior to June.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-1 BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated to CNN “I still remain optimistic. I know it’s hard to do it, but what other hope do we have but to rely on the Aruban criminal justice system? And we just hope that it will prevail. We hope they Aruba will show us they do have enforceable laws, such as perjury, and obstruction of justice, and rape.” BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated to CNN about what she knows of the DUTCH F-16 jets infrared camera searches “Well, you know, the first time that they did it, it was reported to me that nothing turned up. And that was probably, you know, in the middle of June when they did infrared search, of course, over the dump and certain areas of the island. But, you know, I never heard back a report from the F-16s and really wasn't sure what they could pick up anyway.” On 2-1 when CNN asked what led, wHat Tip, what information led to this decision to search the dunes around the lighthouse?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "I think it’s always been a suspicious area from early on and, you know, even in some of Joran’s statements. And I think that there must be somewhat -- these two witnesses that have come forward must be somewhat credible for them to pull together this coordinated search effort with Dutch forensic institute in Holland and the officials on the island. So they must be putting credibility into these witnesses.” When CNN asked if she knows if there is any way the ARUBAN Police can trace where Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , Current Murder Suspect DEEPAK KALPOE and Current Murder Suspect SATISH KALPOE at the time Natalee went missing?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "You know, that was something we were asking early on. And it seemed the answer we were getting were the cell towers were just too close together on the small area of land, and it was really hard to pinpoint which tower that it was coming from.”

On 2-1 CNN reported “The Aruban officials were able to interview 17 of the 21 young people that they had hoped to talk to. They said all of that was based on having looked through previous interviews. They were concerned about some holes and inconsistencies. They’re done with that. We don't know what those people told or whether there was anything new.
The search will continue in the sand dunes in the northwest region, about a mile from the Marriott. They're going to look at information they got from infrared cameras. They still hope to bring in cadaver dogs. And at this point, that’s the latest.”

On 2-1 when CNN asked about the DUTCH F-16 jets infrared flyovers done in July, JOSSY MANSUR stated "I don't know. I heard that they were going to use it at the northern side of the island by the lighthouse. Apparently, they have some additional information from one or two witnesses that came forward in the past two to three weeks that have given them some kind of lead that they are concentrating now on that side of the beach to the north of the lighthouse.” On 2-1 when “CNN asked who performed the “California lighthouse” sand dunes search nearly 2 weeks ago, MANSUR stated "I understand it’s being done by a group of Policemen, I mean students to become Police, recently graduated Policemen, and friends of them that have put together a group that are doing this search.”

On 2-1 when CNN asked what he thinks “of all the re-interviews of these students, those that were there with Natalee the night she went missing?,” DAVE HOLLOWAY stated "Well, I spoke with the F.B.I. today. And I think it was just to clear up some holes that the Investigators had within their mind. As you recall, all the Mountain Brook kids left that same morning, and they didn’t have the opportunity to speak with them, so -- and they saw some things on the Internet that may have been a little bit different. So they wanted to talk to these kids, and I think they’ve cleaned all that up.”


On 2-1 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com" reported:

(QUOTE)

Paul van der Sloot Claims Damages

ARUBA – Paul van der Sloot claims damages from the National Government of Aruba, because he was wrongfully arrested and detained in the Holloway-case. The case was handled behind closed doors by the court sitting in chambers last Monday. The judge will continue the case at the end of this month.

Van der Sloot indicated in a telephone conversation with the Amigoe that he doesn’t , want to tell the size of the amount he is claiming. He did say though that during the hearing, the chief public prosecutor Karin Janssen substantiated the Public Prosecutor’s (OM) opinion on the claim, but he didn’t go into details. The OM didn’t want to give any comments. van der Sloot emphasized that having been wrongfully arrested, is not under discussion. “The Judge had already decided that this was the case”, and based on that he thinks that he can claim damages. During the hearing in the Judge’s chambers, van der Sloot ’s lawyer Arie Swaen indicated that his client’s social position and career were damaged due to negative publicity his family had to deal with during the Holloway-case. Question is whether his case is built strong enough. Luis de Lannooy, presiding judge of the common Court of Justice where van der Sloot was working as substitute judge, mentioned before van der Sloot was arrested that his work was not satisfactory and that his contract would definitely not be extended. In addition, the publicity had to do with his son and his wife Anita had consciously sought publicity a few times. The judge heard the lawyer as well as the OM and said that he will look into the information. The parties will meet again on February 27th. It is not sure yet whether the judge will give verdict on that day. “It can be that the judge comes with another proposal. We’ll wait and see”, said van der Sloot.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-1 JOHN Q. KELLY stated to FOX News:

(QUOTE)

New information about the search for Natalee Holloway: The Holloway family attorney just got back from Aruba, and he spoke with both the chief prosecutor and the chief Investigator.
Holloway family attorney John Q. Kelly joins us live in New York. Good evening, John.
JOHN Q. KELLY, HOLLOWAY FAMILY ATTORNEY: Hey, Greta. How're you doing?
VAN SUSTEREN: Very well. How long have you been back from Aruba?
KELLY: Got back late last night.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. How many days were you there?
KELLY: Just two.
VAN SUSTEREN: And what did you learn? Who did you talk to, and what did you learn?
KELLY: Monday, I spent about two hours with Deputy chief Dompig and the prosecutor, Karin Janssen. And then on the second day, Tuesday, I spent about an hour-and-a-half separately with Karin Janssen, going through things.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Go ahead.
KELLY: Well, yes, basically, the first day, we went through — I had been down there in mid-December — and they brought me up to date on everything they had done between mid-December and now and what they intended to do for the next month to two months in terms of the investigation.
I think what they're really focused on right now, Greta, is search-and-recovery efforts. The feeling is that if they can locate a body that, one, it may yield forensic evidence, and two, it also could fit in with witness accounts and suspect statements and would, you know, be of great help in the investigation, obviously.
VAN SUSTEREN: Have you grown more optimistic that this is going to be resolved, having spoken to chief Deputy Dompig and Karin Janssen, less optimistic, or are you at the same place before you went?
KELLY: I think at about the same place, Greta. What I am satisfied both with the Police, in terms of the investigation, and with Aruban investigative team, that they are committed to making an arrest. They want to solve this.
And secondly, if and when an arrest is made, that Karin Janssen, the prosecutor, is committed to a prosecution. She wants to see people charged and she would love to see a conviction in this case, too. And I think they're putting in the effort right now.
VAN SUSTEREN: Why the search of the dunes there? Hasn't that been searched and searched and searched and searched?
KELLY: Well, I mean, you've been there, Greta. It's a massive place. They say the size of eight football fields. I think it's got to be two or three times that size, even. It just goes on endlessly.
Two things: One, they've received what they term as credible, reliable, fresh information in terms of location there. And secondly, there was some indication from the infrared test, the F-16s flying over there, that there was a heat source located in there, too, which could indicate remains located in the sand dunes.
And my understanding is they're going to be back down there with Aruban authorities, F.B.I. and the Dutch Forensic Institute, a joint effort to just comb the entire area once and for all with cadaver dogs and the latest technology they have available to them.
VAN SUSTEREN: John, the F-16s flew over there in early June. If they had some sort of sign, I mean, why didn't they look then?
KELLY: I agree, Greta, and there's been some talk that they're able to peel away the layers of the topographical map. And my other comment is, once you locate a heat source through that, it's usually something that's very pinpointed, where you can go to a very specific location, just excavate that small area.
So I don't put a lot of credence in that. I'll go along with it for now, but I would hope the main reliance right now is on a credible eyewitness account of something that may have been observed or someone that was told in terms of location of a body there, and that's what's the driving force right now.
VAN SUSTEREN: Thirty seconds left, John. Paul van der Sloot was going to go to court, try to get damages for his arrest. Any update?
KELLY: There's going to be a decision February 27. Karin Janssen actually made an application in court for me to be there that day. van der Sloot opposed it, thought I'd been rather unkind to him in the public eye with my comments. I agree with him. I have been. I'm not a big fan of his, but we'll find out February 27 if he hits the motherlode or not.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. And you'll come back and join us immediately after, right, John?
KELLY: I sure will, Greta.
VAN SUSTEREN: If not sooner. Thank you, John.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-1 CNNHN reported:

(QUOTE)

NANCY GRACE, HOST: … And tonight, major developments out of Aruba, Aruban police just leaving Natalee Holloway`s Alabama hometown after finally interviewing those U.S. students, remember, the ones with her the night she disappeared. Is there a break in the case of Natalee Holloway?

…

Good evening, everybody. I`m Nancy Grace. I want to thank you for being with us tonight. Live to Aruba. Is there a new break in the Natalee Holloway case? Aruban investigators wrap up interviews here in the U.S. of Holloway`s friends with her on the same senior trip when Holloway vanished.

…

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, MOTHER OF NATALEE HOLLOWAY: I still remain optimistic. I know it`s hard to do it, but what other hope do we have but to rely on the Aruban criminal justice system? And we just hope that it will prevail. We hope they Aruba will show us they do have enforceable laws, such as perjury, and obstruction of justice, and rape.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Aruban authorities leave the U.S. and head back home with new clues with a break in the case or are they empty-handed? Is it too little, too late? To investigative reporter Pat Lalama, bring us up-to-date, friend.

LALAMA: All right, here`s the latest. The Aruban officials were able to interview 17 of the 21 young people that they had hoped to talk to. They said all of that was based on having looked through previous interviews. They were concerned about some holes and inconsistencies.

They`re done with that. We don`t know what those people told or whether there was anything new.

The search will continue in the sand dunes in the northwest region, about a mile from the Marriott. They`re going to look at information they got from infrared cameras. They still hope to bring in cadaver dogs. And at this point, that`s the latest.

GRACE: Take a listen to this. I believe this is where they should focus their interrogation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , FORMER SUSPECT IN NATALEE HOLLOWAY CASE: She was drunk. I had stuff to drink, too, but now I don`t respect that the Aruban authorities tried to pin it that it was a rape case. She wanted to go with me, I wanted to go with her. It was totally consensual. I had something to drink, and she had something to drink.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I think if you can explain to people what really happened and you were really forthcoming, the more forthcoming you are, the more chance there is of you to get on with your life.

VAN DER SLOOT: One day, I will explain exactly what happened, but right now I don`t -- I don`t feel ready to do that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How do you leave a girl on the beach?

VAN DER SLOOT: I told her I had to go home. I had school the next day. And I thought maybe she`d understand. She told me, no, she wanted me to stay there with her, because the next day she was leaving, and she wanted to stay there the whole night.

I told her, no, I had to go. I even lifted her up to carry her back to her hotel, and she told me to put her down. I left her there. I sat down next to her, talked to her a while, and I called Deepak to ask him if he could come pick me up, which Deepak didn`t do, but...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Was she angry?

VAN DER SLOOT: She wasn`t angry. If it`s anything, she was probably more upset I was leaving her there. And I don`t know what reaction she had. I don`t know.

At the time, I didn`t feel it was a bad idea. At the time, I really didn`t -- it didn`t seem wrong, it didn`t seem -- of course, now I look back at it and I think (bleep) I`m an ass(bleep). What did I do? But there`s nothing I can do about it now. If I`d have that moment back, I would have made sure she got back to her hotel safely, but I can`t change that now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Yes, there is something you can do. You can cooperate with police.

To Jossy Mansur, managing director and editor of "Diario" magazine, Jossy, tell me about this F-16 infrared usage. What did they find?

JOSSY MANSUR, EDITOR, "DIARIO": I don`t know. I heard that they were going to use it at the northern side of the island by the lighthouse. Apparently, they have some additional information from one or two witnesses that came forward in the past two to three weeks that have given them some kind of lead that they are concentrating now on that side of the beach to the north of the lighthouse.

GRACE: To Beth Twitty, Natalee`s mother, welcome, Beth. It`s great to see you again. Beth, all along, didn`t Joran van der Sloot and the Kalpoes say that she had gone toward the lighthouse, they had taken her, she wanted to go toward the lighthouse?

TWITTY: Oh, yes, Nancy. In some of his earlier statements, that`s where that he said that he and the Kalpoe brothers took Natalee, was to the lighthouse. So you`re exactly right.

GRACE: Well, Beth, then what`s new about this information? I mean, why are they just now deciding to search the dunes around the lighthouse?

TWITTY: You know, I can`t imagine, Nancy. And I just want to say that sound bite that you played -- you know, I mean, it`s just perfect, because, within that one sound bite, he`s saying the words drunk, consensual, and rape.

And, you know, I just -- you know, there`s no way that you can have those three -- three in the same -- in the same sentence. And, you know, why they couldn`t get Joran early on in the interrogation, if they would have just used their (INAUDIBLE) interrogators, they could have gotten the information from Joran without having to go through what we`ve gone through and, you know, trying to turn up something off infrared or pulling together these search teams. You know, they just chose to do it the hard way, Nancy.

GRACE: Beth, what did they pick up on the infrared search?

TWITTY: Well, you know, the first time that they did it, it was reported to me that nothing turned up. And that was probably, you know, in the middle of June when they did infrared search, of course, over the dump and certain areas of the island. But, you know, I never heard back a report from the F-16s and really wasn`t sure what they could pick up anyway, Nancy.

GRACE: To Dave Holloway, Natalee`s father, Dave, what do you make of all the re-interviews of these students, those that were there with Natalee the night she went missing?

DAVE HOLLOWAY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY`S FATHER: Well, I spoke with the FBI today. And I think it was just to clear up some holes that the investigators had within their mind.

As you recall, all the Mountain Brook kids left that same morning, and they didn`t have the opportunity to speak with them, so -- and they saw some things on the Internet that may have been a little bit different. So they wanted to talk to these kids, and I think they`ve cleaned all that up.

GRACE: To Don Clark, former head of the FBI Houston bureau, Don, is it too little, too late? I mean, can you really get someone to clear up an inconsistency a year after the fact?

DON CLARK, FORMER HEAD OF FBI HOUSTON BUREAU: Well, Nancy, it`s never too little, too late. You can`t just let these cases lie dormant, and you`ve got to keep trying to do something.

And I know there`s been a lot of speculation about the competency of the police over there and what happened, but the bottom line, at least they made the effort to come over here. And I talked to the FBI today. And they said, yes, we facilitated and assisted them with the interview.

That was a good thing, because perhaps they may be able to generate some information that they didn`t have before, be able to tie that together and, who knows, find the holes in some of these statements that they may have previously taken.

GRACE: Joining us now, clinical psychiatrist Dr. Lisa Weinstock. Lisa, it seems to me, from studying the statistics I`ve got, that the tourism in Aruba since this debacle, since Natalee`s disappearance has gone up. Seventy percent of that tourism is American.

Do these people need a shrink? I mean, why, when you learn of this horrific event, would people then want to go to Aruba?

LISA WEINSTOCK, PSYCHIATRIST: You know, it`s hard to say, Nancy. Perhaps some of them aren`t paying attention to the news. Perhaps some of them feel that they don`t blame the Aruban authorities. So it`s really tough to say.

I can tell you that I was actually in Puerto Rice a couple of weeks ago and ran into somebody who said that he used to go to Aruba every year and chose to go to Puerto Rico this year because he didn`t want to go. So there are certainly people who are avoiding the island, but then there are others who don`t pay attention or don`t feel that it`s an important thing to act on.

GRACE: Hey, Lisa, what do you say to parents that have lost someone the way these parents have lost Natalee, and they basically have the whole investigation thrown into their lap? They never have a time to mourn. They never have a time to grieve. They`re basically conducting the investigation themselves.

WEINSTOCK: You know, what can you say? I mean, you can give them kudos for their strength and their persistence. And obviously, losing a child is the most horrific thing that anyone can imagine. And no one can really understand the pain except the person who`s going through it.

And all you can do is encourage them, as we can encourage the Holloways, to continue to fight the good fight and hopefully do whatever they can do in the face of other people not doing their jobs.

GRACE: To Alan Ripka, Alan, it`s my understanding that not only has infrared search been done around the dunes but now dogs, specially-trained dogs, are being brought in from overseas to Aruba to search. At this juncture, would you expect them forensically to find anything?

ALAN RIPKA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, Nancy, I think the longer they search and the greater the investigation, the more expectation we can have that they may find something. I mean, if you cover every inch of the island, you may find something that you missed before. And the longer this goes on, the greater the chance.

And cadaver dogs are trained to find this type of material and smell it out. And I would hope they would do this and more and continue to do this until they find answers.

GRACE: Back to Jossy Mansur with "Diario" magazine, Jossy, I understand this area they`re about to search is from 10 to 15 football fields large. Now, you remember the search of the dump? Remember the draining of the pond, OK? Who is going to be performing this search?

MANSUR: I understand it`s being done by a group of policemen, I mean students to become police, recently graduated policemen, and friends of them that have put together a group that are doing this search.

GRACE: Pat Lalama, what can you tell us about the search that is about to be kicked off?

LALAMA: Well, as the one that I just mentioned, you know, they will peruse this area as best they can with the cadaver dogs. Remember, they`re also talking about bringing in deep-sea equipment, which has yet to happen. That`s my latest understanding.

But they wanted to go way out in the deeper waters, 400 to 600 feet deep, and get way down there with the equipment. And, as far as I know, they have not been able to do that at this point.

GRACE: To Beth Twitty -- this is Natalee`s mom, everyone, as you well know -- what led, what tip, what information, Beth, led to this decision to search the dunes around the lighthouse?

TWITTY: Well, Nancy, I think it`s always been a suspicious area from early on and, you know, even in some of Joran`s statements. And I think that there must be somewhat -- these two witnesses that have come forward must be somewhat credible for them to pull together this coordinated search effort with Dutch forensic institute in Holland and the officials on the island. So they must be putting credibility into these witnesses.

GRACE: You say two new witnesses, two new witnesses?

TWITTY: Well, I`m not sure if there were -- I heard that there were one or two. It was reported to me, Nancy, but I`m not sure.

GRACE: And also, I understand that certain cell phone records have now been brought forward. Do you understand in any way they can trace where these three were, Joran and the two Kalpoe brothers, at the time Natalee went missing?

TWITTY: You know, that was something we were asking early on. And it seemed the answer we were getting were the cell towers were just too close together on the small area of land, and it was really hard to pinpoint which tower that it was coming from.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(END QUOTE)



2-2-06

On 2-2 the BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA CBS TV channel 42 reported:

(QUOTE)

Twitty Appointed Honorary Deputy

She's spent countless hours hunting down leads in the search for her daughter, she's battled Aruban authorities, now Beth Holloway-Twitty has her own sheriff's star. The mother of missing Mountain Brook teenager Natalee Holloway became an honorary deputy sheriff Thursday.

Jefferson County Sheriff Mike Hale presented the certificate, along with a replica pin of the Sheriff's badge. "She's one of us," said Sheriff Hale.

The Mountain Brook mother has been searching for her daughter Natalee since May. The case has attracted attention across the globe. "I'm very proud how you've conducted yourself and how you've handled adversity and tragedy," Sheriff Hale said to Twitty, during his presentation.

Twitty plans to use her deputy status and recent endorsement by the National Sheriff's Association to get her story out at schools across the country. "I always said that if I could come out of this with something positive to give back to other families, to their sons and daughters, that I will," said Twitty. The Sheriff said he was proud to support her cause. "Her story can save the lives of young folks across this country," said Sheriff Hale. Beth Twitty beamed with pride upon receiving the badge and certificate, "I can't even begin to explain, I would have never imagined myself being in this position and having the Sheriff's Association to support the message and our mission," said Twitty.
The "Save Yourself" campaign, is aimed at giving young adults a heightened sense of safety. Twitty plans to show a video and talk to students about her daughter's situation and how to keep safe. "I think the message shows them the dangers that exist right around the corner whether they're within our border or they leave our border," said Twitty. Safety cards will be handed out to the students, along with a rear-view mirror cling-on, that uses this motto as a reminder; "you're your own best protection, save yourself."

Twitty's campaign is also going into cyberspace. The website www.saveyourself.org is under construction. Safety information and materials will soon be available online.
The determined Mountain Brook mother will start visiting schools in Alabama in three weeks, and she has already lined-up speaking engagements in Indiana and Kentucky. Meanwhile, Twitty's search for answers will take her back to Aruba later this month.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-2 ARUBAAN's news-source "Bon Dia" wrote an article that featured a photo and captions of an ARUBA tours of NATALEE HOLLOWAY case locations

(QUOTE)

The effects of the Natalee Holloway disappearance is growing totally out of control. Information received by us says that now out of Holland companies might decide to join the boycott, because of strong business ties with Alabama.

In particular companies like, Aegon, ING, KPMG, ABN AMRO, AKZONOBEL, PHILIPS, and SHELL are big contributors to the Bob Riley Campaign. Bondia has yet to confirm all this info. At the same time we can say that there is a big campaign going on in the US against Aruba, Dr. Phil etc. something we expected already, but that now is a reality. Bondia decided to show some of the fake advertisements that are going around on the net, that are putting Aruba in a very negative light, and also making fun of some of the people involved like Dr. Phil and John Gibson.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-2 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com" reported:

(QUOTE)

National Detective Investigates the Permit-case

ARUBA – The Public Prosecutor (OM) says that an investigation is going on possible abuse of the issuing of work- and residence permits, as a result of documents handed over by parliamentarian Otmar Oduber (AVP) to the national detective on December 12th.

Oduber indicated that the documents show that Justice-minister Rudy Croes (MEP) had committed corruption. The entire AVP-party in Parliament had handed over the same documents to the OM on December 19th with a covering letter to the attorney general. The letter stated that the indications are clear that the minister and/or employees of his ministry have committed punishable acts. The AVP requests the OM to investigate this. The OM says that the attorney general had answered the letter on January 12th, stating that the facts are serious and that the AVP should report this to the national detective. A few people have already been heard.

(END QUOTE)



2-3-06

On 2-3 the “National Enquirer” reported:

(QUOTE)

NATALEE SUSPECT'S BOOK SHOCKER

One of the suspects in the Natalee Holloway mystery plans to cash in on the tragedy — by writing a book about the case. Incredibly, Deepak Kalpoe — one of the last three men to see the Alabama teen alive — believes he has the same money-making author potential as the infamous Runaway Bride and O.J.Simpson cop-turned-successful-crime writer Mark Fuhrman. In a further insult, Deepak has revealed that when he, his brother Satish and prime suspect Joran van der Sloot were "cooking up" an alibi that got two innocent men arrested, Joran bragged that he knew how to beat a polygraph test.

Deepak, 21, broke the silence he has maintained since Natalee vanished in Aruba seven months ago in a secretly-taped two-and-a-half hour talk with Jamie Skeeters, a former Police chief and polygraph expert. During the wide-ranging conversation, Skeeters tried unsuccessfully to get Deepak to take a polygraph test.

But along the way, in a transcript obtained by The National Enquirer, Deepak made some startling admissions.

Pick up this week's issue of The ENQUIRER to read the rest of this story!

(END QUOTE)



On 2-3 EcontentMag.com reported:

(QUOTE)

Nelson Current Publishing Launches Author Podcasts

Nelson Current, a publisher of social and political books, has launched "CurrentSpeak.com," a Web site offering free author interviews available for podcast. Podcasts are radio-style shows delivered over the Internet to a personal computer, produced both by major media and passionate individuals.

The site, which is owned and managed by Nelson Current, will include interviews from every author discussing their latest books. Authors on Nelson Current include New York Times author and radio talk show host, Michael Savage, former Secretary of Education and radio talk show host Dr. Bill Bennett, Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano, Instapundit blogger Glenn Reynolds, Dave Holloway (father of missing teen Natalee Holloway), and more.

The material on "CurrentSpeak" will also be available on podcast directories on the Internet including iTunes, iPodder.org, Podcast.net, and PodcastBunker.com. The first podcasts are now available at the Web site. (www.currentspeak.com)

(END QUOTE)



On 2-3 the “Aruba Hotel and Tourism Association” wrote in its wrote in the weekly newsletter email:

(QUOTE)
…

The Strategic Communications Task Force Steering Committee has continued to meet to analyze the status of the Holloway matter and provide a course of action aimed at preserving the image of Aruba. Some of the Task Force initiatives along with the support work performed by our consulting team have begun to bear fruit and more is on the way. Stay tuned.
…

The AH&SF will host the 1st "Caribbean Tourism Security Conference" from June 7-9, 2006. The Conference will include topics such as: Media Crisis Management, Event Security, Handling of medical crisis, Critical Infrastructure and much more. Stay tuned to more details.

We had an excellent North American Marketing Committee Meeting on January 6th in Aruba, which was chaired by Patrick Donovan who has agreed to take the helm of the NAMC for 2006, with Vice Chair being Louella Brezovar. The minutes of that meeting can be found on the AHATA website as of Monday, Feb. 6.

In brief, the committee discussed the need for more marketing to help push March through June bookings, and discussed in detail recommendations for the $ 900,000 in additional marketing funds that AHATA has committed to strengthen marketing efforts ATA currently has underway in the USA. Details of the AHATA USA marketing spend can also be found on our website.

The next North American Marketing Committee is scheduled for Weds. February 15. with time and location to be advised shortly.

A Very Productive CHA Marketplace:
We had a most excellent CHA Marketplace in the new Puerto Rico Convention Center Jan 15 18. Team Aruba, consisting of Adwina Arends, Peggy Croes, Amy Ras-Speyer, Jorge Pesquera, Steve Cohen, Myrna Jansen, Frits Israel, Minister Briesen and yours truly.

The Aruba booth area looked very nice with two living room areas created to provide a very welcoming atmosphere for our airline and tour operator visitors. The North American team met with 6 airlines, 35 tour operators and 9 media companies. A recap of each discussion and a follow up action plan can be found on the AHATA website and is viewable only by AHATA members.

…

Aruba's February Marketing Activities:
Radio advertising (3 weeks) Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and Washington, DC
Outdoor Advertising (huge billboards) in Boston and New York all month,
Airport billboards in Philadelphia and Chicago
Newspaper Advertising in Boston Globe, Cape Cod Times, New Bedford Times, Lawrence Eagle, Lowell Sun, Connecticut Post, NY Daily News, NY Times, Albany Times, Syracuse Post Standard, Newark Star Ledger, Bergen Record, Asbury Park Press, Atlantic City Press, Staten island Advocate, Philadelphia Inquirer, Greater Philly Newsgroup, Pittsburgh Post, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun Times, Detroit Free Press, Detroit Magazine, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Houston Chronicle, Orange County Register, Toronto Su
On-line Advertising on Weather,com, Expedia, Travelocity, Boston.com, AOL, Google, Kayak, Overture, and on many of our airline and tour operator partner websites
Magazines Travel Weekly, Travel New England, Vacations To Go, Caribbean Tra6el & Life, Destination Weddings and Honeymoons
…
If you have any questions about any of the information provided above please do not hesitate to contact us directly at info@ahata.com





On 2-3 ARUBAAN's news-source “Solo de Pueblo” reported:

(QUOTE)

Yolanda Wever of Mementomori funeral home is said to conspire together with Paul van der Sloot of cremating or burying Natalee Holloway

STA CRUZ – On internet is circulating actualmente cu one funeraria local, cual they're menciona textualmente cu is of the conocido empresario yolanda wever, directora of mememtomori funeral home, cu they a conspira in the cremacion or burial ilegal of the young desapareci mericano, natalee holloway. we is cita textualmente:

“???? It is rumored that current suspect Paulus van der Sloot has done some legal contract work with Yolanda Wever. if Natalee was murdered, could she have been cremated at this funeral home? (if the crematorium is operational), or, in an industrial incinerator? (it takes 2 to 4 hours to completely cremate a persons body) perhaps Yolanda Wever conspired by putting Natalee’s body into the coffin or and with another person scheduled to be buried? Cremation or putting her in a shared coffin would go a long ways to explaining why current suspect Paulus van der Sloot told the 3 current suspects “when there is no body, you don’t have a case.”

at first lugar we have cu tell, cu at aruba, till cu so far, not have crematorio, neither niether fornonan industrial cu is crema curpa. also, have one custumber local, cu difuntonan is wordo exponi cu box open at instant of burial, for all family dispidi of dje. then is prácticamente impossible for her “supuesto” curpa of natalee holloway wordo bury in cemetery. in we humble opinión, locura a lever for cabez of the personanan here, kendenan is involucra personanan cu neither have of haber cu the caso here. acaso they have algo of earn in the caso here??? the website caminda we can come achieve part of the articulo cu we a cita more upstairs yama:
http://members.aol.com/WorldJOURNIER/NATALEE/NATALEEtimeline.html come across. Will more tristo is, cu not only they're enfoca on the caso of the young here, but also, they're coba in life priva of person, exponiendo this on the website here, of as for give all clase of bad imagen at we island. they're talk of mafia, but not forget cu beth “twit” twitty a involucra his self cu one mafioso, in name of joe mamana, that públicamente a lanza menasa in direccion of the hobennan sospechoso. shonnan, not forget, god is big. they day will arrive.

(END QUOTE)



2-4-06

On 2-4 “Blogs For Natalee” identity “pdh3” reported:

(QUOTE)

I have been reading this forum for a long time, trying to decide where to post this sad story I have been holding on to. You might be interested to read this in light of your post about other female tourists and their safety in Aruba.
My neighbor mentioned that she was going to Cancun with a friend for vacation. I asked her if she was boycotting Aruba. She said she had been there, and would never go there again, and had told people for a long time not to go, before Natalee's disappearance. On her visit to Aruba, she and her friend, both in their 30's, were harassed by the locals who felt that these 2 women were just there to get drunk and pick up men, and the guys were angry when rebuffed. She and her friend stayed at the same Holiday Inn as the MB group. She said the HI employees were constantly propositioning them, and trying to get them to go out. On the last night there, her friend was taken against her will to the beach by the lighthouse where so much has been mentioned in connection with Natalee. She was raped by someone she said was a " high ranking person" in Aruba. She was so traumatized, she could not talk about it for a long time. She did tell my neighbor later, but before Natalee. I have met this nice lady, and I know my neighbor very well. They are professional women, with no reason to lie. They both were not surprised by what happened to Natalie. This lady just wanted to get off the island, and back in the USA. I am sure there are many other stories like this.

(END QUOTE)



2-6-06

On 2-6 ABC News reported:

(QUOTE)

The disappearance of Alabama teen Natalee Holloway, who has not been seen since a high school graduation trip to Aruba last May, captivated the nation and devastated her friends and family.

But the parents of one of the prime suspects in Holloway's disappearance say the investigation has also devastated their son.

"I think Joran is not anymore the same boy," Paul van der Sloot said in his first interview since his son was released from prison.

Joran van der Sloot, 18, was arrested June 9 along with two friends, Surinamese nationals Satish Kalpoe, 18, and Deepak Kalpoe, 21, on suspicion of involvement in Holloway's disappearance. van der Sloot was released from prison last September and is attending college in Holland.

"We tried to raise our kids in a way that they are able to trust people, and I think a lot of trust is gone," Anita van der Sloot said.

On the night that Holloway disappeared, Paul van der Sloot drove his son home from McDonalds. Without his parents' knowledge, Joran van der Sloot later snuck out of the house with two friends and went to a local bar where they met Holloway. She has not been seen since leaving the bar with the Kalpoes and van der Sloot on May 30.

"They picked up the girl, Natalee, that they, um, drove awhile and the, um, put the girl at the beach," Paul van der Sloot said.

"She left voluntarily with them, and there are witnesses," Anita van der Sloot added.
Joran van der Sloot told Police he left Holloway on the beach.

"That was the most difficult thing to deal with as a parent, and it's also the thing that he regrets every day that he did not hand her over to a guard or somebody," Anita van der Sloot said. "He said that she was able to walk and when he mentioned that he wanted to bring her [to the] hotel she didn't want to go."

Parents Stand by Son, Deny Being Uncooperative

Some people, including Holloway's mother, Beth Holloway-Twitty, have accused Joran van der Sloot of lying, insisting he knows more about the teen's disappearance. But Joran's parents stand by him.

"If we would have had any feeling that he was involved in something, Paul would have taken him to the Police station and said: 'Here, hold him, he did something. He deserves his punishment,'" Anita van der Sloot said.

Paul van der Sloot has been accused of advising his son to keep quiet and not to cooperate. He has denied both claims.

"I told him to cooperate so much as possible," Paul van der Sloot said.

The van der Sloot's said they had a lot of sympathy for Holloway's mother. But they also believe Twitty has carried on an unfair and relentless media campaign against their family and are critical of the way the U.S. media have covered the case. They will talk about those issues on Tuesday's "Good Morning America."

(END QUOTE)



On 2-6 when MSNBC asked his reaction to ANITA VAN DER SLOOT and Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT appearing with ABC earlier in the day?, DAVE HOLLOWAY stated "Well, he appears to be very relaxed and confident, versus the last time I saw him, where he was very nervous and afraid. His son‘s out of jail, and things appear to be going well for him.” “Well, it sounds like to me that they‘re a lot more relaxed and the stress is off of them. And of course, with us, it‘s—we still don‘t have our answers and we still don‘t have our daughter.” When MSNBC asked if he believes that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT just left NATALEE on the beach and he regrets it every day?, DAVE HOLLOWAY stated "I have my doubts.” When asked if he believes that Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT encourage the Main Murder Suspects and asked them to cooperate with the ARUBAN Police as much as possible?, DAVE HOLLOWAY stated "It‘s my understanding that he helped them find their attorneys and, you know, like John said, coached them through it.” When MSNBC asked if he thinks the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s are trying to create sympathy for their son, like, ‘poor Joran’?, DAVE HOLLOWAY stated "You know, I don‘t have any idea what they‘re up to. Like John, yesterday, I received a phone call. And some of my friends called and said that they were being interviewed or going to have an interview the next day. And so I continued watching the Super Bowl, and lo and behold, there they were.”

On 2-6 when MSNBC asked if he believes that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT just left NATALEE on the beach and he regrets it every day?, JOHN Q. KELLY stated "No, not at all. You don‘t fabricate a story like he did after the fact about taking her back to the hotel and leaving her with the security guards if you have nothing to hide. You make up a story and you lie for a reason.” When “MSNBC asked how he found out about the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s re-appearing in the media after so long?, KELLY stated "Beth had come into town yesterday for some business. And she was in here alone, so we invited her up to the house. We had a bunch of family and friend over, and we were actually watching the Super Bowl. And they promoted it by putting a picture of Natalee on the screen during the Super Bowl, which is supposed to be a festive time. And it was rather awkward, uncomfortable and just a painful moment for everybody to see that being promoted during the Super Bowl with no notice.” (BETH was) “Just stunned. I mean, you‘re just there, trying to relax, just, you know, trying to be social and things, and all of a sudden, you see your daughter‘s picture there to promote these people, who know probably what happened to your daughter, being, you know, promoted and coming on the tube the next day.” When MSNBC asked about the Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s statement on ABC that if they thought Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT was guilty of something they would have taken him themselves to the ARUBAN Police?, KELLEY stated "Well, I don‘t think it‘s up to the parents, who aren‘t really impartial, to decide whether their son‘s involved in foul play or not. I mean, clearly, Paul van der Sloot instructed his son to be obstructionist and uncooperative. He instructed him not to use e-mail, not to use cell phones, to keep his story straight, to get lawyers immediately. And he was obstructionist from the start. And you know, what he says today and what he says tomorrow—you know, I think he thinks people forget how uncooperative he‘s been from the start in this whole investigation.” When MSNBC asked what he thinks is driving the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s?, KELLY stated "Ultimately, it seems like it might be about money. They‘re waiting for a decision on the damages claim. I think he‘s trying to put a good face on a bad situation, where he‘s, as I said, totally uncooperative and assisted his son and his friends in a cover-up from the start.” “Yes, and also trying to clear his name that was rightfully sullied and dragged through the mud by the steps he took early on to protect his son and his friends and obvious cover-up and totally—one other thing, Rita, I just want to point out real quick is, just remember, as recently as Christmas, Joran was invited in to clarify some statements of his, and he refused. So he‘s clearly not being cooperative, and the father‘s not telling him to be cooperative.”


2-7-06

On 2-7 ABC News reported:

(QUOTE)

Holloway Murder Suspect's Family: Enough Is Enough

Joran van der Sloot's Parents Say Holloway Mother, Media Have Damaged Them

Feb. 7, 2006 — Since Natalee Holloway's disappearance in May, the van der Sloot's have reluctantly become Aruba's most famous family.

Joran van der Sloot, 18, admitted meeting Holloway in a bar on May 30 and going with her to the beach, along with two friends, Satish Kalpoe, 18, and Deepak Kalpoe, 21. The Alabama teenager hasn't been seen since.

The three young men were considered suspects from the beginning, and though they were held by Police for questioning, they were never charged with a crime. For the last eight months, Holloway's mother, Beth Holloway-Twitty, has mounted a one-woman campaign against the Kalpoes and, particularly, van der Sloot and his family.

The van der Sloot's are now speaking out, saying their son has been unfairly singled out.

"They point fingers at him from the beginning. They called this a murder case from the beginning. They only had that tunnel vision," Anita van der Sloot, Joran's mother, told "Good Morning America."

The van der Sloot's say they understand Twitty's relentless search for her daughter.
"That, that she's not giving up, for her girl, that we understood, but that she is calling our son a rapist, that — that's awful," said Joran's father, Paul van der Sloot.

Hate Mail

While the van der Sloot's have said in the past that Twitty is "always welcome" in Aruba, they are feeling less charitable toward her, saying she has gone too far and seriously hurt their family.

"I think that when she wants to talk, we will talk. But, of course, she has to explain something. I think she has done a lot of damage to Joran and our family," Paul van der Sloot said.

The van der Sloot's say they — and their son — have received bags of mail and e-mail, most of it supportive. But not everyone is a fan.

"They threaten to murder him, to kidnap his brothers and torture them," Anita van der Sloot said. "And it's, it's disgusting. I can hardly read them."

The case continues to captivate the public and the media — cable-news hosts such as Fox's Greta van Susteren have taken up Twitty's cause, calling Joran a liar and sometimes worse.

"It hurts. It really hurts. Why are people doing this? Is this only about ratings, and this is not about truth at all?" Anita van der Sloot asked. "How many people are missing all over the world, in the States? And if this attention that this case gets from the media — I think every parent of a missing child should deserve the same attention."

The van der Sloot's say they want to move on.

"But enough has been enough," she said. "We are parents of a young boy who needs to continue his life."

(END QUOTE)



On 2-7 when MSNBC asked what she thinks of ANITA VAN DER SLOOT and Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT ’s 2-7 comments with ABC, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "You know, Dan, I am only sharing information that Joran has given to witnesses and Police that is, you know these are his own admissions of that things that he has done to Natalee, he and Deepak and Satish Kalpoe, you know sharing the information is not causing damage to Joran. Joran caused the damage to himself by admitting these things that he committed against Natalee.” “Well, he—there are numerous Police statements. There were, you know Joran gave admissions of these acts (rape) that he committed against Natalee in front of witnesses, so I mean they‘re simple facts. And I‘m sorry that, you know that they can‘t see through and find the truth in this.” When MSNBC asked how she felt when she saw the interview with the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "It was very difficult, Dan. And you know the van der Sloot's know that Joran has committed these acts against Natalee. The father—we have statement from Joran and from Deepak Kalpoe of Paulus van der Sloot‘s involvement in the disappearance of my daughter, and it‘s just unbelievable how he seems to be so confident, to me, and that he‘s almost just moving past it. I mean now he‘s already been sworn in as an attorney. And I just don‘t see a man that is even concerned about an upcoming search of the sand dunes or any repercussions. He seems as if he‘s in the home stretch now and that just really surprises me. He must be getting a lot of support from the government and the officials on the island of Aruba.” When “MSNBC asked if she wants to see Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT ’s father re-arrested?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "Oh, you know I don‘t even know if they‘d have to re-arrest him, but you know just to, you know re-question him. And of course you know Joran van der Sloot needs to be—I mean he definitely needs to be re-arrested. There was evidence that was brought forward. You know just from the taped interview from Deepak Kalpoe, there had been, you know, alibis destroyed over a period of months, so yes.” “You know when I sat down with Anita and Paulus van der Sloot, I told them that they are the ones who are responsible for holding Aruba captive and they are the ones who are responsible for the financial strain that has occurred within their government and their country. And that they alone can fix this. They have the information. Paulus van der Sloot knows that Joran has the information and he is the one who is single handedly responsible for all that has happened, Dan. And doesn‘t—it doesn‘t have anything to do with Natalee, that‘s correct, because Joran van der Sloot and Paulus van der Sloot are the perpetrators in her—in this crime committed against her.” When MSNBC asked if she was surprised that the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s are re-appearing in the media?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "I was a bit surprised that almost nine months later—of course, we had—you know everyone has begged them to come forward. So I‘m a little bit curious as to you know what has motivated them at this point. And I just don‘t know where they‘re headed in this direction. But I am glad that they‘re coming out and speaking out. I wonder where they have been for the past nine months.” When MSNBC asked her about the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s comments that the continued media attention is “only about ratings? This is not about truth at all,” BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "you know I‘ve heard this comment you know a couple, you know several times, and—but what I was getting from the feedback is that you know really missing persons cases in general, how they have changed or how they‘re handled now is completely different. And a lot of this is due to Natalee. And I‘m thinking if that is true and that she has changed how missing person cases are handled, then you know what a sacrifice that Natalee and Jug and I and her father Dave and his wife Robin have had to make.” When MSNBC asked “what‘s next?,” BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "I have no idea. I just—when I see Paulus van der Sloot, I‘m thinking he just doesn‘t appear to be a father who is concerned about some upcoming searches in the sand dunes. It just really concerns me that you know we‘re headed somewhere, but I‘ll tell you, I don‘t think we‘re headed towards any type of prosecution or even a re-interrogation of these suspects. I just don‘t think it‘s going to happen, Dan.”

On 2-7 when MSNBC asked her to respond to the earlier in the day charges on ABC by Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT that she “has—quote—‘done a lot of damage‘”?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "I have not done the damage to Joran. All I have done is share information that Joran has given voluntarily to witnesses, and officials, Police officials, interrogators. You know, Joran caused the damage to himself.” When MSNBC asked what is her reaction watching ANITA VAN DER SLOOT and Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT this morning?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "I think my first thought is, I don‘t know why they‘re coming out now, you know, almost nine months later. And, you know, we have pleaded with them to come out in the media earlier. I lived on the island of Aruba for four months. And I would have done anything to have had an opportunity to meet with Paulus. After all, I initiated that one meeting at his home. And, you know, I would have never denied him a meeting or Anita. I think that it was something that I was desperately trying to do and keep myself available while I was living there.” When MSNBC asked her what were the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT parents like, and to compare those parents that she met back then (June 21, 2005) to what she saw this morning on television?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "Well, really, the most significant one that‘s changed of course is Paulus van der Sloot. He‘s a completely different man than the one that was seated before me during the month of June. And there are so many things that are different. This was a man that, Joe, I had to call him from the bushes. He could not even maintain eye contact with me. He was tremoring just pretty significantly, sweating to where his wife had to wipe it from the table. This is not the same man that was seated before me. This seems to be now a much more confident man. And that‘s a concern of mine.” When MSNBC asked her if she thinks that because Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT reportedly said to the boys, ‘no body, no crime’ and because Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT thinks that he got rid of the body, so he and the boys are in the clear?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "It does concern me that Paulus van der Sloot has tied up many loose ends. And we have to look at what‘s going on right now on the island. They have sworn him in as an attorney. And not only that, he‘s joined the law firm of his son‘s attorney, the 19 that represented Joran. And I just feel that these loose ends are being tied with a tight knot. And he must be getting backing from the government. He just—it is concerning me that he seems to be moving past things.” When MSNBC asked her opinion of ANITA VAN DER SLOOT ?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "I really think that Anita van der Sloot is just in denial from her son. I don‘t think that—you know, I just think that, you know, she just cannot accept the fact that Joran has lived this lifestyle, has been gambling senselessly since he was probably 15, 16. He‘s had a VIP pass at Carlos 'N Charlie's since he was at least 16. She sees the pictures that he displays on the Web sites, you know, where he has young girls, you know, licking him in certain positions. I mean, she just is in complete denial of who her son really is.” When MSNBC asked her if ANITA VAN DER SLOOT is now lying to cover up for the misdeeds of her son?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "No, I don‘t, Joe. And the reason why is, look who is pushed out forward. Look who has most of the comments when they do the interviews. It‘s Anita. She‘s the one that he pushes for, because she does seem to not—she just doesn‘t seem to have the information. And after all she was in Holland when this happened. You know, I don‘t even know when she returned from Holland. It was certainly not within the first couple of days. But it would be interesting to see when she actually departed and arrived in Aruba. So, she has no knowledge of what—of if Joran went to school or the things that happened. She just—they have just kept her out. Otherwise, Paulus van der Sloot would not be pushing her forward during these interviews.” When MSNBC asked her if she thinks they have lied?, if she thinks that Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT has lied to ANITA VAN DER SLOOT and is now using her as his front person?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "it appears to me that she‘s always the one who‘s the most verbal and gives the most information during these interviews. When you think about it, most of the statements are coming from her. And he‘s always tended to push her out in the forefront of this because I think that she doesn‘t seem to have the knowledge that he and Joran van der Sloot possess.” When MSNBC asked if she has had any contact with either of these people since June?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "No. I have not been able to have contact with them since—it was probably the middle of June. That was the last time. And they had specifically stated that they would not meet with me again.” When MSNBC asked if she would you be willing to meet with the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s they decided to change their mind and invite you?, BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated "I think it‘s nine months too late. And I don‘t really think there‘s anything that we could discuss and come up with any type of resolution. I think that I was there early on. They knew that I was willing to meet with them. I desperately tried. I live there for four months. It‘s nine months too late now, Joe.”

On 2-7 when MSNBC asked what he thinks about the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s re-appearing in the media?, WILLIAM FALLON, a former ESSEX COUNTY MASSACHUSETTS prosecutor stated "If they were my client, Dan, and I were defense counsel for their son, who clearly had some information here, if not the involvement, I would tell them let‘s use a little of that censorship that we talked about in the earlier segment here. They should be shutting their mouths. You might love your kid. You might not—you might believe him—or better yet you might not believe him and try to have it go somewhere else. There‘s clearly a missing girl here. In many people‘s minds there‘s a missing girl here that had foul play come upon her. There are very few people who think she just went for a midnight swim. And I actually think this brings more direction and focus back to their son, so I personally think this type of thing backfires. Nobody‘s going to suggest that a girl who is missing and potentially dead—and I hate to say that—or a victim of a heinous crime—and this guy, who told false stories—remember, they‘re talking about their son like all of a sudden their son was walking down the street and somebody said hey come here, we have to pick someone up. There was an investigation that led to them. And Michelle, you‘re right. They didn‘t get charges yet and they may never get charges, but we live very differently...about missing girls, whether it‘s Laci Peterson, whether it‘s the girl in Massachusetts. We do not start saying because they‘re missing there‘s no crime.” “We have Natalee—it‘s a symbol—she became a symbol, I think, as her mother just said. She was kind of the American dream girl. And the American dream girl turned into the American nightmare vacation. And then we did have people involved here. This just wasn‘t a missing person who fell off a ship and we know that‘s getting a lot of coverage for those things. There were people involved in here, people who told different stories. So all of a sudden it became even more sinister than just missing. And I will say I think Beth‘s point is very valid.”

On 2-7 the "Aruban Boycott Blogspot" reported:
(Joe= JOE MAMMANA; M= Michelle)

(QUOTE)

JOE MAMMANA SPEAKS OUT

Joe Mammana, the infamous bad boy turned good, with the outspoken, unforgiving and vigilante attitude was asked to address some of the rumors from the media and the Internet. "If it's anything bad...everyone thinks its me...I bet they all think I was the guy in the grassy knoll, too.", Mammana laughs.

M: The National Enquirer article states that you have bounty hunters after Joran in Holland. Is that true?

TACOPINA: Yes I do. They are professionals that just want to talk to Joran. To my knowledge, they have not yet approached him.

(These professionals contacted and met with Joran's school in Holland who stated he was no longer a student.)

M: Are you paying Beth's attorney fees?

TACOPINA: No! I have my own attorneys on retainer and she is welcome to use my attorneys whenever she likes. I am not paying for John Q. Kelly.

M: Is it true that you sent the Kalpoe brothers or Joran threatening letters?

TACOPINA: I'd like them to show me these "threatening letters" and I'll tell you if I wrote it. C'mon, please.

M: Since Daddy Sloot is suing the Aruban government for his unlawful detainment, why can't the two innocent black security guards do the same?

TACOPINA: They can't sue the government because they are still considered suspects.

M: Why?

TACOPINA: That's Aruba for you. I am working with the NAACP on this issue and I want these two men to know that I am here to help them in all legal aspects. I don't know if they already have attorneys, but I have a lot of resources to help them.

Joe's Final Comment:

When you least expect it, expect it. What you see is what you get and if you don't like it there are two words I can use for you...

(END QUOTE)



2-8-06

On 2-8 PATRICK HURLEY reported:

(QUOTE)

Anita van der Sloot Vs. Beth Twitty [A Tale Of Two Moms]
By Patrick Hurley
Feb. 8, 2006

I watched the interviews with Anita and Paulus van der Sloot these past two days on, "Good Morning America."

I tried to keep a straight face.

I was particularly intrigued by the demeanor and responses uttered by the mother of Joran van der Sloot. She obviously has no grasp of reality when it comes to her child and who he is. In her universe, her son can do no wrong. It is only a matter of time before they award him the Nobel Peace Prize for his contribution to the Dutch nation. With all the violence that has been suggested in the Natalee Holloway mystery, Anita the mom is convinced her son is the dove of gentleness. Convinced, yes; convincing, not....even....close. Who is she kidding here? There are only two people who buy every word she says, her husband Paulus and idiots! I can tell you who is NOT buying into her description of Joran the Angelic One....

Joran.

He knows his mother is full of Edam cheese. He knows it because he was the one gambling incessantly in the casino when mummy thought he was polishing off his cookies and milk and turning out his night light. He knows it because he was the one hustling girl after girl after girl while mummy believed he was doing his homework. He knows it because he was getting high on alcohol and who knows what else, while mummy was pasting a new tennis article about her boy in the family scrapbook. The gap between what Anita van der Sloot believes about Joran and what Joran KNOWS about Joran can only be measured in light years.

On the other hand, we have another mom....Beth Twitty. Granted, she tried to convince the world that her daughter went to Aruba to be the designated driver and never touched anything stronger than chocolate milk. Jug, however, in an interview gently explained to her that the world was not buying THAT Natalee. So, Beth backed off and dropped the Natalee nun bit as she gallivanted around the country in search of funding for her mission and clues to her missing daughter. She is a more intense personality than Anita van der Sloot. If you put the two of them in a mud wrestling pit, I can tell you who would win without question. Anita is ice, Beth is fire. Anita is calm and mild mannered when she speaks; Beth is a hacksaw. Anita has that mushy face that looks like she is serving an unlimited amount of cream of wheat. Beth doesn't have time for breakfast, she gnaws on a power bar and doesn't take prisoners.

There is one other major difference between the two mothers: One has a child who is dead. The other one has a child who is very much alive. If the roles were reversed, I don't think you would be seeing a gentler, kinder Anita. If Natalee walked into the door tomorrow, you would see a totally new Beth, too. Life is so unfair when you add tragedy to it. It changes people and makes them behave in another identity.

I sympathize with both mothers. Anita, as clueless as they come, is still believing in her son's innocence. I could accept that if we were only talking about the events that occurred around May 29, 2005. Where she lost me, (and most people who roll their eyes whenever she says the word, "Joran!") is when she gets that faraway look on her face and begins to verbalize her son's qualities as if HE were her husband and not Paulus. The gospel of Joran, according to Anita, talks about her little messiah who the world is trying to crucify. How this kid became a potential martyr for righteousness after listening to him say things like, "we had sex in between the times Natalee was passing out," is beyond me. That is not sainthood, that is sexual assault. But, the tennis star, honors student, gentle lamb, unselfish son, perfect friend and future leader of the free world has a credit card to Anita's heart and in her world. I have seen that kind of mom before during the Scott Peterson trial.

You expect a mother to believe the best about her child. That is why I can understand why her and Beth Twitty always try to put a positive light on their loved ones. But, because one is alive and the other one is not, I am having a hard time being fair here. It was not Natalee who left Joran on the beach and became the one who turned up missing; it was the other way around. Had Natalee survived that night and lied on three different occasions about where she said she was when Joran disappeared, I would be zeroing in on her in the same way I am focused on Hans Brinker with the plaid shirt.

That is why I cut Beth Twitty so much slack. That is why I tolerate her wild accusations at times and forgive her for coming across harsh or manipulative. She has a lot more at stake than her counterpart. Mrs. van der Sloot gets to hug her baby and talk to him on the phone and keep her fantasy alive that he is God's gift to any society. Beth Twitty will never hug her Natalee or talk to her on the phone again. Anita gets to prepare Joran's room when he comes home to visit from college. Beth is only allowed to go into Natalee's room and sit on the bed and cry for a daughter who never made it to college and will never be coming home.

I feel sorry for both of them. But, when it comes to their view of their own child according to all that I have read and researched....

I only believe one of them.

The one whose daughter had the misfortune of meeting the other mom's son.

------------

About the author: Pat Hurley has won three Emmy awards for writing, hosting and producing television shows. He resides in Southern California.
Email: coolhumor@sbcglobal.net

(END QUOTE)



On 2-8 the “Aruba Strategic Communications Task Force” reported:

(QUOTE)

Van der Sloot and Holloway-Twitty Families Battle Over GMA Interview

The highly promoted interview with Paulus and Anita van der Sloot brought nothing new to the investigation of their son Joran’s involvement in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. In fact, ABC’s Good Morning America had to agree to enough strigent conditions in the interview that it could only be what it was, a parents’ support of their son.

The family has always contended that Joran’s only flaw was leaving Natalee, alive he said, on the beach that fateful night. So they had an opportunity to repeat that to a national audience, after being promoted in a SuperBowl promotion. ABC never intended to make news with the interview, only to drive an audience to the Good Morning America program at the start of their February rating period.

Also as expected the Holloway-Twitty family forcefully denounced the couple for their views and offered again that Paulus himself had a role in the disappearance of their daughter. Attorney John Kelly remarked that Joran is and has always been the key to finding out what happened that evening.

In sum, a ratings grabber used to good advantage by both ABC and the van der Sloot's. But, it brought nothing new to the understanding of what happened the night she disappeared.

Investigation Continues

As reported over the last weeks, the investigation continues along the lines projected by the prosecution. The Alabama teens were questioned and the results are now in Investigators’ hands. Other witnesses in Aruba have come forward, some have been re-interviewed. A dig by the dunes at the Lighthouse did commence. And files have been reviewed in Holland by Karin Janssen.

Also the prosecutor assigned by Theresa Croes, Attorney General, is completing an independent review of the case to be presented to the prosecutor.

All of this suggests an attention to detail and a firm commitment to compile all evidence and testimony in the hope that a case can be constructed to present to the court.

A “wait and see” mood by the Holloway-Twitty family

Unlike other periods in the course of the investigation, the Holloway-Twitty family seems prepared to “wait and see” what results from this current phase of the inquiry. There is much less acrimony, no talk of boycotts, and attorney John Kelly admits he is getting the briefings he needs to inform the family.

Only Beth Twitty, herself, seems intent, when at a loss for any new information, to ask viewers to call their representatives to pressure Aruba. She continues to claim that such pressure will somehow acclerate the process. Even her attorney, always calm in the center of this storm, has backed away from such efforts, because he sees that work is beng actively pursued to come up with a case.

Still, the level of acrimony and the sense of anger has been diluted by the aggressive pursuit of the case by prosecutors.

(END QUOTE)



2-9-06

On 2-9 FOX News GRETA VAN SUSTEREN reported in her “Gretawire,” “Speaking of planes, I missed my first plane out of Boston on Monday. Missing that plane turned out was annoying at first, but it turned out to be a stroke of luck because on the flight I did board, I ran into someone who had some important information for me on the Natalee Holloway case. The person approached me and we talked for a few minutes. We could not talk long because the doors to the plane were closing. We talked later that night by phone and again yesterday by phone for about 45 minutes. The person is reluctant to come forward, so I am working on persuading him/her. I guess the headline is: Stay Tuned. Incidentally, I don't want to overstate this since I am not giving you lots of information. The person has some very important information to the news story, but this information will not solve it.”

On 2-9 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com" reported:

(QUOTE)

Croes Under Pressure

ARUBA – There are some indications that the visit of the Dutch ministers Rita Verdonk and Alexander Pechtold to Aruba has to do with the work of Rudy Croes (MEP) as Justice-minister. This would have weakened his position in the cabinet even more. However, Croes’ spokesperson denies the rumors that the minister is considering his position.

According to his nephew and spokesperson, Edward Croes, these are just rumours and the minister continues on as agreed. “There is pressure on the Justice-position, but it is not true that he wants to resign.” Edward Croes says that the pressure comes from the opposition. “They are targeting the credibility of the Justice Department.” The visit of the Dutch ministers should be considered as a political stunt, just to turn the attention away from their own political problems in their country.

According to the spokesperson, during the visit they talked about the integration of the different departments that have to do with resident- and work permits, just like the Netherlands did with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND). “The Netherlands hopes that we can learn from their mistakes. That’s the reason why they came with a lot of recommendations.” Minister Croes had other obligations to tend to; that’s why he was not seen on any of the pictures made after the visit. “He did sign the covenant, but had to leave afterwards and could not stay for the settlement of the protocol.”

His spokesperson confirmed that the minister met with his family and confidents yesterday to talk about the political pressure. “But that happens more often.” Edward Croes says that the minister will remain in office for two years, just as was settled during the formation of the cabinet.

He wants to finish some projects and will then step down and make room for a younger person. This way, this younger person can gain ministerial experience.” The MEP does not like the opinion of the minister. Prime Minister Nelson Oduber had preferred not to see Rudy Croes, as well as Ramon Lee, minister of Labour, Culture and Sport back in the Oduber IV cabinet. Insiders within the MEP fear that, after the agreed two years, minister Croes will mobilize his supporters and so try to stay for the full four years.
It was decided during the cabinet formation that part of Croes’ portfolio, the immigration policy, will go to minister Booshi Wever. But up till today, this transition didn’t seem to go very easy, but with the visit of the Dutch ministers, it was settled that Dimas, the new administration that falls under Wever, will be the only instance in charge of the admittance policy.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-9 the "Aruban Boycott Blogspot" reported:
(spelling corrected)

(QUOTE)

DENNIS JACOBS --INSTRUMENTAL IN COVER UP

These excerpts are taken from an Investigator currently working on the investigation:
Dennis Jacobs is a career narcotics agent for the Aruban Police. He has never worked a missing person or a murder case. He was instrumental in orchestrating the arrest of the two black security guards. He did that after knowing full well that the boys had lied about dropping Natalee off.

There is a beach bum named “Booty” who hangs out at the “Moomba Bar” next to the “Holiday Inn.” Booty insists that he saw the two security guards going in and out of Natalee's room the night she disappeared. The Investigator interviewed Booty at least 5 different times and his story doesn't add up. The Investigator believes that he was coached into identifying the two security guards.

Booty sells drugs on the beach. Remember, Dennis Jacobs is a narcotics agent!

Dennis Jacobs interviewed the suspects on May 31, 2005 and he admitted that their were inconsistencies in their statements, however, he didn't think it was necessary to re-interview them for days after they lied about dropping Natalee off at the “Holiday Inn.” As a matter of fact if Beth hadn't told him that she reviewed the video camera film at the “Holiday Inn” and Natalee was not on it being dropped off by the suspects as they insisted he may not have re-interviewed them at all.

In August a belt was found in the dunes and was turned over to the Aruban Police to be entered into evidence. The belt appeared to be the same belt that Joran used as prop in his web site that spring. He was choking a young boy while holding the belt. The Investigator believes that the belt found in the dunes was strikingly similar or even the exact same belt. The next day cadaver dogs led an organized search of the sand dunes area. At one point one of the dogs began digging in the sand near where the belt was found. The dog dug so vigorously that within minutes all you could see was his tail. The area was excavated and searchers came up with a few tiny pieces of clear plastic.
The cadaver dog leader wanted to record and enter those pieces of plastic into evidence but Dennis Jacobs threw them into the wind saying "they were of no value."

Weeks later our source asked chief Dompig about the belt being sent to Holland for forensic examination. He replied that "the investigative team had decided that the belt was too old and it was not sent for forensic examination."

In October Dennis Jacobs took a statement from Dave Holloway regarding a meeting that Dave had with Paulus van der Sloot back in August. Jacobs questioning of Dave Holloway lasted for three hours and when Dave finally saw an English translated version of the interview which was prepared by Jacobs it was reduced to one page. Three hours of questioning reduced to one page and it failed to even relate to the subject that they covered. Instead, it made reference to Beth and Jug Twitty and the Natalee Holloway fund. The statement was witnessed by another Police Officer who was not even present during the testimony. Which brings the Investigator to the fact that Dennis Jacobs was responsible for taking the statements from the suspects in this case. The Investigator has personally seen two of these statements and they appear to be incomplete and manipulated in Joran's favor.

As an experienced Investigator, he believes these statements were poorly written and vague. Almost as if the Police Officer taking the statement did not want to get to the truth. These statements are witnessed by up to four Police officers.

In October Dave Holloway and the Investigator observed Jan van der Straten, the former chief of Police leaving Jacobs office. A young dispatcher informed the Investigator and Dave Holloway that he (Van der Straten) was a frequent visitor to the office. The Investigator is VERY suspicious that van der Straten is still pulling the strings of this investigation and he has his hand picked Investigator, Jacobs, who has sabotaged the case at every turn.

(END QUOTE)



2-14-06

On 2-14 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com" reported:

(QUOTE)

Growth Tourism is Dropping

Although the beaches are still full with sunbathing tourists, last year’s totals up till October were hardly greater than those of the year before.

ARUBA – The government’s critics were right. They predicted a downward trend and ATA’s tourism figures over the months of August up till October 2005 confirm this. The growth in the total number of tourists visiting Aruba in the first half of 2005 was 8 percent, while by the end of October it dropped to 2.15 percent in relation to the year before.

We cannot say that the decrease was caused by the Holloway-case, because the number of American tourists dropped with about the same numbers of foreign visitors. The figures by state differ from each other. Alabama, the state where the disappeared girl is from, scored significantly lower than other American states. Also after the first quarter of 2005, by that time Holloway had not even visited Aruba yet, this state was already red in the statistics.

More worrisome are the figures from the state New York. The majority of the American tourists come from this state, about 17 percent of the total. In relation to 2003, 2004 had a growth of 13.47 percent, which dropped to 9.1 percent in the first quarter of 2005. At the end of June, the growth was just 3.19 percent and at the end of October the growth was negative 3.07 percent.

The figures over the entire 2004 for two other important states, Massachusetts and Illinois, are respectively 15.68 percent more than in 2003 and 10.19 percent more than in 2003 and for the first ten months of 2005, 15.74 and 14.68 percent more than same months in 2004.

(END QUOTE)



2-15-06

On 2-15 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com” reported:

(QUOTE)

Investigation Holloway Case in the Final Stages

ORANJESTAD — The cabdriver the Police was looking for in relation with the Natalee Holloway case has reported in with the Police, this according to Police-spokesperson Papito Comencia. Whether or not the man had valuable information the Police couldn't comment on. Acting chief of Police Gerold Dompig sent out a press-release last Monday in which he called for the cabdriver he had spoken to in June or July 2005 to come forward and contact him.

Dompig mentioned in the same press-release that a renewed search will be undertaken to find the possibly buried remains of Natalee Holloway, this time with more advanced means. According to the Acting chief of Police the investigation in the Holloway case is in the last stages.

The cabdriver Dompig wanted to come into contact with showed Dompig last year, a place/area near the California dunes that had something to do with the missing American girl.

Dompig also made public that he and the district attorney had fruitful meetings in the Netherlands with several government agencies that helped in the investigation into the missing American girl Natalee Holloway. "The visit was very productive", according to Dompig. The meetings have stimulated the Aruban law enforcement and justice department to deepen the investigation "because the justice department has a few cards left to play". The search of possible places where Holloway possibly is buried will continue but this time with more advanced devices and specialist dog trained in finding human remains.

All the material that has already been collected will be thoroughly analyzed again. According to Dompig the government agencies and the Aruban law enforcement/Justice department think the investigation is in the end-game phase of the investigation. The feeling that positive results will be achieved is predominant.

(END QUOTE)



2-16-06

On 2-16 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com" reported:

(QUOTE)

Holloway investigation in last phase

ARUBA – Police spokesperson Papito Comenencia indicated that the cabdriver that the Police was looking for as part of the investigation on the missing Natalee Holloway, has reported with the Police. The Police cannot say whether the man had valuable information. Deputy chief Commander Gerold Dompig had a press report published last Monday, indicating that he would like to talk again with a cabdriver, whom he had contact with in June or July of 2005.

He mentioned in same press report that modern equipment and better trained dogs will be used to search for the possible buried body of Holloway. According to him, the investigation is in its last phase. At the time Dompig had contact with the cabdriver, he pointed out a location near the California dunes that can be related to the missing American girl. Dompig and a public prosecutor went to the Netherlands and had visited several instances that have helped in the investigation. The visit to the Netherlands had produced a lot, said Dompig. They were stimulated to broaden the investigation, because Justice ‘has not played her last cards yet’.

All the material that was collected up till now will be analyzed again.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-16 the “Joran van der Sloot” blog spot reported:

(QUOTE)

Breaking News

The van der Sloot's have been served with a civil law suit by the Holloway's and Twitty’s. ABC had been planning a face to face interview with the van der Sloot's (Joran, Paul & Anita). Upon setting foot on American soil Paul vander Sloot was served at his hotel. John Q. Kelly had a retired Scotland person sitting next to Joran on the plane and served him with papers on the airplane. Joran van der Sloot (was) served with papers on the plane. (SM)

"Paulus and Anita were served at their hotel in NYC with a civil lawsuit, service witnessed by hotel staff. Further, the service was videotaped. Joran was served by former Scotland Yard agent on the plane as soon as the plane landed on American soil. The suit against Joran for three counts; sexual assault against a minor, false imprisonment, and malicious interference. Charge against elder Sloot's not stated."

(END QUOTE)



On 2-16 the “AP” reported:

(QUOTE)

Parents of Teen Missing in Aruba Sue Dutch Youth in New York

NEW YORK -- The parents of Natalee Holloway, the Alabama teen who went missing during a high school graduation class trip in Aruba last May, have sued a youth who was questioned in connection with her disappearance.

The lawsuit, filed late Thursday in Manhattan's state Supreme Court, seeks unspecified money damages against Joran van der Sloot, 18, and his father. Both were served with a summons while in New York, Holloway family lawyer Scott Balber said.

Holloway, 18, of Mountain Brook, Ala., was last seen May 30 leaving a bar with Surinamese brothers Deepak Kalpoe, 21, and Satish Kalpoe, 18, and van der Sloot, a Dutch national. The honors student was hours from ending her graduation trip.

The lawsuit was filed by Elizabeth Ann Twitty, of Alabama, and Dave Edward Holloway, of Mississippi, the missing teen's mother and father.

Van der Sloot and the Kalpoe brothers were arrested June 9, 2005, on suspicion of involvement in Holloway's disappearance. van der Sloot admitted he was with the teen but denied any wrongdoing. All were released, and nobody has been charged.

Referring to van der Sloot as "the predator," the lawsuit says that on at least three occasions young Aruban women have complained they were the victims of "date-rape" by him and his accomplices.

Van der Sloot left Aruba, where his father still lives, and currently lives in Arnhem, the Netherlands, court papers say.

The lawsuit says the father, Paulus van der Sloot, was an enabler of his son's "violent and anti-social lifestyle." Court papers say that on the night of May 29, 2005, he went with his underage son to a casino to play poker. It was at that casino that the younger van der Sloot met Holloway, the lawsuit says.

The court papers present a partly speculative version of what happened after the young people left the casino and went to a bar called Carlos 'n' Charlies in the early hours of May 30, 2005.

At about 1:30 a.m., court papers say, an intoxicated Holloway left with van der Sloot and the Kalpoe brothers. Several of Holloway's friends saw her in the car with the youths and asked her to get out, court papers say, but she did not.

"The next hours of Natalee's young life were marked by torment, terror and debasement," court papers say, describing an imagined sexual assault. "Natalee has not been seen or heard from since entering Deepak's car with Joran."

Balber would not say where he believes the van der Sloot's are staying in New York or when they were served. He said he believed that as of Thursday they had not retained a lawyer.

Balber explained that if a defendant is served with a summons for a lawsuit in the state and neither party lives in the county where the summons is served, then the plaintiff gets to decide the county in which the lawsuit is filed.

(END QUOTE)

On 2-16 JOHN Q. KELLY stated to FOX News:

(QUOTE)

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, HOST: Joran van der Sloot slapped with a lawsuit on an international flight on a runway in New York. At the same time, his father was also slapped with a lawsuit, but this time in a New York City hotel. Joran flew to the United States today for a news interview, but he got an unwelcome surprise the moment his plane touched down on U.S. soil in New York.

Holloway family attorney John Q. Kelly joins us live in West Palm Beach, Florida, with the inside story. Welcome, John.

JOHN Q. KELLY, HOLLOWAY FAMILY ATTORNEY: Hey, Greta. How're you doing?

VAN SUSTEREN: Very well. John, I must admit this sounds very James Bond-ish to me in terms of how this all unraveled. So take me back to yesterday. I mean, how did you learn that he would be coming back in the country? What was the plan? Or coming into the country, I should say.

KELLY: We knew they were both coming into the country. I guess you'd classify it as chatter that picked up considerably yesterday. And once we were able to move independently on the chatter we had picked up, we were able to confirm some facts, got lucky with some facts.

And you know, we had three different teams on three different continents moving at breakneck speed to pull this together. And we got one process server on a flight with Joran coming over here. We were able to stake out the hotel where his father was and were able to serve the father at about 1 o'clock today. And Joran was already in flight, sort of captive, with the process server on the plane, and we were able to serve him once we landed on New York soil.

VAN SUSTEREN: Where was the process server on the plane in relationship to Joran? Was he watching him? I mean, how did this work out?

KELLY: He was three rows in front of him.

(CROSSTALK)

VAN SUSTEREN: How were you able to do that?

KELLY: We had our information, and we were able to, you know, locate the process server to make sure Joran would not be able to get past him and get off the plane without being served. So once we knew that we had that locked in, we knew it was safe to serve the father because he wouldn't be able to warn Joran, and even if he did, it wouldn't help.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So the case was actually filed when, officially filed with the clerk's office?

KELLY: It was filed at about 11 a.m. this morning.

(CROSSTALK)

We had to e-mail the index number of the filed action to the process server on the plane, so he could add it to the complaint before service was completed and also provide it to the investigative team sitting on the hotel for Paulus van der Sloot, to mark that it was formally filed with the index number formally before he was served, also. Everything was videotaped. Everything was videotaped. We have still photos. We have videotape footage of the servers of both the father and the son.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Why was it so important that the case be filed and the service be done immediately, for instance, rather than filing it yesterday?

KELLY: Well, I just know from experience that different newspapers have reporters down there who are down there just to check on filings, and we didn't want the media to pick up that a case like this had been filed. It would have hit the media. The family would have found out, and all Paul van der Sloot and Joran would have to do is stay out of New York jurisdiction, we wouldn't have been able to serve them.

VAN SUSTEREN: So you filed the lawsuit about 11 a.m. You've got an index number. You've got to try to accomplish both services almost simultaneously, so one doesn't tip off the other and sort of avoid the jurisdiction...

KELLY: Right.

VAN SUSTEREN: So you don't lose one.

KELLY: Right.

VAN SUSTEREN: Now, when the plane lands at Kennedy airport, what happened?

KELLY: It's my understanding that Joran was the last person off the plane. He was waiting to be escorted through a separate exit by Customs, but and it was just a cat-and-mouse game. He couldn't get off the plane without getting past the process server in the aisle there, and he was served right on the plane there at that time.

VAN SUSTEREN: What did the process server say to him?

KELLY: I wasn't there, but I'm sure it was words to the effect, you're served, this is a complaint, and you know, you're in.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So the process server didn't have the index number on it when he left Holland. He had to wait to get it, what, by, like, a Blackberry when he landed at JFK?

KELLY: Exactly.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So he...

KELLY: And that was added to it, and then he served it.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So he madly scrambles, writes it down. Do you have a separate person on the plane videotaping the service?

KELLY: We have it memorialized, Greta. I don't want to talk about too much the mechanics right now.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Give me an idea of how many people were involved in this whole exercise and service?

KELLY: Dozens. The key people are the Chadbourne & Parke people, Scott Balber, the partner over at Chadbourne & Parke, and another partner there, Jerry Katz. Scott's a former partner of mine, partner over there. We've tried a number of very big cases, won a number of very big cases together, and he was my right-hand man on this. Bo Dietl and his whole investigative team was, you know, at various locations. And we had some international help, too. But as I said, three teams, three continents, a lot of moving parts and a little bit of luck, a lot of skill and a lot of hard effort by a lot of people, we were able to pull this part of it off.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So now let's look at the service of Paul van der Sloot in the New York hotel. Obviously, you'd been tipped off someplace that he was going to be at that hotel.

KELLY: We tracked him down there. We're waiting — the instructions were that we weren't going to serve him until Joran was served, unless he started to leave the hotel, and then we felt it'd be necessary to serve him at that time. And at about 1 o'clock, he apparently showed up downstairs in the lobby, and the team moved in and served him and videotaped that.

VAN SUSTEREN: Now, do you know if he had any reaction to being served?

KELLY: You know, I'm down here in West Palm, Greta. I've just gotten some verbals. I don't know the exact reaction. I'm sure he wasn't too excited.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. What are the verbals? I mean, what did the process server see? Did he actually pick up the complaint and look at it? I mean, he's a lawyer.

KELLY: Yes, apparently, we have some footage of him actually looking over the papers there in the lobby of the hotel.

VAN SUSTEREN: Is the purpose of videotaping to preserve so that the person served can't later say, I never got this?

KELLY: Well, that's it. You want to avoid a situation of "He said, she said," you know, process server says, I placed it in his hand, or I put it up against his chest, and someone else says, No, he never got within 20 feet of me, he just, you know, threw it in my direction and ran away. So you know, this is all memorialized.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So the plaintiffs in the case are who?

KELLY: The plaintiffs are the natural parents of Natalee, Beth Twitty and Dave Holloway. It's their action. They've brought the claims. And just so we're clear on the jurisdictional issue, Greta, once the action was filed in New York state and the defendants, meaning Paulus van der Sloot, then Joran, were in New York state and we personally served them, that's how we gain jurisdiction on them. If we had served them in New Jersey, it's no good, or if they'd been in New York state, we didn't get it in their hands, the service is no good and we don't have jurisdiction. But once we filed the action, they entered the state and they were personally served, we gained jurisdiction over them for purposes of this lawsuit.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So you're down in Florida. Were you monitoring, people giving you calls, e-mails, and sort of on pins and needles to make sure that this thing — I mean, because it had to be executed pretty carefully. I mean, one slip-up and you weren't going to get another shot — I mean, I don't think they'd come back here.

KELLY: Yes. No, this was all done by phone from down here on my part for the last 24 hours or so. It's been straight through until it was, you know, completed at about — I think it was about 3 o'clock today when service was completed on the plane. But there were a lot, as I said, of moving parts, we had to do some speculating as to parts of what was unfolding, based on what we had learned, you know, yesterday, and guessed a little bit, guessed right on a couple things. And everything turned out to effect service.

VAN SUSTEREN: I suppose that Joran van der Sloot's pretty easy to identify. He's 6-foot-5, young kid on a flight from Holland. How did you prepare your process server in New York to make sure that he got the right person?

KELLY: You know, we had plenty of photos. And you know, the plane was easy. I mean, you know, as you said, he's a very recognizable young man. He's not shy about the media himself. He's got plenty of pictures that we were able to use from his own Web site, which was kind of him to help us with that. And you know, the father's been out there a lot, too. He's been giving interviews. He was on one of the networks, you know, a couple mornings last week, giving interviews, so we had plenty of footage and pictures of him, too. So it wasn't too difficult to, you know, prep people to pick them up.
VAN SUSTEREN: Did Beth Holloway-Twitty, one of your clients, or Dave Holloway, your other client — did they know this was going on today?

KLLY: In general terms. I mean, it was one of these things that I just felt more comfortable the less people knew. And the less people that were brought in the loop fully, the better. You know, I just absolutely put everybody — I put it black today for them. I just told them, you know, something generally might be coming down. Don't take any phone calls. I don't know if you tried calling them.

VAN SUSTEREN: We did.

KELLY: You didn't get a call back, but — you did?

VAN SUSTEREN: We tried. We pounded...

KELLY: Oh.

VAN SUSTEREN: We called them so many times today, and we didn't get return calls, so at least they're following your instructions, I reluctantly tell you.

KELLY: They both get ice cream cones for that, Greta. They're good. So yes, we tried to keep most people in the dark and tell as few people as little as possible until we had accomplished what we had set out to do.

VAN SUSTEREN: And once it was accomplished, did you call Beth and talk to her? And what'd you tell her and what'd she say?

KELLY: I just told her in the plainest terms what we had accomplished. She was thankful. I think both she and Dave just see it as one more avenue of possibly getting some answers to questions that we haven't been able to get out of Aruba, and possibly, ultimately finding Natalee. That's the goal.

VAN SUSTEREN: You know, John, this changes a lot. I mean, in many ways, it — you know, it empowers them. You know, whether they ever, you know, get more information, it changes the dynamics for them, don't you agree?

KELLY: Empowers who? I'm sorry, Greta.

VAN SUSTEREN: Empowers, you know, Dave and (Beth). I mean, they've been over there in the hot sun, trying to get information, working with the prosecutor, feeling they aren't getting answers. Now things have changed a little bit, at least in the short run.

KELLY: Well, sure. You know, we've been able to, for once, go on the offensive. We're masters of our own little universe for now, with what we've been able to accomplish today. And you know, we can control our little world here with what we've done and then proceed the way we want to, work it the way we want to. You know, I've had my own Investigators working since I came in on the case a couple months ago, down in Aruba and things. But you know, it's good to get back on the home court, home soil, and get some work done here.

VAN SUSTEREN: Did Karin Janssen know this was going to happen?

KELLY: No. You know, Karin Janssen's been very good. I've talked to her weekly. I actually just talked to her the other day, and I forgot to bring this one up to her when we were talking.

VAN SUSTEREN: Forgot to bring it up? I mean, I don't know if she'll think you forgot it. How do you plan to tell her, or are you going to let us tell her?

KELLY: For some reason, I suspect she probably knows by now. But if not, I'll be talking to her, and we'll knock it around a little bit.

VAN SUSTEREN: What's your sort of wild thought about how she's going to react to this?

KELLY: You know, she's been fine. I think she'll see it as movement on a different front, possibly more assistance, and maybe we'll be to accomplish some things that she hasn't been able to. We'll have some additional subpoena power, maybe have some access to some information here and elsewhere. And we've got, you know, very good investigative sources, as I told you, you know, Bo and his people and very good attorneys working with me, and maybe we'll get some different and, you know, fertile results that'll help them down there, too.

So you know, it's a parallel operation, but we plan to share what we can. And you know, the ultimate goal would also be to see a prosecution and conviction in the case for what went on down there.

VAN SUSTEREN: John, don't you sort of wonder how in the world Paul van der Sloot and Joran van der Sloot's lawyers let them even try to slip into the country for an interview?

KELLY: You know, I guess it was very kind of them to do that, to help us out a little bit here. You know, it was very nice of them to pick New York and, you know, Very nice that, you know, people even down there are very attuned to the movements of the van der Sloot's, you know, even when they go to the airport and things like that. So yes, I'm very surprised. But I guess, for some reason, they feel emboldened a little bit and felt they're a little bit bulletproof and they've been sort of, you know, given a free pass down there on a lot of things, and I guess they thought they could come here and do as they please, and you know, put their own spin on things with whatever interviews they were going to do and walk out of here unscathed. And fortunately, that didn't happen.

VAN SUSTEREN: Why are they in New York? I mean, who are they interviewing with? What's was the plan or what is the plan?

KELLY: I take it it's not you, Greta.

VAN SUSTEREN: No, I take it — I'd like it to be. I mean, I'd like to talk them.

(LAUGHTER)

KELLY: Oh, make a call. I won't get into that. It's my understanding one of the networks and one of the marquee names that they're going to sit down and chat with. And our feeling was, if they could sit down and talk to one of the networks, they should be happy to sit down and answer a few questions from us under oath, too.

VAN SUSTEREN: You know, you would have thought, though, that the anchor or the news — that they would have asked that the person they were going to interview with would have come to them, just to avoid this particular problem.

KELLY: I would think. It's a lot easier for one person to travel, and there's no risk involved in that. But as I said, for some reason, they thought they could slip in here for a weekend and slip out. And didn't quite turn out that way.

VAN SUSTEREN: How long have you been tracking this possible trip to the United States?

KELLY: Well, the trip to the United States just very recently surfaced. We've tracking, monitoring, investigating and waiting for breaks, waiting for movement, monitoring chatter, monitoring the blogs, monitoring Web sites daily for months now. And as I said, there was just a peak very recently, and we picked that up, moved on it, able to confirm some things, were able to guess on a couple things, and that's where we ended up today.

VAN SUSTEREN: You know, it is so unusual, John. I've never seen anything like it. I mean, it was like a well-oiled machine, so well orchestrated, so James Bond. I understand the process server's a former Scotland Yard who sat on the plane in front of him. I mean, watching this thing go down from the inside these last final minutes must — or final hours today — must have been horrible for you, yet exciting.

KELLY: I'll tell you, sitting down here, it was kind of like watching grass grow. Time wouldn't pass fast enough. I was just every second trying to check on everybody, you know, trying to micromanage a lot of little details that you know, one little slip-up from — you know — a lot of things could have gone wrong that went right today, Greta. We'll put it that way. And you know, the well-oiled machine could have been, you know, a broken-down heap if things had turned out differently. And you know, I could have had egg on my face, too. But you know, as I said, we had a great team of people, both lawyers and Investigators everybody else working on it. What we set out to accomplish today was accomplished, and I'm thankful to everybody for that. Just a small first step, but we did what we had to do today, at least.

VAN SUSTEREN: Was Beth calling you all day, or Dave calling you all day, hounding you for details?

KELLY: No. They were terrific. Terrific clients. You know, told them what they had to know, asked them to have a little bit of faith and hang tight and just stay dark for the day, and they did that and they were terrific. And they've honored that. And you know, we've had very good relationship, so I have a terrific relationship with both Beth and Dave, and they're terrific clients and terrific people and, you know, they deserve a little, you know, retribution at this point, that — you know, it's the first step. I think they feel pretty good about it right now.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So in the complaint, basically, what does the complaint say?

KELLY: It's basically four causes of action brought on behalf of Beth and Dave. You have a sexual assault. You have a battery, which is an unlawful touching. You have a false imprisonment. Those are the three claims against Joran. And then you have — basically, for lack of a better term — you know, negligent supervision against Paulus van der Sloot.

VAN SUSTEREN: And how long has the complaint actually been ready, finished, in the drawer, ready to go, waiting for this moment?

KELLY: Oh, Greta, you know I'm not going to tell you that. It was filed today at 11 o'clock.

VAN SUSTEREN: I know, but have you been sitting on it, waiting for this chance? I mean, has it been like that?

KELLY: No, no. No, it has not been because you have to file the action in the state that they're going to be coming to, and we certainly didn't have information for any length of time that they were going to be coming to New York. So as I said, you know, the lawyer part of it was even done, you know, right through the night, you know, in the last 24 hours, to get this done and get this filed and make sure it was filed and was properly served all within this very small window of opportunity, without people being tipped off as soon as the media would have found out that they were here, all they had to do was get spooked and go over to Newark to a hotel or something, and you know, we never would have been able to serve them.

VAN SUSTEREN: So you're writing the complaint through the night. It isn't as though that you wrote it a month ago and you were just waiting to see if you lucky, is that once you got word, you began the drafting, and it was, you know, a foot to the floor on this one.

KELLY: Yes. I mean, I've always had my thoughts of where to go with this, if the opportunity arose. But no, the actual pen to paper was just done very recently. And you know, as I said, Scott Belber and, you know, Jerry Katz did a lot of heavy lifting on that, too, and did a terrific job to accomplish that part of it.

VAN SUSTEREN: Any way to describe what your clients have been through in since May 30?

KELLY: It's just, you know, they lost their daughter. And you know, a lot of people lose family members, but these are people who lost their daughter and know that people have the answers as to what happened to their daughter, and they can't get those answers. That's what the really painful part is.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right...

KELLY: And hopefully, this will maybe provide a way to find some.

VAN SUSTEREN: John, thank you very much. And of course, as you know, we'll be following this lawsuit.

KELLY: Thanks, Greta. Bye-bye.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-16 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

DAN ABRAMS, HOST: All right, we‘ve got about a minute and a half left, and I want to tell you about a lawsuit that has been filed in connection with the case in Aruba, of missing girl, Natalee Holloway. The family of Natalee has filed a lawsuit against the chief suspect, Joran van der Sloot and his father.
They‘re not claiming wrongful death. What they‘re claiming is that Joran van der Sloot willfully caused personal injury to Natalee as the result of his sexual assault upon her. They‘re saying the he wrongfully, unlawfully and intentionally detained and directly restrained Natalee, depriving her of her personal liberty through force and/or the threat of force.
They‘re saying that he abducted her, prevented her from returning to her parents, and then they‘re also blaming the father, basically saying that Paulus van der Sloot knew that Joran had a long history of sexual assaults on young women. This is again according to the lawsuit. That he owed a duty of care to all reasonably foreseeable victims of his son‘s dangerous and violent proclivities.
Now, the family has been in the United States to do an interview, and so it seems that they were served while they were here. Unfortunately, we didn‘t have time to cover this as much as we would like, but we will talk about this more in depth tomorrow, and you can watch it on “RITA COSBY” tonight at 9:00 Eastern Time. She‘ll have full coverage.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-16 CNNHN reported:

(QUOTE)

NANCY GRACE, HOST: Very quickly, to tonight`s "Case Alert." Breaking news tonight in the Natalee Holloway case. Remember the missing girl who went missing out of Aruba on her high school senior trip? Well, Natalee`s parents, Beth Twitty, Dave Holloway, have filed a civil suit here in New York City against the van der Sloots. The father, Judge Paulus van der Sloot, an Aruban judge, and son Joran van der Sloot, last year were in jail as suspects in Natalee Holloway`s disappearance. Well, the suit says Holloway`s parents seek a yet-to-be-specified amount of money, plus punitive damages to be determined at trial. The 18-year-old girl vanished off her senior trip in May.

(END QUOTE)



2-17-06

On 2-17 the “Joran van der Sloot” blog spot reported: “According to Nova Reporter Twan Huys, The van der Sloot's together with ABC are stunned by the news. Joran van der Sloot reportedly insisted in coming to the US to sit down with ABC for the interview. The interview was arranged by Larry Garrison, Dave Holloway's publisher, who is reportedly in the works with Joran to publish a journal he kept in prison detailing his ordeal at KIA.”

On 2-17 the “Joran van der Sloot” blog spot reported: “Nova's correspondent Twan Huys reporting from New York has scored an interview with Joran van der Sloot. The interview is expected to air on the Dutch network on Monday.” (2-27)

On 2-17 FOX News reported:

(QUOTE)

Lawsuit Filed Against Dutch Youth Questioned in Holloway Disappearance

NEW YORK — A Dutch youth questioned in the case of missing Alabama teenager Natalee Holloway has been served with a summons, according to a lawyer for the missing teen's family.

In a story first reported by FOXNews' Greta van Susteren, Joran van der Sloot and his father Paulus were served with papers in connection with a wrongful death suit filed in Manhattan Supreme Court after they arrived in New York to take part in a television interview on Thursday.

The lawsuit, which seeks unspecified monetary damages, was filed by the parents of Natalee — Elizabeth Ann Twitty and Dave Edward Holloway.

Click here to read the summons and the complaint (pdf).

Natalee, 18, was last seen May 30 leaving a bar with van der Sloot and two other residents of the Dutch Island of Aruba. Her body has not been found and no one has been charged.

Van der Sloot and his father could not be reached for comment. Holloway family lawyer Scott Balber would not say where he believes they are staying in New York. He said he believed that as of Thursday, when they were served, they had not retained a lawyer.
Van der Sloot and Surinamese brothers Deepak Kalpoe, 21, and Satish Kalpoe, 18 were arrested June 9 on suspicion of involvement in Natalee's disappearance. van der Sloot admitted he was with the teen but denied any wrongdoing. All were released.
Natalee's family argues the Aruban authorities botched the investigation and have continued to maintain that van der Sloot knows more than he told authorities about the missing teen's whereabouts.

Referring to van der Sloot as "the predator," the lawsuit claims that on at least three occasions young Aruban women have complained they were the victims of date-rape by him and accomplices.

Van der Sloot left Aruba, where his father still lives, and currently lives in Arnhem, the Netherlands, court papers say.

The lawsuit alleges the father, Paulus van der Sloot, was an enabler of his son's "violent and anti-social lifestyle." Court papers say that on the night of May 29, 2005, he went with his underage son to a casino to play poker. It was at that casino that the younger van der Sloot met Natalee, the lawsuit claims.

The court papers present a partly speculative version of what happened after the young people left the casino and went to a bar in the early hours of May 30.

At about 1:30 a.m., court papers say, an intoxicated Natalee left with van der Sloot and the Kalpoe brothers. Several of Natalee's friends saw her in the car with the youths and asked her to get out, court papers say, but she did not.

The court papers go on to allege she was sexually assaulted.

Balber said when a defendant is served with a summons for a lawsuit in New York state, but neither party lives in the county where the summons is served, then the plaintiff gets to decide the county in which the lawsuit is filed. Manhattan is New York County.

(END QUOTE)



On October 22, 2006 “SFgate.com” reported:

(QUOTE)

…

Consider [Bart] Schwartz's role in helping the parents of teenager Natalee Holloway, frustrated in their efforts to sue Joran van der Sloot, the boy last seen with their daughter before she disappeared in Aruba.

Their lawyer, Jerome Katz, got a tip one night that van der Sloot planned to fly to New York for a media interview. By the next morning, Schwartz had an investigator in the first-class cabin, one row in front of van der Sloot. The investigator served van der Sloot with papers as soon as the wheels touched down in New York.

Schwartz "pulled it off. He did it lawfully, he did ethically, he did it right," said Katz, a partner with Chadbourne & Parke who has hired Schwartz at least a dozen times in the past decade.

…

(END QUOTE)On 2-17 CNN reported:

(QUOTE)

Aruba mystery: Holloway's parents sue Dutch teen
'Trip to a tropical paradise ... turned to tragedy'

NEW YORK (CNN) -- The parents of missing Alabama teen Natalee Holloway have filed a lawsuit against one of the teenagers who was questioned in the case.

In documents filed with the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Joran van der Sloot, a Dutch national, is accused of "malicious, wanton and willful disregard of the rights, safety and well-being of the plaintiffs and their daughter, Natalee Holloway."
Holloway's parents, Elizabeth Ann Twitty and Dave Edward Holloway, have asked for an unspecified amount of punitive damages from van der Sloot and his father, Paulus van der Sloot, an Aruban judge.

According to court documents, the van der Sloot's were personally served with the lawsuit in New York.

Van der Sloot, 18, was arrested in June in connection with Holloway's disappearance. Her disappearance prompted massive searches around the tiny island, but a body has never been found.

Holloway was last reported seen leaving a bar on the resort island with van der Sloot and two brothers, Deepak and Satish Kalpoe. All three were questioned and released.
Holloway, 18, a resident of the Birmingham, Alabama, suburb of Mountain Brook, was in Ar5ba with a group of classmates celebrating their high school graduation.

The 16-page lawsuit makes its case with a mixture of fact and supposition, using a dramatic opening paragraph:

"This is a case about a high-school graduation trip to a tropical paradise that turned to tragedy. The trip was an opportunity for a group of young people to celebrate the end of one phase of their lives and the beginning of another. But for one young woman on that ill-fated trip, paradise it was not. For that young woman, Natalee Holloway, the trip was a brutal contrast to a life full of promise and hope."

Holloway was last reported seen in a car with van der Sloot and the Kalpoes near an island nightspot.

In a section of the case called "Natalee's Nightmare," the lawsuit alleges that "the next hours of Natalee's young life were marked by torment, terror and debasement," adding that she was kept against her will, sexually assaulted and fondled by van der Sloot and "his accomplices" as she "drifted in and out of consciousness."

During Police questioning, van der Sloot and the Kalpoes gave conflicting testimony of what happened after Holloway was last seen in the car with them. Other than her disappearance, no clear details of what may have happened that night have emerged.
The lawsuit describes van der Sloot as "The Predator," alleging his parents let the boy, then 17 years old, spend his free time drinking, gambling and "trawling for victims."
The suit also says van der Sloot's father, Paulus, created a permissive environment for his son that "knowingly facilitated his own son's predatory ... behavior toward Natalee Holloway."

(END QUOTE)



On 2-17 the DUTCH news-sourced "Expatica" reported:

(QUOTE)

Holloways sue Dutch teen over Natalee's disappearance

AMSTERDAM — The family of US teenager Natalee Holloway have filed a lawsuit against the Dutch teenager who was questioned extensively about her disappearance on Aruba in May.

Documents filed with the Supreme Court of the State of New York accuse Joran van der Sloot, 18, of "malicious, wanton and willful disregard of the rights, safety and well-being" of Natalee Holloway, CNN reported on Friday.

The complaint implicates van der Sloot's father, Paulus, who is a lawyer and trained judge on the autonomous Dutch island of Aruba. He is accused of "knowingly facilitated his own son's predatory ... behavior toward Natalee Holloway".

Joran, his father and his mother, Anita, were all served with a court order on Thursday when they arrived in New York for an interview Joran was scheduled to give to broadcaster ABC.

A private detective hired by Holloway's parents was monitoring their movement and arranged that they be served with the court documents on arrival in the US.

The Holloways have led a high-profile campaign, focused on the van der Sloot's, to discover what happened to their daughter. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.
Investigators indicated in the weeks after her disappearance that Natalee was probably dead. Repeated searches of the Caribbean island failed to find any trace of her.

Joran van der Sloot was arrested along with his friends, Deepak Kalpoe and Satish Kalpoe, on 9 June, ten days after Natalee disappeared while on a holiday on the island with classmates to celebrate graduation.

The three men said initially they gave Natalee a lift home from a nightclub and dropped off Holloway at the "Holiday Inn." Joran then admitted he had spent time alone with Natalee on a beach but he insisted that he did not harm her. He said he left her alone on the beach at her request.

The Kalpoe brothers were released from custody on 14 July, but were re-arrested in late August on suspicion of rape and murder. All three were later released.

Joran is represented by lawyer Antonio Carlo, who is also Paulus van der Sloot's boss on Aruba.

Carlo indicated he was not happy about Joran's trip to America for the ABC interview. "I'm on Aruba, you can draw your own conclusions," he said.

Paulus van der Sloot joined Carlo's lega, firm as a lawyer in January this year.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-17 the “Joran van der Sloot” blog spot reported: Dutch newspaper the DUTCH news-sourced “AD.nl” here is reporting Aruba Police have received a 'semi-credible' anonymous tip to the possible location of a NATALEE grave.


On 2-17 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

ABRAMS: All right. Now on to the Natalee Holloway case where Natalee‘s parents have filed a lawsuit against chief suspect, Joran van der Sloot, and his father. The papers served in a movie-like moment.
The lawyers for Natalee‘s parents learned Joran and his parents were coming to the U.S. from Aruba for a network television interview. They drafted a lawsuit, got a process server on the plane with Joran and staked out the hotel where Joran‘s father was already staying.
While Joran‘s plane was in the air, and he was out of touch with his parents, Paulus van der Sloot was served in his hotel lobby as he was leaving yesterday afternoon.
When Joran‘s plane landed in New York, he had to pass by the undercover process server sitting three rows in front of him in order to get off the plane.
Joran was served and, according to an eyewitness to the event, Joran was also taunted by the team waiting for him at the airport.
Now, the lawsuit alleges that Joran, quote, “willfully caused personal injury to Natalee as a result of his sexual assault upon her; wrongfully, unlawfully and intentionally detained and directly restrained Natalee Holloway, depriving her of her personal liberty through force and/or threat of force. Abducted Natalee Holloway and prevented her from returning to the custody of her parents.”
The suit also claims that “Paulus van der Sloot breached his duty to Natalee by failing to take steps to prevent Joran from sexually assaulting Natalee Holloway.”
So is this lawsuit going to hold up?
Joining me now is the civil rights lawyer, Gloria Allred, who is also the author of “Fight Back and Win: My 30 year fight against injustice and how you can win your own battles.”
Former prosecutor and NBC legal analyst Susan Filan; and New York personal injury attorney, David Worby.
Thanks to all of you for coming on the program, appreciate it.
All right, Susan, let me start with you. I mean, it does seem that this is an odd lawsuit on two fronts.
I mean, first of all, there are a lot of conclusions. It sort of assumes that Joran assaulted Natalee repeatedly. It doesn‘t lay out the facts upon which they are basing that.
And number two, it‘s is a lawsuit filed in New York for something that happened to an Alabaman in Aruba.
SUSAN FILAN, FORMER PROSECUTOR AND NBC LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. Obviously, the first problem will be jurisdiction, a fancy word for does this court in New York have the power to hear this case. It may be better removed to federal court.
But as for what there‘s alleged therein, look, this is a creative approach to trying to deal with what happened to Natalee Holloway.
In a civil case, as you know, Dan, it‘s just a preponderance of the evidence. It has to tip the scale 51 percent to 49 percent. It‘s not a criminal proceeding. It‘s not prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
And the most important thing, Dan, is in a civil suit, you get the powerful tools of discovery, interrogatories, deposition.
You get to put these people under oath, assuming it survives the motions to dismiss, and ask them what happened, and make them answer these questions under oath.
And lastly, Dan, it‘s a circumstantial case.
ABRAMS: All right, but let...
FILAN: Joran‘s given enough of his own statements that we can try to piece together what says he did. And Natalee‘s mom‘s going to tell us there‘s no way Natalee would have every consented to that.
ABRAMS: All right. But that‘s different from saying and I quote, “Natalee was kept against her will, Natalee was sexually assaulted, was fondled and was touched without her consent by Joran and his accomplices, over and over again, as she drifted in and out of consciousness.”
Gloria, are they going to be able to show that?
I mean, look, they‘ve been there. They have been witnesses who have heard, for example, Mrs. van der Sloot talking to Beth Twitty and it seems Joran has conceded there was some sexual activity that went on.
But how are they going to be able to prove that Natalee was held against her will, sexually assaulted repeatedly as she went in and out of consciousness?
FILAN: Well, it will be difficult. But, first of all, the biggest problem is jurisdiction. And that is no small issue, whether or not the court will dismiss this case. Because, of course, the people suing are either from Alabama, that Mrs. Twitty, and Natalee, and the father is from Mississippi, and all of the acts are alleged were done in Aruba, if they occurred.
And, in fact, the defendants are from Aruba or the Netherlands and they‘re suing under Alabama law in New York.
ABRAMS: Yes.
FILAN: This is a real question here of jurisdiction. But proving
that, in fact, there was a sexual assault is not going to be easy. They
are probably going to try to use any statements that were previously made
by any of the defendants or by other witnesses.
ABRAMS: Yes.
And Mr. Worby, let‘s talk about this issue that I know all the lawyers want to talk about. Let‘s keep it simple.
This issue of jurisdiction, you know, people are going to say, “How can they really try to sue in New York when it‘s an Alabaman woman suing over something that happened in Aruba?”
DAVID WORBY, PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY: Well, there‘s no question there are jurisdictional issues. But the law is, if they are served in New York, they are subject to New York jurisdiction.
Now, the defendants can move to, what‘s called Forum Nonconvenience, (ph) which basically is Latin for this is an inconvenient forum to move the case out of New York or have it dismissed.
But the New York courts would, thereafter, have power to potentially move the case down to Alabama.
But jurisdiction, once they‘ve been served in New York, is sustainable. The power over the person solely on the issue that they were served in New York State puts them in our power.
ABRAMS: Right. But that‘s not the end of the inquiry.
Here are the factors that are considered as to whether this lawsuit is going to hold up in a New York court.
“The burden on the New York courts.” I don‘t think that‘s going to be a big issue.
“The potential hardship to the defendants in this case.” That certainly, you know, they‘ll be able to argue it‘s hardship for them to come back to New York.
WORBY: Absolutely.
ABRAMS: “The unavailability for an alternative forum for the suit”.
“The residency of the parties.” Again, that works against hem.
“Where the basis of the cause of action arose.”
I mean, you go through this list, Mr. Worby, and it seems that just about each and everyone of them work against the Holloways.
WORBY: They totally work against the Holloways. But that‘s not the purpose of the lawsuit. Let‘s examine what the purpose is.
These are desperate parents that want to know what happened to their daughter. They found out that these people were going to be in New York. That gives them jurisdiction in the United States of America, not Aruba.
Once there‘s jurisdiction in New York, New York‘s court power attaches.
Is it a convenient forum? No. Will it be moved because of that?
Almost 100 percent likelihood.
Yes, but New York‘s can transfer...
ABRAMS: But if it‘s moved—Wait. But if it‘s moved, wouldn‘t they have to serve them then in Alabama?
WORBY: Once the New York courts have jurisdiction, the defendants can try to remove it because they are from Aruba and the plaintiffs are from Alabama, into a federal court of New York, from which they can move to dismiss it and/or the federal court can transfer it from a New York court to Alabama federal courts. Or it could be transferred potentially from New York State Court.
ABRAMS: Bottom line, Mr. Worby, bottom line, do you think this case is going to hold up in a New York court?
WORBY: It won‘t stay for long. But New York courts aren‘t going to dismiss it, in all likelihood, because of those grounds.
ABRAMS: Yes.
WORBY: And remember, what you mentioned earlier is crucial. Can they prove that there was a false imprisonment? No. However, courts must accept pleadings as true for purposes for considering a motions to dismiss.
All these parents want, they want this kid under oath. They want to find out what happened. And the only way they can do that is for this case to survive a motion to dismiss, which it possibly can do in New York if transferred to another jurisdiction.
ABRAMS: All right. Let me do this. Everyone‘s going to stick around for minute because I want to talk about the father.
I mean, remember, they are not just suing Joran van der Sloot. They‘re suing his father saying he should have been able to prevent something like this from happening.
And guess what? At the same time as this lawsuit is filed, right now, today in a courtroom in Aruba, Joran and his father apparently trying to clear their names.
Not just say, “We should be released or this lawsuit should be released.” They want their names cleared.
We‘re going to get a live report from Aruba on what happened today in court.
And later, a Florida mother says this tape, showing guards at a juvenile detention center, restraining her son proves that those guards killed him.
The medical examiner says it was something else. But we‘ll hear form the family next.
Your e-mails to abramsreport@msnbc.com. Please include your name, where you‘re writing from. I‘ll respond at the end of the show.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ABRAMS: Continuing now with the news in the Natalee Holloway case, it is ironic that while a lawsuit was filed in the United States yesterday, by the Holloway family, against suspect Joran van der Sloot and his father, today in Aruba, Joran‘s attorney and the prosecutor met with the judge in a closed door hearing, apparently an effort by the van der Sloot's to clear the teen as a suspect.
Joining me by phone is editor in chief of “Aruba Today” newspaper, Renfro.
Julie, thank you or coming on the program.
So what happened today in court?
(BEGIN AUDIO FEED)
JULIA RENFRO, EDITOR IN CHIEF, “ARUBA TODAY”: This afternoon, Antonio Carlo, the lawyer of Joran van der Sloot went before the judge to release his client, Joran, from suspicion in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway.
Of course, opposing this procedure was the prosecutor, Karin Janssen, who feels that they are still on a solid road to bringing Joran van der Sloot, the main suspect to trial.
ABRAMS: Did the judge rule?
RENFRO: No, he didn‘t. He said it will be two weeks and he will give his ruling.
The consensus here on the island is that he will not be released from suspicion. And even if he is, it wouldn‘t make a difference. Because if, as the prosecution says, they are on a road to finding some potential evidence.
If they do find evidence, he will be re-arrested or at least re-included as a suspect in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway.
ABRAMS: What are the arguments they were make? I assume that van der Sloot‘s lawyers were arguing that there is absolutely nothing to implicate him?
I mean, it is clear that he gave inconsistent statements to the authorities, right?
RENFRO: Right. And there is actually no physical evidence linking Joran to her disappearance. Anything more than him being the last one known to be with her.
ABRAMS: And his statements?
RENFRO: And his original statement, which he obviously changed after he had been arrested.
ABRAMS: Yes. I mean, he apparently gave, at least, I think, three different accounts of what happened of exactly...
RENFRO: Yes. Two different accounts and the third, a slight change on how he actually got from the beach to his home.
ABRAMS: Yes.
RENFRO: But, it was consistent that, you know, originally he said he dropped her off at the "Holiday Inn." After he was arrested, he changed that to he was alone with her on the beach and left her there. And then it was a matter of did he get a ride home or did he walk home.
ABRAMS: All right. So we will look out for that ruling.
Thanks a lot, Julia Renfro. I appreciate it.
(END AUDIO FEED)
All right. Back with me is our panel.
Let me read from this lawsuit, again, that‘s been filed. And, again, it‘s not just Joran they‘re going after. They‘re going after papa.
And remember that Paulus, the father was arrested as well and eventually released.
“Paulus van der Sloot knew Joran van der Sloot had a long history of sexual assaults on young women, engaged in underage drinking and gambling and that he would leave his house late at night. He created a permissive environment, in which Joran‘s criminal proclivities were permitted to fester and be acted upon, unchecked.”
Gloria, is that a cause for a lawsuit?
GLORIA ALLRED, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Well, they‘re alleging that under Alabama law, Dan, that it is.
In other words, what they are saying is that it was reasonably foreseeable, given what the father allegedly knew about his son, that the acts they allege the son did to Natalee would occur.
They are alleging that the father knew that the son had engaged in sexual assaults in the past. And, of course, they are going to have to prove that, in fact, there were sexual assaults in the past, and that the father knew. And that, therefore, he should have prevented him from perhaps being with Natalee, and they are, of course, making a leap and saying that he then sexually assaulted her.
So they have a lot to prove here but it is a cause of action that they have alleged.
ABRAMS: Susan, how much of a legal long shot is this case?
FILAN: Well, you know what this is? This is actually pretty creative lawyering. This is pretty courageous lawyering.
Sometimes lawyers don‘t think outside the box. And they think, “Oh, gee, I can‘t win, I won‘t bring it.”
Here, they‘re going that extra step and they‘re saying, “We really don‘t know what happened but we think we know, and we can prove it by a preponderance of the evidence. And, darn it, we‘re going to bring this lawsuit and we‘re going to find out.” So I think that...
ALLRED: Well, wait a second. I don‘t know how creative it is. Obviously, the reason you go after the father is because he‘s the one that has deep pockets. The son is not going to have any money should they find that, in fact, the son did what is alleged. The only way to get really get any money out of this is to go after the father and to try to prove that the father is in some way legally liable.
FILAN: Well, what is created about it, Gloria—and hi, Gloria, good to see you again.
ALLRED: Hi. You too.
FILAN: ... is that most lawyers that most lawyers would say, “Oh, this could never survive a motion to dismiss. There‘s juridictional issues. It‘s going to fail to thrive. It‘s going to be tossed out of court.” And they‘re going for it anyway.
I don‘t think it‘s just a question of the deep pockets. What they‘re basically saying is, look the van der Sloot‘s created the equivalent of a vicious attack dog and set that attack dog into motion, lo and behold, it attacked. And so they should be responsible for it.
Not only did they know he was an attack dog, they created him to be an attack dog. And I think that‘s not a bad cause of action to allege. They can‘t bring it in bad faith. They have to have some basis in fact. They have to have some belief that they can prove it. Otherwise it‘s completely unethical.
ABRAMS: David Worby, let me switch gears a little bit. And that is, when he was served, when Joran van der Sloot was served, there are allegations that he was taunted. There are allegations of efforts at a possible physical confrontation. It didn‘t apparently happen.
Is it possible that Joran van der Sloot could end up suing back?
WORBY: Well, in this country anyone can sue anyone. I can turn around and sue you tomorrow for—well, it was a great show so I couldn‘t do that but—no, anyone can sue anyone in this country.
Unless there‘s been an physical altercation to provoke an assault and battery claim, there wouldn‘t be a claim.
You know, the service in likelihood was valid. The case against the father, in the United States of America, 95 percent of our states do not permit that type of case, unless a parent have entrusted a child with a dangerous instrumentality, such as a gun or something like that. There usually is not a cause of action against the parent. The cause of action is against the kid.
If it survives, they get the kid in court, he‘s lied before. They can show the person that‘s lied once, lies more than once. They survive a motion. Maybe they have a chance.
ABRAMS: All right, we shall see.
Gloria Allred, Susan Filan, and David Worby, thanks a lot.
ALLRED: Thank you, Dan.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-17 CNNHN reported:

(QUOTE)

NANCY GRACE, HOST: … Plus: Finally, courtroom action the Natalee Holloway case.

…

GRACE: Another so-called cold case still hot on the camera, a new development in the Natalee Holloway case -- Eric?

ERIC MARRAPODI, NANCY GRACE PRODUCER: Nancy, we brought you this story late last night. A lawsuit has been filed in the state Supreme Court of New York. It is a civil suit brought by Natalee Holloway`s parents again Joran van der Sloot and his father, Paulus van der Sloot.

Here`s how it went down. ABC had set up an exclusive interview with Joran and his parents to be filmed here in New York. Joran flew in from Amsterdam. Now, attorneys for Beth Holloway Twitty and Dave Holloway had an investigator on that flight coming from Amsterdam to New York City with Joran.

As they landed...

GRACE: What is he doing in New York? Isn`t he supposed to be studying and keeping a low profile? What, is he going to see Broadway plays, seeing the Empire State Building?

MARRAPODI: Well, that`s a question we posed to the producers.

GRACE: They couldn`t get out and help find Natalee the day after she goes missing, but they can come to New York and sightsee?

MARRAPODI: You know, this is the second interview with the van der Sloot parents in recent months. You know, right after the Super Bowl, the van der Sloots appeared on ABC`s program "Good Morning America" to talk about...

GRACE: Themselves.

MARRAPODI: ... themselves and their support for Joran van der Sloot. Now, interestingly enough, we spoke with Joran`s attorneys, who are in Aruba today. They did not travel with Joran to this interview here in New York.

Now, when the van der Sloots arrived at their hotel, the Lucerne on the Upper West Side of Manhattan here, they were served...

GRACE: That`s some digs.

MARRAPODI: A nice hotel. They were served with papers from investigators. The whole thing has been videotaped. A private investigator here in New York, Bo Dietl, has said he has the video and will be providing it to the media on Tuesday. So we`ll be keeping a close, close eye on this one to see what actually happened.

GRACE: Well, what`s the content of the papers? What`s the lawsuit all about?

MARRAPODI: Well, the lawsuit...

GRACE: Well, for one thing -- hold on. Let me just break you off right there. For one thing, a lawsuit means discovery, depositions, cross- examining these parties, including the father and the son.

MARRAPODI: That`s right. You know, this lawsuit is a civil lawsuit. And it breaks down into a number of charges, three against Joran, a few against his father, as well, one of which is false imprisonment.

Obviously, with the whereabouts of Natalee Holloway still unknown 263 days later, not much can be brought. This is not a wrongful death civil suit; this is a civil suit seeking punitive damages, among other things.

GRACE: You know, Renee Rockwell, many, many times when a case goes dead then you get a civil lawsuit, you get somebody under deposition oath, start asking questions, and it all comes unraveled.

ROCKWELL: Nancy, I`ve got a copy of the lawsuit. Gotcha! He goes to New York. I don`t know who his lawyer is, but they didn`t need to let him go get served with a lawsuit. And, Nancy, they talk about him in the lawsuit as the predator. I love it.

GRACE: OK.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-17 the “National Enquirer” reported:

(QUOTE)

JORAN QUITS SCHOOL AFTER DEATH THREATS

The prime suspect in the Natalee Holloway mystery got a terrifying scare when he received an explosive e-mail that said he would be killed if he went to school. The message to Joran van der Sloot, 18, read: "Don't go to school on Monday — turn yourself in to police or we will kill you. Me and my associates are booking reservations to Holland and are going to come and kill you."

Though Dutch-born Joran has received death threats several times before, this one was sent to a private e-mail address that only a few of his closest friends know about.

It spooked the teen so much that he quit his school in Arnhem. A source told The National Enquirer: "Joran was really frightened — and his family took it so seriously they told him not to go to school."

For more on Joran, pick up this week's issue of The National Enquirer.

(END QUOTE)



2-18-06

On 2-18 the “Joran van der Sloot” blog spot reported that the ANITA VAN DER SLOOT and former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT went back to ARUBA. (presumably Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT went back to ARNHEM, HOLLAND.
Here is a partial transcript of the DUTCH TV “NOVA” program that was recorded 2-16 and 2-17 and played on “NOVA” on 2-18.…In the following transcript the reporter is “R,” Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT (“J“), Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT (“P“), and ANITA VAN DER SLOOT (“A“) while they were staying in their “Lucerne Hotel” room in NEW YORK CITY:

(QUOTE)

J: I've never had a fair chance, I hope I will now get a fair chance.

(Correspondent gives the charges in the civil suit then goes on to introduce the viewers to a summary of the facts of the case)

R: ABC-New York apparently requested an interview with Joran. Guilt ridden and convinced of his own innocence Joran takes a risky decision. Last Thursday he travels to New York, right into the lion's den.

A: Hi again. (on the phone)

R: From Aruba, Joran's parents came to New York as well. Paul and Anita van der Sloot.

A: (on phone) Let's see how this develops. If there's a lot of press people in front of the ...entrance that'll change a lot of things. Maybe just of... like one occasion and then… Yeah, okay, thanks bye.

R: They don't agree with Joran's decision to travel to New York, but still they're here to support him. I meet them in the hotel room. Literally they have just received bad news.

P: We first went for a walk in Central Park and on returning to the hotel we were overwhelmed by two people who forced something in my hands. Later this turned out to be a subpoena. A subpoena in New York state.

R: You have it here ? The subpoena ?

P: Yes. I'll get it. The parents of the girl.

R: The Holloway family ?

P: Yes, the mother and the father, they have served a subpoena on Joran and me, to appear in front of an American judge.

R: Joran hasn't arrived yet, can he expect the same welcome ?

P: I don't know, but I'd guess so.
P: (on phone) Joran, this is daddy. Could you give me a call before you leave the airport ?

A: Did you talk to Joran ?

P: No, it was on voicemail.

A: I'm going to the airport, what if he still wants to continue ?

P: He's got to make his own decision, but at least we did point out the risks.

A: Yes. (Kisses Paul) oh and I'll take this and I'll try to call Joran (leaves the hotel room)

A: (on phone) If it's possible to reach him here.... Hi Joran this is mommy. Don't leave the airport under any condition, stay where you are at the luggage claim, they'll try to bring you a cellular, so you can give us a call.

What we want him to do is return to Holland. We're really afraid that strange things are going to happen and I don't know how far this family will go and.. of course we're Dutch citizens and, and I want to speak with Joran first, see what he wants to do, if he wants to proceed with this. This is exactly what happened, what our lawyer in Aruba umm he has I think foreseen this and that's the reason he didn't want to travel with us, because he didn't want to be responsible and we thought ..oh well, no big deal, it will not happen, but what is happening now is that somebody here must have informed the family that we're here.

R: On arrival at the airport, Joran has cleared customs already. Here some employees of the law firm representing the Holloway family are waiting. They are aggressive and force a subpoena in his hand. We meet with Joran in a New York hotel room.

J: The minute we arrived at the airport, we were taken in by customs and were held for 3 hours, and interrogated by customs. In the airplane itself, some paperwork was forced upon us already, papers showing they wanted to start a court case against us, here in New York. When they finally allowed us to leave the airport, the people who were there to pick us up, were attacked by people who were trying to force the same papers upon us. The person who came to pick us up, was thrown down a couple of times. I was pulled by my coat, papers stuffed in my coat and it wasn't fun.

R: You haven't uttered one word on camera or television and the circus, as I witnessed this afternoon, has started already. Do you think you will get a fair chance in this country to tell your side of the story?

J: I think I never got a fair chance, I hope to get it now.

R: Fox news has found out about Joran's arrival in New York.

(FOX News GRETA VAN SUSTEREN is seen on TV reporting about Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT ’s arrival in NEW YORK CITY)

R: What's the biggest misunderstanding about Joran van der Sloot in the States ?

J: In the States I'm being called a murderer and a rapist, and I never aggressively touched a girl in my life, everybody knows that. For me the most important thing is that my family and friends and loved ones know that, and they do.So... what anybody else thinks, to be honest, doesn't matter so much.

R: Back to Sunday night, May 29, 2005... An Aruban beach. What happened in the night of the disappearance of Natalee Holloway?

J: Yeah I eh.. I went out with her and we ended up on the beach at the "Holiday Inn," I left her there, and that is the only mistake I made, and it is the only thing I wanted to redo.

R: That you wouldn't have left her ?

J: That I hadn't left her there, or would have taken her to somebody... yeah.

R: The second most often asked question probably is: Why did you lie during Police interrogation ?

J: Well eh I eh and my friends have decided to do this when we heard that the girls family was at our home. It shocked us. I mean, I left the girl there and you never know what could have happened to her, we were scared, we thought she could show up in a couple of days or WOULD show up we were eh ah eh we were scared and we thought it would all end well.

R: Did you ever realize that this statement would haunt you the longest ? And that the Holloway family would say: 'See he's lying.. and he adjusts his statement'?

J: In hindsight it was stupid and yes one would like to take it back that I lied to the Police because it isn't good to lie to the Police, but at that moment it felt like.... I'm not a person to leave a girl behind on the beach and I didn't want anybody to find that out. So yeah that's the reason why I lied.

R: It's getting late and Joran prefers to continue the next morning. A publicity storm has started from Fox.

(FOX News GRETA VAN SUSTEREN is seen on a TV interviewing HOLLOWAY family attorney JOHN Q. KELLY)

R: Friday morning 7 a.m. We talk with Joran and his father about what happened the last 24 hrs. Why did you come to New York ? Why did you walk into the lion's den?

J: I couldn't have expected that this would happen, but if I had been guilty I wouldn't have come here. Im not afraid of it, I didn't do anything evil, I didn't do anything wrong.

R: Was it a smart idea coming over to New York.

P: Well, it's a choice that was made and we'll have to live with the consequences.

R: What's your estimate? What can you do?

P: Seems, I think, that the stated facts can be refuted rather easily.

(FOX News GRETA VAN SUSTEREN is seen on a TV interviewing HOLLOWAY family attorney JOHN Q. KELLY)

R: If you were asked to describe Natalee Holloway, what kind of a girl is she?

J: Well eh.. I haven't known her for very long. I met her the same day, she asked me to go out with her , and I did, when I arrived she had been drinking, she was a little drunk, but she wasn't someone that I would like to have a relation with, she wasn't really nice or supersweet, let me put it that way.

R: Why did you decide to take her along?

J: She herself asked to come, she voluntarily went with us and eh we visited the places she wanted, we did what she wanted.

R: Did she come on too strong?

J: Yes towards me and my friends she did. When we stopped on the corner, she opened the car window and shouted at her friends and her friends told her to get out, and we stopped so she could get out, but she didn't want to, she wanted to go with me, Deepak and Satish. And she went with us and she wanted to be left on the beach. She wanted me to stay with her, but I had to go to school the next day and I told her I had to go and eventually I called one of my friends and he picked me up and I went home.

R: Who picked you up?

J: Deepak's brother Satish.

R: After all the media violence, the van der Sloot family is putting up a fight.

P: An image has been created, not just by the media, but by more official spokesmen as well, it doesn't feel good if you just let it happen. So eh eh we don't have anything to hide so ... we would like to tell our story to the US, also because Aruba is very much US-oriented.

R: Do you feel guilt towards your father?

J: Um Yeah of course, I feel very guilty towards my father. I never should have lied to him either... that was one of my big... biggest mistakes... he had to suffer a lot because of that.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-18 the DUTCH news-sourced “AD.nl” reported (translated by an Internet translation website) (another more grammatically flowing translation follows this first literal translation):

(QUOTE)

New witness knows sepulchre Natalee

ORANJESTAD - the man cried to the telephone and told that he could not live further with what he knew.

Five new witnesses have communicated themselves in the matter of the disappeared Natalee Holloway on Aruba. The Police force research aims especially at the anonymous deposition of a man who has said that he weet that Natalee Holloway are buried and also approximately where.

research LEADER and temporary korpschef rolled Dompig has confirmed that. , we do not doubt to the truth quality of the deposition, because for our clear it is that he has rung from conscience remorse.

The man, whom from the uitenland rang but in papiamento spoke, cried to the tel. and told that he could not live further with what he knew.

Another witness has given a statement concerning three suspected which has been considered as lasts with Natalee Holloway in the night of its disappearance. It concerns Joran of of the Ditch and Surinamese brothers of Kalpoe.

For korpschef Dompig is certain that Holloway are during the trip with three ezweken and afterwards have been buried. He goes of that three suspected thereby aid have had of others.

As a result of the depositions the Police force starts within two weeks with bloedhonden from the Netherlands and earlier not yet used ground radar equipment a search operation in the area where Holloway for last have been seen.

The Police force expects at the sepulchre of Holloway also the disappeared gymschoenen to find which Joran of of the Ditch carried the evening of the disappearance of Holloway. He has explained during politieverhoren which are night have gympen on the range to have left behind and foot to house have run.

Joran are now in the United States. There he got an intimation, with a charge which the parents of Natalee against him and its father have submitted. The parents require an unknown amount to smartengeld in a civil law procedure for a court in New York. Joran and are parents are in New York on invitation of TV-zender the ABC, which gave the chance him its tale to do.

In the charge the Dutch teenager is typified as ‘het roofdier’. According to the parents certain three young women on Aruba will have complained that they were the victim of verkrachting by of the Sloot and medeplichtigen. The father is accused of actively the hand to have had in ‘gewelddadige and the asocial levensstijl’ of its son.

'They was Already Dank'

Joran keep full that he did not know Natalee or hardly. Then I with her went out, was them already drank. She was rather insistent against me and wild moreover itself that I with her on the range remained. That I have not done. I have rung a friend and those me, thus Joran have picked up of the ditch in an interview with NOVA. Natalee only lagged behind according to him on the range.

The lawyer of Joran, Antonio Carlo, confirmed that to Friday morning its customer and his parents in New York are. Joran came to that Thursday for an interview which he is give ABC of plan to the American sender. To be parents arrived Wednesday in New York to support their son.

According to the lawyer not only Joran and Paul have been summoned, but also mother Anita. Carlo have further understood that the matter keeps turning for dead debt.

According to the lawyer the parents of Holloway have summoned the family of the Sloot in civielrechterlijke a matter. "they consider it as an unlawful action", thus Carlo. "that implies that only damages can be claimed, no cell sentence."

Carlo are not glad with the travel of Joran to America and the interview which he wants give to ABC. "I am on Aruba, you can draw your conclusions", thus the lawyer. Except lawyer of Joran Carlo also the boss of father Paul is. Of the Sloot senior person became employed in January last as a lawyer at the office of Carlo.

(END QUOTE)




((the same article with a more grammatically flowing translation))

(QUOTE)

One Claims Knowledge of Where Natalee is Buried

ORANJESTAD - The man cried on the telephone and said that he could not live further with what he knew.

Five new witnesses have come forward in the matter of the disappearance Natalee Holloway on Aruba. The Police investigation aims especially at the anonymous call from a man who has said that he knew that Natalee Holloway was buried and also approximately where.

chief Dompig has confirmed that. “We do not doubt the truth of this call, because it was clear that he was upset from a guilty conscience.” The man, who called from a foreign country but spoke in papiamento, cried to the telephone and told that he could not live further with what he knew.

Another witness has given a statement concerning three suspects which have been considered as the last with Natalee Holloway in the night of her disappearance. It concerns Joran van der Sloot and the Kalpoe brothers.

chief Dompig is certain that Holloway died during the trip with these three and afterwards was buried. He believes they were aided by others.

As a result of the depositions the Police force starts within two weeks with bloodhounds from the Netherlands and earlier not yet used ground radar equipment a search operation in the area where Holloway was last seen. The Police force expects at the grave of Holloway to also find the tennis shoes of Joran. He has explained during interrogation that he left his shoes behind and walked home.
…

(END QUOTE)



On 2-18 JULIA RENFRO (the transplanted AMERICAN who has lived in ARUBA for 17+ years and has several business interests there, including an ARUBAAN's news-source) claimed to FOX News that there should be a decision by the DUTCH judge about clearing Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT as a suspect within about 2 weeks (circa March 4). RENFRO claimed this suspect clearance procedure is the same procedure that the Former Murder Suspect PAULUS VAN DER SLOOT went thru. If NATALEE’s body is found, RENFRO claims that even if he is cleared as a suspect now, Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT could be brought back from HOLLAND to ARUBA and re-arrested. RENFRO also claims the ARUBAAN's seem very surprised at the civil suit filed by NATALEE‘s parents against the Murder Suspects SLOOT‘s. RENFRO claims she found out that LARRY GARRISON, the co-author of DAVE HOLLOWAY's book, is the person who arranged for Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT to come to NEW YORK CITY.

On 2-18 FOX News reported that 3 teams have been closely surveiling the Murder Suspects SLOOT’s movements in HOLLAND and ARUBA.


2-19-06

On 2-19 the DUTCH news-sourced “AD.nl” reported ( translated by an Internet translation website…. another more grammatically flowing translation will follow this first literal translation, when provided):

(QUOTE)

Claim Worth Millions Threatens for Joran
ORANJESTAD/New York - the Dutch student Joran of the ditch must pay possibly millions dollars damages to the parents of Natalee Holloway.

The 18 person whose birthday it is Joran of the Sloot hangs a claim worth millions above the head. The parents of disappeared American little girl Natalee Holloway him in the United States have summoned for a civil procedure. With that they follow the scenario ‘O.J. Simpson’.

Sportsman and actor O.J. Simpson were suffered some years cleared of the assassination on its woman, but later in a civil law procedure still condemned to million compensation. At a civil law procedure in the United States the onus of proof much lies lower. ‘Meer then 50 per cent waarschijnlijk’ is sufficient for ‘schuldig’.

The Dutch student became for a long time suspected of the assassination on the little girl, who disappeared in May previous year without a trace on Aruba and still vermist are. But he is for a long time on free feet. On Aruba he has not been accused for the assassination on Natalee Holloway.

The lawyer of Joran of the Sloot, Antonio Carlo, had still this way warned its customer: do not go to America, because then you can be summoned. Of the Sloot ignored that recommendation, because he wants in the US an interview give. , I had dissuaded Joran at strongest to the United States go, ’’ Carlo say. , but Joran are of age, therefore he ascertains eventually himself whether he goes to this end to or not. He will have its reasons, however, has. Its father was proponent also no of this travel and giving an interview, but he has gone to New York for its son as much as possible at ondersteunen.’’

The matter serves mid-March for a court in New York. How large the detriment-claim will be unclear, but supposedly it concerns an amount worth millions.
…
(END QUOTE)



2-20-06

On 2-20 MSNBC “Dan Abrams”: ABRAMS: We're back. During a brief visit to New York last week, Aruban suspect Joran van der Sloot and his father Paulus were served with legal papers, notifying them of a suit filed by the family of Natalee Holloway in New York's Supreme Court. Now you can understand that Natalee's family says that they believe Joran did it and they want accountability.

But the question, as a legal matter, can a suit like this which really didn't seem to have a whole lot of facts, survive in a New York court. Joining us now Scott Balber, one of the Holloway family attorneys who wrote the complaint filed against Joran and Paulus van der Sloot.
Thanks a lot for coming on the program. Appreciate it.
SCOTT BALBER, ATTORNEY FOR NATALEE HOLLOWAY'S FAMILY: Thanks for having me.
ABRAMS: All right. Let me read some of the charges that you lay out against Joran van der Sloot that he willfully caused personal injury to Natalee as a result of a sexual assault upon her. Wrongfully and lawfully and intentionally detained and directly restrained Natalee Holloway, depriving her of her personal liberty through force and/or threat of force. Abducted Natalee Holloway and prevented her from returning to the custody of her parents.
This is all from the civil lawsuit. My concern was that I read this, you don't explain upon what you're basing this. A lot of conclusions. This was done to Natalee. That was done to Natalee. Joran did this to Natalee, et cetera, but you don't say where you're getting this from.
BALBER: It's not our obligation in this threshold complaint to articulate what our sources are, but I can assure you that Chadbourne and Parke, a serious law firm, John Kelly is a serious lawyer, and we don't put anything into a complaint that we are not abundantly certain we can prove, and in fact in many instances already have the evidence developed.
ABRAMS: But then—but what's the point of the legal papers then? I mean shouldn't the legal papers at least provide some of the support, because I mean, it seems if this is the case, then you can really just throw out a lawsuit there and say, well, I believe that this person did this to that person and this person did that to that, and then at a later point that, what then the judge has to sort through it and say all right now come to me and explain to me why you believe any of this is true?
BALBER: Well a complaint, as you know Dan, is a notice pleading and actually this complaint has far more detail than many. We will during the course of discovery and motion practice in this case be able to lay out our cards on the table one by one in the manner we deem appropriate without necessarily giving our adversaries too much of an understanding of where our basis lies at this point.
ABRAMS: But it's pretty clear, right—I mean we know this case pretty well. It's coming from statements that were made by Joran van der Sloot. It's coming from other people who claim that they've been mistreated by Joran van der Sloot in the past, et cetera. It's coming from eyewitnesses. I mean that's where the information stems from, right?
BALBER: Among other sources, that's right.
ABRAMS: Let me ask you about where you filed the lawsuit, all right? I mean this is an Alabama girl, Alabama family, and for an incident that occurred in Aruba, with defendants that live in Aruba. And you're filing it in New York, and there's no question, look, you slapped the papers on him, as a result he has got the papers in hand and now he's going to have to respond in a New York court.
Fair enough. We know he's going to have to respond in a New York court now, but when you lay out the factors to consider why a New York court should consider a case about an Alabama girl about something that happened in Aruba, seems like a real long shot for you.
BALBER: Well it's actually not a long shot at all. Let's start with one of the comments you made. Once we served the defendants in New York, we have unassailable personal jurisdiction over them. There's no question...
ABRAMS: But that doesn't mean anything. Right. So that means that they have to show up in court and they have to respond. OK.
BALBER: That's correct...
ABRAMS: ... and then the judge is going to do an evaluation to say does this belong in a New York court and when you weigh the factors in New York State, just about every lawyer I've spoken to has said at the very least, you guys have an uphill battle.
BALBER: We certainly have a battle. I wouldn't describe it as an uphill battle. There are—there's several factors that the courts consider and the number one...
ABRAMS: We're going to put them up. As you're speaking, we're going to put up the five factors to consider in New York. Go ahead.
BALBER: I don't have a video, so I can't...
ABRAMS: No, that's all right...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: You know them, so no need...
BALBER: I do know them...
ABRAMS: ... what they are.
BALBER: But the first premise is that tremendous deference is given to the plaintiff's choice of forum and the plaintiff's choice of forum here is New York. Beyond that, there's a whole host of private interest and public interest factors. Now, while you're right, that the events took place in Aruba, there are witnesses in Alabama, Natalee is from Alabama, one of my plaintiffs, Beth Twitty is from Alabama...
ABRAMS: Right.
BALBER: ... Dave Holloway is from Mississippi, Joran van der Sloot lives in the Netherlands, and quite frankly, we have witnesses from other jurisdictions...
ABRAMS: How does that bring New York into play?
BALBER: Well New York is the choice of forum, elected by the plaintiffs and the defendants were served here and there is no superior choice of forum. Every forum, take your pick, be it Aruba, Alabama, Mississippi, the Netherlands isn't perfect and when you have a whole host of imperfect jurisdictions, deference is given to the choice by the plaintiffs and that's our case here.
ABRAMS: Yes, that—again, that's—I mean here are some of the factors the court has to consider.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: The burden on the New York courts, I don't know if that will be a big issue. Potential hardship to the defendant, that would be a big issue in either Alabama or New York.
BALBER: Well let me stop you right there.
ABRAMS: Yes.
BALBER: Obviously, it's not a hardship because both Joran van der Sloot and Paulus van der Sloot were able to make their way to New York just last week...
(CROSSTALK)
BALBER: ... without...
ABRAMS: (INAUDIBLE) You don't just say...
BALBER: Well...
ABRAMS: ... oh they were able to get here once and therefore there's no issue of potential hardship to the defendant in getting back to the place.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: I mean that's not where the inquiry ends.
BALBER: It's certainly a part of the inquiry and of course you consider the hardship to the plaintiffs of having to litigate either in Aruba or in the Netherlands.
ABRAMS: The unavailability of alternative forum for the lawsuit, that's one of the issues that you've been focusing on. The residency of the parties, on that one you have big problems, where the basis of the cause of action arose. Again, not a good one for you guys.
BALBER: Well you skipped one I think abruptly and that is the residence of the parties. Why is Alabama or Mississippi or Aruba or the Netherlands superior?
(CROSSTALK)
BALBER: As I said, there's problems in all of those different forums.
ABRAMS: Wait. But the residency of the parties—one of the things you're suppose to consider is are they from New York.
BALBER: Correct.
ABRAMS: They're not.
BALBER: That's correct. They're not from New York.
ABRAMS: OK. Anyway, look, it's an interesting case and I understand why it's being done, but again, I just think it's important for the viewers to understand that as a strictly legal matter, this could be an uphill battle for the family. Mr. Balber, I know you don't like that characterization of uphill battle. You refer to it as battle, but I appreciate you coming on the program. I have to say when I saw that your firm had signed off on it, it definitely added to the validity for me of considering the case.
BALBER: Well we like the tough battles, uphill or otherwise.
ABRAMS: Scott Balber, thanks a lot for coming on the program.
BALBER: Thanks for having me.

On 2-20 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANITA VAN DER SLOOT , JORAN'S MOTHER: We want him to do is return to Holland because we're really—we're really afraid that strange things are going to happen, and I don't know how far this family will go.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: And LIVE AND DIRECT tonight is Holloway family attorney John Q. Kelly. John, how surprised, from your guys on the ground, were Joran and his parents when they were slapped with these lawsuits separately?
JOHN Q. KELLY, HOLLOWAY FAMILY ATTORNEY: Total surprise on both their parts, as I understand it, Rita.
COSBY: Any reaction? Did they say anything? Did they do anything?
What was sort of the feel?
KELLY: No. In fact, it was—both services were memorialized. We have videotape of Paulus van der Sloot being served in the lobby of the hotel, and he's just sort of stunned silent, staring at the papers. And Joran, same thing. We have a picture of him holding the papers, just standing there, staring at them at the aisle of a Delta flight on the runway at JFK.
COSBY: And in fact, we're going to have those pictures tomorrow, John. You know, from what you've heard, did they go over and did they—did the guy tap him on the shoulder? How did they actually approach Joran on the plane?
KELLY: They—no, the—we had our Investigator three rows in front of him, just standing there, waiting for him. Joran was going to be the last one off, to be escorted out by Customs, and we had our man in front of him, blocking his way, where he had nowhere to go, nowhere to hide. And he got served right in the aisle there.
COSBY: And did he say anything at the time, or what did he say and do?
KELLY: It's my understanding that when he was served the papers, he said, Thank you.
COSBY: And that was it?
KELLY: Yes.
COSBY: How long had this been in the works for, John? Because it's quite impressive to be able—you got parents coming from Aruba. You got him coming from Holland—to coordinate this. How long did you have it in the works, though?
KELLY: Everything just happened very quickly, starting early on Wednesday morning, the 15th. We got word that the van der Sloot's might be heading to New York. We then—I then talked to Dave and Beth and got authorization to draw up the complaint for filing. We then confirmed that Paulus had left Aruba, was heading for New York. So we had a surveillance team waiting to pick him up and sit on him at the lobby at the hotel. We then confirmed Joran was leaving from Amsterdam, so we had an agent going from London's Heathrow airport over to Amsterdam, get on the flight in front of him to serve him and served the complaint Thursday mid-morning, e-mailed the index number to both the plane and the surveillance team, and caught Paulus in the lobby at about 1:00 o'clock. And he couldn't communicate with Joran. And then we caught Joran when the plane landed at JFK.
COSBY: You know, let me play another little clip, John...
KELLY: Yes.
COSBY: ... if we could, from the interview. This is with Dutch TV, actually speaking with Anita van der Sloot, Joran's mom.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANITA VAN DER SLOOT : We thought, Oh, no big deal, it will not happen. But what is happening now is that somebody here must have informed the family that we're here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: John, I don't know how much you can tell me, but where did the tip-off come from to sort of get the tip because they're coming on these different flights?
KELLY: You know better than that, Rita.
(LAUGHTER)
KELLY: It turned out to be very accurate information, though, obviously. But just like you, we don't reveal our sources.
COSBY: And did you say (INAUDIBLE) I may be catching a red herring, I'm not sure if it's all going to work out?
KELLY: I'm sorry?
COSBY: Did you say, Maybe this is like a leap of faith, it may not work out?
KELLY: Oh, well, you know, there are about 12 critical steps involved there, where anything could have gone wrong either in the—you know, the filing of the complaint and not serving Joran, not serving the father, one being able to contact the other. You know, my ultimate, once I told the ultimate step and filed the complaint, that I'd have a complaint filed in New York state supreme court and no service made, and I'd be sitting there with egg on my face, looking like a jackass, if you will.
COSBY: Instead, you're looking like a magician now in terms of juggling all this. You know...
KELLY: Well, it worked.
COSBY: ... we talked to someone close to the van der Sloot's, and let me put a little quote—this is about the family. They said, “The family is very disappointed what happened last Thursday. They feel this was a public relations stunt orchestrated by John Q. Kelly and Beth Holloway and the lawsuit has no merits.” Was this just for publicity, John?
KELLY: No. Absolutely not. We feel very comfortable with the cause of actions. We certainly had jurisdiction over them. And they were the ones that thought they could flaunt this system, thumb their noses at us and come into our, you know, home court, into New York, and put their spin on things, and we certainly weren't going to let that happen.
COSBY: So John, what happens now? How long until they respond?
KELLY: They have, technically, 20 days to respond because they were served in person. It's up to them what, affirmatively, they're going to do now.
COSBY: And do you think they'll respond? And what happens if they don't?
KELLY: You know, if they don't, it'll be a default judgment. Just one thing, Rita. It's kind of ironic that they're talking about it's a publicity stunt, and they were the ones coming into New York to do their series of interviews and do their PR stints here. That was their sole purpose of coming here, as I understand it, to do interviews and air what they had to say. So it hardly was a publicity stunt. They were the ones seeking the publicity, and they're the ones that'll pay the price for it.
COSBY: When you talk about default, what can happen legally? Because the big question is how much jurisdiction? Can we enforce this? If they say, Look, we're not going to respond, we're not going to do anything, then what happens? What can U.S. authorities legally do if they go forward?
KELLY: Well, if they don't respond, then we can move for a default judgment. Then you go to an inquest for damages, of which they wouldn't participate in. A judgment could be entered after the default and the inquest, and we can execute on that back in Aruba against them.
COSBY: So you're saying that somebody actually could go down there, can say, Look, we're going to collect, if it actually wins in the case?
KELLY: Absolutely.
COSBY: And what are you looking at? How much could they potentially get?
KELLY: Doesn't matter. You know, we're looking for answers, we're not looking for money. We're not looking for assets. We're looking for a resolution. We're looking for Natalee. That's what we're looking for.
COSBY: Could this be a long road, though, John? You're dealing with also U.S. courts. You're dealing with Aruba.
KELLY: Sure. You know, litigation is a marathon, it's not a sprint. This was just the first small step. We were able to serve them. We were able to commence the action. And I've got no, you know, reservations or, you know, other thoughts, other than it's going to be a very tough row to hoe, and we've got a long way to go.
COSBY: I also understand you have an update on the sand dune search, which we all of a sudden didn't hear anything about. Where does this stand?
KELLY: Well, it's my understanding—I talked to Karin Janssen actually several times in the last couple days, and she just got back from Holland, and it's my understanding they're going back in the sand dunes with the Dutch dogs now. They're not going to use the F.B.I. dogs. And they're going to use the ground sonar provided by the Netherlands Forensic Institute and finally do a—finally do a thorough search of the sand dunes, the pond location by the racquet club and a couple other places, too.
COSBY: And when are they doing this? And why has it taken so long, John?
KELLY: I don't know. it just—I guess red tape, and a lot of different pieces have to be pulled together. But you know, I intend to be down there in the next couple of weeks and talk and see where all this is.
COSBY: What do you hope to achieve when you go back down there?
KELLY: What I do every month. I like to sit down with Janssen and Dompig and see what they have to report and what progress has been made. And at this point, I've been asked to and I'm sharing some information with them also, seeing if we can advance the ball a little bit.
COSBY: All right, John. Thank you very much.
KELLY: Sure.
COSBY: We appreciate it. And good job juggling all those things. And again, everybody, we will have those pictures tomorrow that John was just talking about, Joran being served actually physically on the plane, and his father being served as he was leaving the hotel. We're going to have that on the show again tomorrow.
Meantime, another ground-shaking question from the interview. Did Joran change his story about the night that Natalee Holloway vanished? He certainly raised some new questions about the other two suspects, Deepak and Satish Kalpoe. And on the phone with us right now is David Kock. He's the attorney for both Deepak and Satish Kalpoe.
David, first of all, there's some new questions tonight about sort of who was with Joran and who picked up Joran. Did either of these two boys that you're representing now—both brothers, that's correct? You're representing them both now, right?
DAVID KOCK, DEEPAK AND SATISH KALPOE 'S ATTORNEY: Yes, that is correct.
COSBY: Did either of them pick him up that night?
DAVID KOCK: No. Absolutely not.
COSBY: They did...
DAVID KOCK: Absolutely not.
COSBY: They did not?
DAVID KOCK: No. Look, I have to tell you that the story that Joran is saying now at the end (ph) again that he called a friend to have him picked up was a story that already (ph) was the last story that he told in a series of stories where he kept changing the versions of what happened on that night, while my clients, from after the third day that they were arrested, they started telling this story that they dropped Joran and Natalee at the beach, went home, and until the following day, they were just at home.
COSBY: So you're telling me again, David, that they were both at home? After they dropped him off at the beach, that was it for both of them?
DAVID KOCK: Yes, that's it.
COSBY: Let me put up a quote because what you're just referring to, David, is the Dutch TV interview—he's done, obviously, a few, but the Dutch TV interview (INAUDIBLE) that he just did, Joran says, “I called one of my friends, and he picked me up and I went home.” The reporter for Dutch TV says, “Who picked you up?” And Joran answers, “Deepak's brother, Satish.”
You're telling me that Satish did not. So what do you make of this discrepancy?
DAVID KOCK: Well, like I said, no—his first story is totally different, that he wasn't even at the beach, that he wasn't even the last one with the disappeared girl. So you know, I don't know how much really value you can give to this last version of his series of stories.
COSBY: But why is he trying to say that your client was there, when your client says he absolutely was not? What does this mean?
DAVID KOCK: Yes, well, you know what it is? The problem is that he was confronted with a phone call that he made from his cellular to the cellular of one of my clients, so then he had to give a justification for that. Since that cellular number was Deepak's cellular number, he first indicated that he called Deepak to have Deepak pick him up. Afterwards, the Police confronted him with proof that Deepak was at home at that time on his computer, because Internet records show that. So then he had to change his story, and since he said, I made the call to that house, he had to give another, you know, solution for the fact that the call was made and somebody picked him up. So, you know, then the other likely person was then Satish. It was more a matter of elimination, really.
COSBY: So what does that say to you about Joran van der Sloot? He's pointing the finger at your—at least one of your clients being some—playing some role here.
DAVID KOCK: Yes. Well, he's been doing that since early in the investigation, so it doesn't amaze me. And of course, now again I am not amazed that he decides to stick to the last story that he told, so that at least lately, he seems more consistent (ph).
COSBY: Are they still friends? Is he still friends with Deepak and Satish?
DAVID KOCK: No. I think everybody would not remain friends with someone like that, in that position, in that situation.
COSBY: What do you think, David, and what do your clients think of the trip to New York, that they came up here for interviews, and also what happened?
DAVID KOCK: Well, let's say if it was my client, he wouldn't have made that trip.
COSBY: And what's your reaction to the fact that they did and they've done these interviews? What's your personal thought?
DAVID KOCK: Like I said, I wouldn't have recommended that. I don't think it's been (INAUDIBLE) I think one should wait for a criminal investigation to finish, you know? And I think if you go after publicity, you know, you have to live with the consequences also.
COSBY: All right. Well, David Kock, thank you very much for being with us, representing Deepak and Satish Kalpoe. Thank you for being with us tonight, sir.
And coming up, everybody, find out why a court in Aruba could be days away from clearing Joran as a suspect, and what Joran's parents are saying now that they're back in Aruba. It's coming up tonight. And that's not all. Take a look.
Still ahead: Why would a prison volunteer help a dangerous murderer sneak out of jail? Police say they'll ask her when they find her and the killer she helped escape. Wait until you hear how they pulled this dirty dog trick and how a security guard let them slip through the cracks. It's tonight's “APB.”
And an Arab company may be about to take the keys to America's biggest ports. Some say that creates a major threat to national security. Are those people racist or rational? The controversial new plan is coming up LIVE AND DIRECT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COSBY: So will the van der Sloot's, Joran and also his father, actually respond to the Holloway family civil lawsuit that's now been slapped against them? And does their trip to New York help or hurt their case? Joining me now are former prosecutor Wendy Murphy and also defense attorney Anne Bremner.
Wendy, help or hurt their case that they came up here to do some interviews?
WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Hah!
(LAUGHTER)
MURPHY: Well, I'll tell you something. They couldn't have been served in hand, and thus subject to the jurisdiction of New York courts, if they didn't come up, and they couldn't have probably been subjected to the jurisdiction of the New York courts without, quote, unquote, “doing business” in New York.
And people have been saying, Oh, they haven't done business here. I don't see how they can be sued. This case is going to be thrown out of court. Not so fast. I think the fact that they probably accepted the value of the plane fare and the hotel is enough. That is enough in and of itself to subject them to jurisdiction in the sense that that's them doing business with New York. And once you do that, that's it. You're allowed to be sued. There may be a difference of opinion about whether this is the best place to do it, but I don't think this case is going to be thrown out. So they may default, they may let the case be resolved in a way that...
COSBY: Yes, yes. Let's get to...
(CROSSTALK)
COSBY: Let's get to that in a moment, Wendy. Anne, do you think helps or hurts the case? Wendy brings up a good point. you know, they probably got the airfare—I—it doesn't—we haven't heard anything that they got paid for the interview, but in terms if took the hotel, you know, got the (INAUDIBLE) the general travel stuff, you know, does that constitute business?
ANNE BREMNER, TRIAL ATTORNEY: I think absolutely. And it just has to be minimal. And I spoke with one of the attorneys for the Holloway and Twitty families this morning, not John Q. Kelly, but I've talked to him before about this. And it is—the personal jurisdiction is serving—you know, welcome to the United States. Here you are. You're served. It's part and parcel of the subject matter jurisdiction. And so this is not like they're saying jurisdiction, you know, out the window. It's here, and I think it's enough, Rita, and it's important. I agree with Wendy.
COSBY: You know, Wendy, let me play a little clip because you could tell that the van der Sloot's really were sort of taken off guard by the whole thing. Let me play a little clip from the interview with Dutch TV.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANITA VAN DER SLOOT : ... we want him to do is to return to Holland because we're really—we're really afraid that strange things are going to happen. And I don't know how far this family will go.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: Wendy, you know, you hear that, it's like—you wonder, like, whether the tables turned?
MURPHY: Yes. I mean, and as well it should be. Look, they are very comfortable in their country, knowing that their little guy got away with it and that, you know, the cover-up worked. And that's because it's an us-versus- them thing. Their citizenship prevails. That's fine. But they can't make it about who they know and whose political connections they have, when it comes to a civil lawsuit filed in this country. They have no power here. They will be subjected to this lawsuit. They may default, which means judgment will be launched against them. There'll be some kind of judgment and money damages awarded. And if they want that to be in place here, I'll tell you, the worst case scenario for them is they'll never be allowed to speak or come to this country or do the kind of dog-and-pony show they've been trying to do, suggesting falsely that their little boy is so innocent. So at least it'll shut them up.
COSBY: Anne, do you think it could do even more than that?
BREMNER: Well, sure. In case like this, it's ironic that the hunter becomes the hunted. And it's going to be more than that, I think, Rita, than what Wendy just described, and that is request for admission—if they don't answer those, certain facts are deemed to be admitted in this case. And there's civil contempt if they don't comply. There can be a jury trial on that. They can go to jail, and all kinds of financial penalties.
But we're looking for a universe of facts right now that no one's been able to get so far, and they can get it through a civil case. And it will hurt Joran van der Sloot and his family in the long run.
COSBY: But Anne, how long could it take? I mean, this whole process could take a long time, right, Anne?
BREMNER: It'll take a very long time. But you can ask for an expedited trial date and try to have it occur sooner. Average, a couple of years, which is tough. But in Aruba, Rita, it could be decades before they have any results.
COSBY: Well, and Wendy, couldn't it get sort of lost in the shuffle, too, the bureaucratic red tape between Aruba, here? Who knows how long it could take, right?
MURPHY: Yes. I mean, getting discovery in a civil case across continents is a very difficult thing to do. You have to go through The Hague convention. It's very complicated. And I'm just telling you something. Anne may be right that this is a nice little tool if you want to uncover information, cause people to sit for depositions, get people to talk who are clamming up. But the bottom line is every single person that we'd like to hear from can just thumb their nose at this case and say, We don't want to talk to you, go to hell.
And if they do that, they will win. you know, Natalee's family will win the lawsuit. They'll win a zillion-dollar judgment against these folks, but they won't get what they really want. This isn't about money, it's about information and solving this mystery and getting someone held to account for what is clearly...
COSBY: And Wendy...
MURPHY: ... a murder.
COSBY: ... does it do that? It doesn't seem like it gets towards the answers, does it?
MURPHY: I don't think it will. It could, I don't think it will because they can just say, We're not answering your questions. We're not sitting for depositions. We're not answering interrogatories. Go to hell. And the judgment will be lodged against them, but it doesn't get the family what they want because you can't get blood from a stone. You can't make these people talk. Cover-ups work, especially when you're in a different country.
COSBY: Anne, let me play another little clip from the Dutch TV interview. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANITA VAN DER SLOOT : We thought, Oh, no big deal, it will not happen. But what is happening now is that somebody here must have informed the family that we're here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: You know, Anne, what do we sort of learn about the family dynamics and Joran—you know, again, as you just heard from the attorney for Satish and Deepak—different stories.
BREMNER: Well, absolutely. And you know, there's that saying, There's no justice inside or outside of court. I think it was Clarence Darrow. And then, of course, Alan dershowitz has said nobody wants justice. I mean, isn't justice here, in some ways, to keep these people on the hook and to keep them confined in kind of a hell, so to speak, of this case and the consequences of what they purportedly did? And so I think there's a lot of interesting angles here.
COSBY: Just from a public relations standpoint, Anne? I mean, do you think...
BREMNER: Sure.
COSBY: (INAUDIBLE) spectrum (ph) that it caused?
BREMNER: Well, yes. I mean, look at—you know, this—they're never—the attorneys are never, never, never going to quit. This family is never going to quit. Every night, we hear about this, literally. And of course, Rita, you've been fabulous on this story. And it's just more of bringing in that whole pressure on this family and that their world will only be ruled by this case.
COSBY: So Wendy—Wendy, is the moral Deepak and Satish never set foot in the U.S.?
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
MURPHY: Well, they're going to be very careful. But you know, I'll tell you this much. If there's somebody out there, somebody in Aruba who knows something and desperately wants to talk, cares about the truth, cares about justice, this could be the very thing they need to be able to speak out, whether it's a cop, a friend, somebody that one of these guys spoke to who has been told thus far, you know, because the Aruban government has such power over this case up until this point, to shut up and don't say anything and don't speak to anybody. With a lawsuit and a subpoena in front of their face, they may well say, Hey, I feel like it's my job. I now have the power to do it because this is a subpoena from an American judicial proceeding. And they may well cooperate, and we could well find that we're going to learn more information as a result of this lawsuit.
COSBY: Hey, great points, both of you. Thank you very much.


On 2-20 BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated to FOX News that she learned about the Murder Suspects SLOOT’s coming to NEW YORK CITY about 24 hours ahead of time, and that KELLEY told her not to answer any of the phone calls she received on 2-16, of which 47 were from separate companies. BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated that the main thing NATALEE’s Loved Ones want to come out of the civil lawsuit is answers, given under oath, and that, right now, “money is the farthest thing from our minds.” “One issue only; What happened to my daughter? That is all i want from the van der Sloot’s.” BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated that there have been people contacting her with money offers for books, movies, etc., but NATALEE’s Loved Ones are focused only on the investigation. BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated that KELLY has been able to maintain communication with ARUBA Prosecutor KARIN JANSSEN.

On 2-20 LARRY GARRISON stated to FOX News that he felt it was his duty to find out the other side of the story from Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT and Current Murder Suspect DEEPAK KALPOE , so GARRISON has also spoken with them. GARRISON stated he was asked to go to HOLLAND, and he could not go, so he helped coordinate between Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT and the ABC “Prime Time” people to do the Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT interview. “It was the most convenient thing for all parties concerned.” The whole SLOOT family wanted to go to NEW YORK CITY to have “a nice family vacation.” GARRSISON stated that the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s did not feel there was any danger for them to come to the UNITED STATES. GARRISON stated that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT does not think that he tipped off the HOLLOWAY‘s. GARRISON stated he had been booking this interview with another network in ARUBA, but he chose to go to ABC because he felt ABC would be sincere and give a true interview that would not be just one sided. GARRISON stated "I have been told that there were sour grapes in Aruba for not getting the interview there. Renfro was doing a book under the conjecture that Natalee is still alive and pregnant with her stepfathers baby. There was a blog message put out that RENFRO put out that the van der Sloot family was going to New York. I think it was shameful.” (FOX News reported that when FOX News asked RENFRO if she is writing a book, she denied it)

On 2-20 FOX News GRETA VAN SUSTEREN reported:

(QUOTE)

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, HOST: Joran van der Sloot is from Aruba and he goes to school in Holland. Natalee Holloway is from Alabama and she disappeared in Aruba. So why did Natalee's family sue Joran and his father in New York? Joining me live in Atlanta is Richard Freer, the Robert Howell Hall professor of law at Emory University, and of course, the professor who e-mailed me Friday night during our show about this very complicated question.
So let me jump to the bottom of the story first. I mean, Professor, in your opinion, is this lawsuit going to stay in court or out of court?
RICHARD FREER, EMORY UNIVERSITY LAW PROFESSOR: I think it is probably ultimately going to be dismissed in New York, but not on jurisdictional grounds, and I think that's important.
VAN SUSTEREN: Why do you say that? Could you explain?
FREER: OK. First of all, we have to worry about jurisdiction. Jurisdiction's is a great chameleon word. It means different things at different times. But it describes and determines the power of a court to decide a case. I do think the New York court has jurisdiction. There are really two kinds of jurisdiction that a court must have. If does it not have either of those, then any judgment, any order that it enters is void. It has to have, first of all, personal jurisdiction, and personal jurisdiction means power over the defendant.
VAN SUSTEREN: And do they have that here, power over the defendant?
FREER: Yes, they do. Historically, the way you got power over the defendant was to have an appropriate person serve process, the legal papers, on the defendant while the defendant was in the forum, in the state of New York. That happened here. We don't care about why the person was there, just so voluntarily he was there. That has always been good, way back to Roman times, and it never mattered why the person was there.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Now, so let's go to the next step, the subject matter of jurisdiction. Do they have that?
FREER: Yes, they do have subject matter jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction determines the power over this particular case. Can this court hear this particular case? And state courts — and this is in a New York state court — have general subject matter jurisdiction. They can hear any case, no matter where it arose, where the parties are from. It's completely irrelevant to that. They can hear any cognizable claim. New York courts have subject matter jurisdiction over this case. They have personal jurisdiction over the defendants.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, so the third prong is: whether it's a convenient forum. Is this a convenient forum, or is that where it gets thrown out or stays in?
FREER: That's going to be the determining issue. Jurisdiction is OK. Personal and subject matter jurisdiction are OK. But there will be a motion to dismiss on the basis of an inconvenient forum — lawyers like to say forum non-convenience — and that basically appeals to the judge to look at whether New York has any interest in litigating this case. Why should New York taxpayers pay for this? Why should a New York jury be used here? Why should they be burdened, when in reality, there's not a New Yorker involved, the events all took place somewhere else? And they will look at the fact that Aruba law applies, and so forth, and determine whether New York is not an appropriate forum, even though it is a proper jurisdiction.
The reason I think it's important that jurisdiction is OK here is that when we get to this forum non-convenience argument, it is a matter of the court's discretion. Jurisdiction is not. If there's no jurisdiction, the court has to dismiss. But with forum non-convenience, it's in the court's discretion, and the plaintiffs here, the Holloways, can appeal to the court and argue that, We have to have this case here in New York because we're not going to get justice in Aruba. This is the only place we can get justice. So I think it opens that argument. I think it's an uphill battle, however.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, so it's going to be fascinating. I'm sure that will be great discussion in law school classes. Professor, thank you very much. And thank you for e-mailing me Friday night and saving me with the gentlemen who were on. And thank you for joining us tonight.
FREER: Thank you, Greta.
(END QUOTE)



2-21-06

On 2-21 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

DAN ABRAMS, HOST: Now to the Natalee Holloway case, and a very first look at exactly how the chief suspect, that‘s him, in Natalee‘s disappearance was welcomed to the U.S. We are seeing these pictures for the first time. The Holloways‘ family attorneys were tipped of a day before that Joran van der Sloot and his parents would be in New York for a television interview.
They quickly drafted a complaint, filed it in New York Supreme Court, and then began figuring out how to serve it on them. This is the video. First, Paulus van der Sloot being served, they found him at a New York who hotel in the lobby, handed him the documents right there. A few hours later Joran was served on a plane after his flight from Amsterdam arrived in New York.
That process server sat three rows ahead of him for the entire flight, waiting until the flight landed on New York soil to hand the complaint to Joran. After Joran passed through U.S. Customs he was met by a team of private Investigators hired by the Holloway attorneys. They took these pictures they say to confirm that Joran was in New York State, that he had been in fact served with a lawsuit.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN Q. KELLY, HOLLOWAY FAMILY ATTORNEY: Once a complaint was filed and became public, then I was very concerned that at some point if service was not completed, you know (INAUDIBLE) filing a complaint in New York against Aruban citizens and then not showing up here, so you know each step of the way we had to sort of make lightning quick decisions about you know when to serve Paul, when to serve Joran, and when to file the complaint, you know getting the index (INAUDIBLE), making sure everything was accomplished and nobody could tip off anybody as to what was happening too.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Joining us now, the man you saw in some of those photographs, private eye Bo Dietl who was at the airport when Joran arrived on Thursday. Bo, good to see you.
BO DIETL, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Hi, Dan. How are you doing...
ABRAMS: Doing good.
DIETL: Finally—we got this creep, finally...
ABRAMS: All right. Let‘s take it step by step here. How did you decide to go to the airport and to wait where you waited when he arrived?
DIETL: Well, first of all, we‘ve been involved with this case for about two months with John Quinlan Kelly. I‘ve had detectives—I haven‘t gone public, but we had detectives over in Aruba that have been investigating this with John. We got a tip around Wednesday that the father and the son were coming in for some interview.
So what we attempted to do was get one of our operatives to go on a plane to Amsterdam, so we could catch him on the plane. We couldn‘t get someone, so we made contact with one of my associates out of London and then we had someone on that plane that we thought he was coming in. In the meantime we set up surveillance at the airport and we nailed the father coming in with his family, coming to the Lucerne Hotel, so I put surveillance on it.
They sat on that all night. Now we—at this time, Joran had to get on the flight. Once he was on the flight I knew he couldn‘t communicate with the father, so then what we‘re going to do is when the plane landed at Kennedy Airport, when he was on the soil of America, then we had our opportunity to serve him.
We had the operative serve him on the plane. He took photographs.
But then I said to John, I wanted to make sure that we know he was served. At the same time, simultaneously, the father walks out into the Lucerne Hotel about 1:00 in the afternoon. He gets served. He was very surprised. He knew—he was a judge. He knew what the papers meant.
So now we wait at the airport, it was about two hours after the flight landed, he was on some kind of a watch list, I think the F.B.I. put him on a watch list, Mr. Joran here. And what happened is finally he came out. When he came out he looked like Darth Vader, some other guy came running over to him, put a coat over his head and I went up, I wanted to serve him purposely you know.
Personally, I wanted to serve him. I have two daughters and he is a suspect in the disappearance of this young lady, and I did serve. He didn‘t want to take the papers, so I stuffed them down his jacket.
ABRAMS: Bo, let me ask you about that. He had already been served at that point, right?
DIETL: Yes.
ABRAMS: So you‘re there—I mean look, we see these pictures of you, sort of looks like at points it looks like you‘re screaming at him.
DIETL: Well I was telling him—I was asking him right out. I said where did you bury the little girl. I figured we got (INAUDIBLE) now. We served him. The legal part was gone, but I wanted to talk to him in Bo language.
And I wanted, you know, I‘m still very concerned. This is an American little girl that went to Aruba and disappeared and this guy knows what happened to her. I mean he has three different stories and you know what, if he thinks he can come step foot in America here and utilize America as his little game, it‘s no game here. This little young girl is missing and he has something to do with it...
ABRAMS: What else did you yell at him?
DIETL: Well I just told him—I asked him where did he bury the little girl. I said where is Natalee? And I said why don‘t you take the coat off your head and be a man. And you know I said a couple other things to him. But you want to know something, I felt very relieved that I was able to look at him in the face. He‘s a big guy. He‘s about six-foot-six, and he looked at me very vicious (INAUDIBLE), but he wasn‘t trying anything with Uncle Bo.
ABRAMS: And all the people who were at the airport were part of your team, right?
DIETL: We had teams at the hotel. We had teams at the airport. We had no less than 10 operatives and we videotaped all the different aspects of the two services. This way there can be no mistake that his father and young Joran was served in America, and they‘ll have to answer to court.
And John Quinlan Kelly, everybody knows about the O.J. case. He‘s a great lawyer. He‘s preparing a great case...
ABRAMS: Yes.
DIETL: ... in behalf of the Holloway family.
ABRAMS: Now, you say that there was a videotape of the incident at the airport. Are you going to release that?
DIETL: Well, the lawyers have it. John has it. It may be we could have that tape released at some—any time...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: Because Bo we‘ve heard it gets pretty ugly with you...
DIETL: No, no, no...
ABRAMS: ... and Joran.
DIETL: No, no, it doesn‘t get ugly with him and I. I don‘t know. He had a bodyguard or somebody pushed me and there‘s a little pushing back and forth. But at that point, he was served the summons. That‘s the bottom line. He was served the summons. It was a legal service. He was advised that he was being served with an official court summons and it was a summons and complaint and then I took it, I stuffed it down his jacket so he wouldn‘t have any mistake that he wasn‘t served with the papers...
ABRAMS: Bo, let me ask you this. In retrospect, did you cross the line in this sense? I mean we‘re hearing from people over at ABC that you roughed up one of their producers who was on the scene there...
DIETL: If anything, I was pushed by someone. I don‘t know if it was a producer. Someone pushed me and I think the tape, it states exactly what happens and I tell the guy you can‘t push me. I‘m doing an official service...
ABRAMS: But isn‘t he then thrown on the ground by a couple of people who were with you?
DIETL: No. No. He pushed me, and I kind of pushed him back. I said I‘m serving a summons. No one else touched anyone else.
ABRAMS: All right. Bo, you‘re going to stick—if you could stick around with us for a moment. Because coming up, someone who says that Bo didn‘t need to do what he did to serve Joran van der Sloot with that lawsuit has some complaints about it. Bo can certainly stand up for himself.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KELLY: (INAUDIBLE) talked to Dave, and they just feel—you know first of all they would not want the van der Sloot's coming in New York and sort of flaunting themselves and thumbing their noses at the family, and the U.S. public, as a matter of fact, in terms of trying to put their own spin on things, feeling they could come into our own backyard and you know walk around without any repercussions. So in that sense, the catching them off guard and sort of stunning them was very important.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Well the repercussions and stunning them in part involved private eye Bo Dietl confronting Joran van der Sloot at the airport. He was served on the plane and then as Bo just told us, Bo then handed him the papers as well after he came out of customs. You‘re seeing these photos that were taken by Bo Dietl‘s team when Joran arrived at the airport.
And again, the allegation is—you saw that last picture there too—this is to file a lawsuit. You got to hand someone the lawsuit in order to have personal jurisdiction in New York, and the lawyers and the Dietl team would say that is exactly what they did.
Joining us now is Jonna Spilbor, a criminal defense attorney. She joins Bo as well to talk about this. All right, so Jonna, you‘ve been listen to Bo describe what he did and how he did it. And you heard John Kelly there say that effectively there‘s been no accountability here and that the van der Sloot's here are coming to the United States to do a TV interview and that there had to be some sort of repercussions and accountability.
JONNA SPILBOR, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: OK, fair enough and that‘s what this lawsuit looks like. Here‘s the problem, though. It sounds like the Holloways are not interested really in the merits of this case, and if you read the complaint, it more reads like a bad movie of the week.
When I listen to Bo, it sounds like this is a well orchestrated campaign to just button push, not to get to the bottom of what happened, not to get to the truth, not to even get money, but to just let this kid know, Joran van der Sloot that you know what, you can‘t go anywhere kid without somebody watching you, somebody listening, and you‘re going to have to always look behind your back wherever you go because we have your number even if the Aruban authorities don‘t.
But that‘s an abuse of process, Dan. With all due respect to Bo—
Bo, you‘re the type of P.I. I want on my side. I do not want a private investor who always chews with his mouth closed...
(CROSSTALK)
SPILBOR: ... but in this case you‘re going a little too far.
DIETL: All right, let me say one thing. If you notice how he came out of Immigration. The guy threw a coat over the top of his head. He‘s not trying to stop from being served and then I‘m getting pushed out of the way before...
SPILBOR: But Bo...
DIETL: ... let me finish.
SPILBOR: ... he was already served.
DIETL: Let me finish.
SPILBOR: He was already served.
DIETL: I am doing a legal process. I wanted to document date...
(CROSSTALK)
DIETL: I wanted to memorialize that he got served. Now that was the end of it. This other kid, I didn‘t know where, from ABC, starts pushing me away then I couldn‘t do a service. I have to do a legal service there. On top of this, this young man, I have nothing against him.
He would have taken the papers normally the way someone should have there wouldn‘t have been any problem. The other one, whoever was there, was pushing back and forth. Maybe we should have just gave him the key to the city. Maybe we should have Mayor Bloomberg...
SPILBOR: Nobody is saying that, Bo...
DIETL: You can see these pictures...
SPILBOR: But he was already served.
DIETL: All right, but look at the pictures. Why does he have a coat over his head...
(CROSSTALK)
DIETL: Why?
SPILBOR: Because he‘s got you who he doesn‘t know, he thinks he has got some goon coming after him...
DIETL: I‘m not a goon—excuse me...
SPILBOR: ... and he was served once...
DIETL: He was never...
SPILBOR: You don‘t need to serve him twice in the same day to effectively...
DIETL: He was never touched except for the papers to be put right in his jacket, so there would be no mistake that he was served, and that‘s a service. You know that‘s a proper service, so we can touch him with the paper or his jacket was open...
SPILBOR: And it was proper the first time and you know it.
(CROSSTALK)
SPILBOR: You know it.
DIETL: I was not there. I wanted to cover myself. Did you know that he was on the watch list? He was in there for two hours by the government of the United States, have him on a watch list. So something must be up there if they think he‘s such an innocent person, why is he on a watch list.
SPILBOR: Well a watch list doesn‘t mean—they didn‘t take him into custody, so...
DIETL: They did take him in the back...
SPILBOR: ... a lot of people can be—babies end up on watch lists.
DIETL: They took him...
SPILBOR: But that‘s not the point.
DIETL: Well, babies end up on a watch list. He was questioned for two hours in the back in United States Customs.
(CROSSTALK)
DIETL: Bottom line is this. All I wanted to do was make sure there was no kind of mistake that he was served and that‘s all it...
ABRAMS: But Bo, you even conceded a minute ago that you wanted to give him a little Bo talk too.
DIETL: No, no, no, excuse me...
SPILBOR: Exactly.
DIETL: When the guy pushed me and started walking way, then he looked at me and took the papers and crumpled them up and threw them on the ground, on the pavement, I says you can‘t...
ABRAMS: Wait. Joran did that, Bo? Wait a sec.
DIETL: Yes.
ABRAMS: Wait. You served the papers on Joran and Joran took the papers...
DIETL: Yes.
ABRAMS: ... and crumbled them and threw them on the ground?
DIETL: And he crumpled them and threw them on the ground. That‘s when it got me a little mad. I say why are you doing that? You were legally served...
SPILBOR: Maybe...
DIETL: ... welcome to...
SPILBOR: ... because that was his second service.
DIETL: Well you know something? Do you really think he knows the difference—that could have been service on another suit. Who knows? He just took them, how indignant he was. He took them out of his jacket, he crumpled them up and he threw them down on the ground, this young man, this nice boy who just came to the United States who a little innocent boy, he took them, he threw them on the ground right in front of me. He littered in New York as a matter of fact...
(LAUGHTER)
ABRAMS: But Jonna, let me ask you a moral question. Look, Joran van der Sloot has not been charged with a crime, OK, fine, fair enough...
SPILBOR: Right.
ABRAMS: ... but he is a suspect. He remains a suspect in this case. He made inconsistent statements; in fact he lied at times about what he was doing that night. As a sort of moral matter, does that mean that people out there can hate him, and can be angry at him, and can want him to have to suffer a little bit?
SPILBOR: That‘s human nature. But when—you can‘t mix human nature with a legal process without there being consequences. This guy would be guilty for all we know. We don‘t care. I really feel for the Holloway family, because this kid thinks he got away with something, and maybe he did.
But when he‘s in the United States and we‘re trying to get him into our legal system, we got to play by the rules. And Bo, when you go after somebody and serve them twice in a one-hour period...
DIETL: Jonna...
SPILBOR: ... on a case that has very little...
DIETL: Jonna...
SPILBOR: ... merit unfortunately...
DIETL: ... I was...
SPILBOR: ... and no jurisdiction...
DIETL: Jonna...
SPILBOR: ... in New York...
(CROSSTALK)
SPILBOR: ... it lacks credibility.
DIETL: There was one person on the plane that served him, so there was one word against another. I think it was...
SPILBOR: But you know how this goes...
DIETL: If I worked for you, Jonna...
SPILBOR: ... you file the affidavit of service in court...
DIETL: Jonna...
SPILBOR: You know how it works.
DIETL: Jonna...
SPILBOR: And it‘s done. Done, Bo.
DIETL: If I was going to do it for you, I would double serve under the circumstances of one operative being on the plane...
SPILBOR: All right.
DIETL: ... you have no witnesses, so I wanted to make sure there was no kind of mistake that this young man was served. The father was served.
SPILBOR: Come on...
DIETL: And believe me that‘s all I care about.
SPILBOR: Come on.
DIETL: And you know what?
SPILBOR: You‘re sending a message to this kid.
DIETL: I‘m going to send a message—I want to send a message, one message. He is being legally served by court papers and that‘s the end of it. Now we know he was served. There‘s no doubt, you see that Darth Vader looking guy? That was him.
(CROSSTALK)
DIETL: That was the papers being served upon him.
ABRAMS: Bo Dietl, good to se you. Thanks for coming back on the program. Appreciate it.
DIETL: Thank you.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-21 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

van der Sloot and son served with civil lawsuit

'Live and Direct' interviews Holloway family attorney about
the case

In a new development, the Holloway family used stealth tactics to serve Joran Van Der
Sloot and his father with a surprise civil lawsuit that had the van der Sloots worried they
were in more than just legal danger.
Holloway family attorney John Q. Kelly joined ‘Live and Direct’ to discuss the civil case
and the reactions from the van der Sloot family.
To read an excerpt from their conversation, continue to the text below. To watch the
video, click on the "Launch" button to the right. (VIDEO here)

RITA COSBY, HOST, ‘LIVE AND DIRECT: John, how surprised, from your guys on the
ground, were Joran and his parents when they were slapped with these lawsuits
separately?
JOHN Q. KELLY, HOLLOWAY FAMILY ATTORNEY: Total surprise on both their parts,
as I understand it, Rita.
COSBY: Any reaction? Did they say anything? Did they do anything? What was sort of
the feel?
KELLY: No. In fact, both services were memorialized. We have videotape of Paulus Van
Der Sloot being served in the lobby of the hotel, and he's just sort of stunned silent, staring
at the papers. And Joran, same thing. We have a picture of him holding the papers, just
standing there, staring at them at the aisle of a Delta flight on the runway at JFK.
COSBY: And in fact, we're going to have those pictures tomorrow, John. You know, from
what you've heard, did they go over and did the guy tap him on the shoulder? How did
they actually approach Joran on the plane?
KELLY: We had our investigator three rows in front of him, just standing there, waiting for
him. Joran was going to be the last one off, to be escorted out by Customs, and we had our
man in front of him, blocking his way, where he had nowhere to go, nowhere to hide. And
he got served right in the aisle there.
COSBY: And did he say anything at the time, or what did he say and do?
KELLY: It's my understanding that when he was served the papers, he said, Thank you.
COSBY: And that was it?
KELLY: Yes.
COSBY: How long had this been in the works for, John? Because it's quite impressive you
got parents coming from Aruba. You got him coming from Holland—to coordinate this. How
long did you have it in the works, though?
KELLY: Everything just happened very quickly, starting early on Wednesday morning, the
15th. We got word that the van der Sloots might be heading to New York. I then talked to
Dave and Beth and got authorization to draw up the complaint for filing. We then confirmed
that Paulus had left Aruba, was heading for New York. So we had a surveillance team waiting
to pick him up and sit on him at the lobby at the hotel. We then confirmed Joran was leaving
from Amsterdam, so we had an agent going from London's Heathrow airport over to
Amsterdam, get on the flight in front of him to serve him and served the complaint Thursday
mid-morning, e-mailed the index number to both the plane and the surveillance team, and
caught Paulus in the lobby at about 1:00 o'clock. And he couldn't communicate with Joran.
And then we caught Joran when the plane landed at JFK.
COSBY: John, I don't know how much you can tell me, but where did the tip-off come
from to sort of get the tip because they're coming on these different flights?
KELLY: You know better than that, Rita. It turned out to be very accurate information,
though, obviously. But just like you, we don't reveal our sources.
COSBY: And did you say I may be catching a red herring, I'm not sure if it's all going to
work out?
KELLY: I'm sorry?
COSBY: Did you say, Maybe this is like a leap of faith, it may not work out?
KELLY: Oh, well, you know, there are about 12 critical steps involved there, where
anything could have gone wrong either in the filing of the complaint and not serving
Joran, not serving the father, one being able to contact the other. You know, my
ultimate, once I told the ultimate step and filed the complaint, that I'd have a complaint
filed in New York state supreme court and no service made, and I'd be sitting there with
egg on my face, looking like a jackass, if you will.
COSBY: Instead, you're looking like a magician now in terms of juggling all this.
KELLY: Well, it worked.
COSBY: We talked to someone close to the van der Sloots, and let me put a little
quote—this is about the family. They said, “The family is very disappointed what happened
last Thursday. They feel this was a public relations stunt orchestrated by John Q. Kelly and
Beth Holloway and the lawsuit has no merits.” Was this just for publicity, John?
KELLY: No. Absolutely not. We feel very comfortable with the cause of actions. We
certainly had jurisdiction over them. And they were the ones that thought they could flaunt
this system, thumb their noses at us and come into our, you know, home court, into New
York, and put their spin on things, and we certainly weren't going to let that happen.
COSBY: So John, what happens now? How long until they respond?
KELLY: They have, technically, 20 days to respond because they were served in person.
It's up to them what, affirmatively, they're going to do now.
COSBY: And do you think they'll respond? And what happens if they don't?
KELLY: You know, if they don't, it'll be a default judgment. Just one thing, Rita. It's kind
of ironic that they're talking about it's a publicity stunt, and they were the ones coming into
New York to do their series of interviews and do their PR stints here. That was their sole
purpose of coming here, as I understand it, to do interviews and air what they had to say.
So it hardly was a publicity stunt. They were the ones seeking the publicity, and they're the
ones that'll pay the price for it.
COSBY: When you talk about default, what can happen legally? Because the big question
is how much jurisdiction? Can we enforce this? If they say, Look, we're not going to respond,
we're not going to do anything, then what happens? What can U.S. authorities legally do if
they go forward?
KELLY: Well, if they don't respond, then we can move for a default judgment. Then you go
to an inquest for damages, of which they wouldn't participate in. A judgment could be entered
after the default and the inquest, and we can execute on that back in Aruba against them.
COSBY: So you're saying that somebody actually could go down there, can say, Look,
we're going to collect, if it actually wins in the case?
KELLY: Absolutely.
COSBY: And what are you looking at? How much could they potentially get?
KELLY: Doesn't matter. You know, we're looking for answers, we're not looking for
money. We're not looking for assets. We're looking for a resolution. We're looking for Natalee.
That's what we're looking for.
COSBY: Could this be a long road, though, John? You're dealing with also U.S. courts.
You're dealing with Aruba.
KELLY: Sure. You know, litigation is a marathon, it's not a sprint. This was just the first small
step. We were able to serve them. We were able to commence the action. And I've got no,
you know, reservations or, you know, other thoughts, other than it's going to be a very tough
row to hoe, and we've got a long way to go.
COSBY: I also understand you have an update on the sand dune search, which we all of a
sudden didn't hear anything about. Where does this stand?
KELLY: I talked to Karin Janssen actually several times in the last couple days, and she
just got back from Holland, and it's my understanding they're going back in the sand dunes
with the Dutch dogs now. They're not going to use the FBI dogs. And they're going to use
the ground sonar provided by the Netherlands Forensic Institute and finally do a—finally
do a thorough search of the sand dunes, the pond location by the racquet club and a
couple other places, too.
COSBY: And when are they doing this? And why has it taken so long, John?
KELLY: I don't know. I guess red tape, and a lot of different pieces have to be pulled
together. But you know, I intend to be down there in the next couple of weeks and talk
and see where all this is.
COSBY: What do you hope to achieve when you go back down there?
KELLY: What I do every month. I like to sit down with Janssen and Dompig and see what
they have to report and what progress has been made. And at this point, I've been asked
to and I'm sharing some information with them also, seeing if we can advance the ball a little bit.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-21 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com" reported:

(QUOTE)

Joran van der Sloot Went to the US for a Fair Chance

ARUBA – “I wanted a fair chance”, said Joran van der Sloot in an interview with Nova about his trip to New York. His parents and his lawyer advised him not to go to New York, but he still did last Thursday. He was invited for an interview with the American TV ABC. He didn’t know that a citation was awaiting him once he touched American soil.

Nova showed his parents, who also received a citation, trying their best to impede their son to go through customs. But that was too late already, because he had already received the writ on the airplane, which added a new chapter to the missing Natalee Holloway soap. The reception at the airport was very rough; everywhere people tried to besiege him. He was also interrogated by the customs department for three hours.

In the interview he said that his biggest mistake was leaving the girl on the beach by herself. He said that Holloway was not a super nice girl, like everybody pictures her. “She was very pushy. She asked to come along and she didn’t want to get out of the car, even when her friends called her.” After showing her around, she and Joran were dropped off at the beach. Joran had to go home after a while though, because he had classes the net morning. “She wanted me to stay with her on the beach.” Joran said that Satish Kalpoe had picked him up from the beach, something that the Police are still questioning.

According to Joran, it was very stupid of him to lie at first, saying that the three boys had dropped Holloway off at the "Holiday Inn." “We though that it was going to be ok and that she would show up in a few days.” He lied because he didn’t want to admit that he had left the girl alone on the beach. Joran went to the US to get a fair chance and to proof his innocence. “I have never been aggressive with any girl.” ABC will broadcast the interview with Joran this coming Thursday evening.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-21 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

RITA COSBY, HOST: Good evening, everybody. Tonight, breaking news in the Natalee Holloway investigation. You‘re hearing it here first on LIVE AND DIRECT, Police in Aruba telling LIVE AND DIRECT about a new tip they believe is so credible, it could blow the case wide open by leading Police directly to Natalee‘s body on the island, Aruba Police chief, Gerold Dompig, telling us, quote, “We feel that based on this new information, we feel strongly that a body is buried somewhere in those areas. These new search areas are because of a tip that we received last month,” that, in his words, he says that is “very credible.”
And joining me now live on the phone right now from Aruba is Julia Renfro with the “Aruba Today” newspaper. Julia, what do you know about where this tip came from?
RENFRO: “ARUBA TODAY” NEWSPAPER: Well, what we know about, Rita, is that recently, Gerold Dompig gave an interview with a Dutch newspaper, or at least the Dutch media, that a credible witness came forward, and he feels that this is something to look into. And this particular person claims to have either witnessed or at least know of some information that there‘s a possibility that Natalee might be buried somewhere in the sand dunes of the California—near the California lighthouse.
COSBY: Now, you‘re saying near the lighthouse. How big is that area?
You know that area very well, Julia Renfro.
RENFRO: Yes, I do. And actually, quite a bit of mounds of sand, and I would say a matter of about eight football fields or so. And they have already sectioned off a tremendous amount of this area and closed it off for a suspicious area. But what they‘re hoping for is some potential new searches to come forward in the near future.
COSBY: Now, how did this tip come in? Was it a phone call? And why are they taking this seriously? Someone of the sources that we talked to was saying that the person was expressing some remorse.
RENFRO: Well, that‘s what we understand, as well, based on the interview that Gerold Dompig did, and that this particular person who came forward felt an extreme amount of remorse, that he knew some information and he wanted to bring that forward to the authorities. He is no longer living, or just maybe never lived on the island. We‘re not really sure of that. And he felt that there‘s a strong possibility that Natalee might be buried in the sand dunes north of the lighthouse.
COSBY: And when did this come in? Was it a call? And did they just suddenly pick up the phone and call Police?
RENFRO: That‘s our understanding, yes. And it was several weeks ago.
COSBY: And when are they going to start actually searching that area by the lighthouse, at least now that they have the sense of if they believe this person?
RENFRO: No, but we—they‘ve already started the searching of the area, and they‘ve realized that they need further additional help besides the Aruban authorities. The Aruban authorities have approximately two or three weeks ago sent 60 to 80, you know, Police investigation people out. And at that point, they‘re hoping for some additional help maybe, from the Dutch authorities or maybe from even the United States authorities, to help them search these particular areas.
COSBY: And Julia Renfro, stick with us because I want to bring in Beth Holloway-Twitty, Natalee‘s mom, of course, who is with us tonight.
Beth, what you have heard about this?
BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY‘S MOTHER: Rita, there was talk of this several weeks ago. And you know, I really didn‘t know if there was any credence to it. And then I believe it was last week, maybe it was Friday, I believe there was an article posted on the Internet about a new witness had come forward. So you know, this isn‘t anything new to me. Id‘ heard of this, like I said, several weeks ago, and then again through a Dutch—I think there was an article that had been translated and had seen it on the Internet. But as far as any other official source of information, I have not heard this from anyone else.
COSBY: What do you make that, you know, the chief of Police, chief Dompig, who you know, is saying that he‘s putting a lot of credence in this? He believes it‘s sort of a credible tip, and we just were hearing from Julia Renfro that person expressing remorse. Again, she‘s not sure if it‘s somebody who witnessed it or who just happened to be driving by. How do you read that, Beth?
TWITTY: You know, I just can‘t put any credence in it until, I think that—until John Kelly gets some information from Karin Janssen, I really just am not going to put too much into that, Rita.
COSBY: Now, I know you‘ve had a lot of—a lot of tips and things coming in. You know, for some reason, Beth, the tone of his language here is he‘s using sort of the word credible. And again, the quote that he gave us is, “These new searches are because of a tip that we received last month,” he says, “that is very credible.” Seems to be putting a little more prominence on this. And of course, we all want everything resolved in, of course, the best way possible. Do you—does this language mean anything new to you more, Beth, that there‘s maybe a little more to this one?
TWITTY: You know, until I see something going on as far as an active search, it‘s just really hard for me to bite into this one, Rita. I just want to see them pull together a search before—before I fall for this one. It‘s just happened too many times. I know this one seems to be building, and it all seems to be headed in that direction, but you know, that one last step has to occur, and the search has to begin. So until I see that, I just don‘t know if I can go for it or not, Rita.
COSBY: Beth, you have heard if there‘s any more activity taking place at the sand dunes down there? And have you heard anything about new searches about to get under way?
TWITTY: You know, only that it‘s been—you know, it‘s still steadily building towards this, but I don‘t think anything has been finalized. And I know that Dompig has said that he wanted to coordinate a search with the Dutch Forensic Institute in Holland, but the last I heard, he wasn‘t even going to begin this until March. So I‘m not real sure. He doesn‘t seem to be putting any sense of urgency into the search. So something just doesn‘t fit.
COSBY: Yes, it is interesting that they would wait if they do put a lot of credence, on one hand saying credible, and then on the other hand saying that they were going to wait a week or two, although maybe they‘re waiting for a certain type of equipment, Beth. You know, the other thing, that area has been searched a bit, right? Scoured, right?
TWITTY: It has been—well, I think that they had searched it, you
know, several times initially this summer. But you know, the conditions
were just so unforgiving when they were doing the searches during the
summer, I mean, with 98-degree, you know, average temperature. By the time
you know, I think the dogs had a very limited time that they could search. And of course, you know, limited to a small area. So you know, I just think it‘s just a pretty big job for them to undertake, and it‘s just never really been done thoroughly or properly.
COSBY: Is it possible, too, that maybe somebody‘s coming forward or inspired because of hearing that Joran‘s doing these interviews, getting out there, the parents doing the interviews? Is it possible maybe it‘s hitting a chord and someone does have a guilty conscience, Beth?
TWITTY: You know, I can only hope that, Rita—I Hope that, you know, it has caused some dissension among some of them and some of them are now beginning to realize that Joran is—how he is just taunting us, and you know, just as he came forward in the United States and just expected to come over here and be permitted to, you know, begin now to probably discredit the family and on our own soil and—so maybe some people have had enough of it. And you know, we‘ve had the reward money in place, and it‘s $250,000 for information that leads to her whereabouts. And you know, maybe someone is coming forward. You know, we can always hope that.
But I really want to see Karin Janssen communicate with John Kelly, the attorney, that if she has some information, or Dompig has some information, they need to be sharing it.
COSBY: You bet. And of course, you guys are the first and foremost people that should be getting that kind of information. Beth, stick with us because I want to get to right now private Investigator Bo Dietl, who‘s with us right now. He‘s the guy who personally served Joran van der Sloot with a civil lawsuit by the Holloway family as soon as Joran arrived at JFK. And we also have with us on the phone tonight former F.B.I. profiler and MSNBC analyst Clint van Zandt.
Bo, what‘s your reaction? You know, the tone from Gerold Dompig—there seems to be more of a sense of urgency, albeit it sounds like he‘s still waiting a little bit to do the search, but using the term credible, saying that it was someone, you know, who called in this tip, at least from our sources. What do you gather from all this, Bo?
BO DIETL, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Well, if this happened a month ago and he had this tip a month ago, all of a sudden, he decides, I think we‘re going to have an interview coming up in a day or two on ABC, and it‘s just a little funny to me, if you have this credible information, why do you wait to right now to release it? Why didn‘t you release it a month ago, if you‘re going to release it at all, or if you‘re going to keep it quiet and do the search, you do one or the other.
This thing has been botched from the beginning by the Aruba Police. I hope to God that we find Natalee, but as far as I‘m concerned, I feel like that Natalee‘s mom that this could be another just walking down a wrong-way road. As far as I‘m concerned, we have a real viable suspect, and a viable suspect was served papers the other day in New York.
COSBY: And in fact, we‘ve got some pictures of that which we‘re going to put up right now. These are some of the pictures of when you actually were there serving him. And Bo, we‘re going to get to that in one second because I want to hear all the details of what it was like talking to him face to face and his reaction.
But Bo, hearing this also, let‘s say with the chief—and again, this is the Police chief saying, Very credible, and again, who knows, I—you know, we—of course, there‘s been so many of these sort of red herrings through the past—saying that, apparently, something credible he received last month, he feels quote, “strongly that a body is buried somewhere in those areas.” Bo, that‘s pretty strong language from a chief of Police to say.
DIETL: Well, I just—honestly, Rita, as far as I‘m concerned, to get some closure into this case, if there‘s some fact to it, let‘s see it.
COSBY: You know what? Bo, could these interviews and these kind of things, all the attention, be spurring to someone to finally say, You know what? You know, one of the sources we were talking to is hearing that the person who called said, I feel sorry. I feel some remorse. I feel some regret. That was something similar to what Renfro was just saying. Is it possible that maybe some of all the attention is getting someone to come forward with information, have a guilty conscience?
DIETL: You know, Rita, there‘s all types of cases that surface through people who feel guilty if they commit murder. And there are people who don‘t feel guilty, and people try to blame other people, or to get the publicity around it. There‘s a lot of avenues here. I just hope that we get closure in this case eventually.
COSBY: You bet. And of course, we want the best of information for Beth and the family, of course, much better news than even what Dompig is suggesting here.
You know, let me bring in Clint. Clint, what is your reaction now, the tone from Dompig, putting a little bit on that and saying that on the record with us and some other news organizations?
experienced F.B.I. criminal profiler CLINT VAN ZANDT, FORMER F.B.I. PROFILER, MSNBC ANALYST: Well, there‘s two different issues here, Rita. Number one is a Dutch television program three days ago, in which Joran van der Sloot and his father were both interviewed in Dutch, but I‘ve seen the translation. And in that interview, Joran suggested he didn‘t like Natalee, she wasn‘t a sweet girl. He says he wouldn‘t have dated her. He says she was drunk. He says she was coming on him.
These are the type of things you hear, Rita, when a suspect, a serious suspect, is trying to dehumanize their victim. They‘re trying to blame it on the victim. I mean, this girl is still missing and likely dead, and whatever Joran van der Sloot‘s involvement, it doesn‘t help anything—obviously, her family, or himself—to start dehumanizing the primary victim in this.
And number two, when the information that you‘re breaking right now that‘s coming out, this telephone call—supposedly, it‘s a telephone call. The caller called in. He was crying. He spoke in Papiamento, which as you know, is the native language in the Philippines, suggesting that he had information that could lead to Natalee. As Beth says, this has been out for a couple of weeks. If, in fact, it has, my question is, why are the Aruban Police one more time dragging their feet? If not the cadaver dogs, get out the ground-penetrating radar. Get what you have to, and let‘s find it or rule it out.
COSBY: Absolutely. Just stop dragging your feet. Bo, real quick, your response?
DIETL: You know, we had the Palm Sunday massacre. For one week, we had some nut that took us all over Brooklyn, saying that he had information, to different phone booths, to this phone booth, that phone booth. And it turned out that he wanted to insert himself into the story and he‘s making fictitious phone calls to the station house, to the 75 squad. This happens a lot of times, where people want to insert themselves into a story. It could very well be.
COSBY: Absolutely. And again, we don‘t know, at this point. The only signal we‘re getting from the Police is that it sounds like they‘re taking it a little more seriously. I wonder if he gave something to verify it or, or if it is just, again, a tip, at this point.
Everybody, stick with us. Still ahead, we‘re going to have a lot more on that new tip coming in on the Natalee Holloway case. Plus, we knew the van der Sloot's were surprised when they got served with the lawsuits in New York City. So how did Team Holloway find out Joran and his parents were in the U.S.? Who gave them the big tip, and how did it all go down? That‘s next.
Plus, on another story, could the words of an escaped killer help track him down? For the very first time on LIVE AND DIRECT, you‘re going to hear his voice just days before he got out. Does the interview hold any clues to where he‘s hiding?
And a big twist in the case of a teacher who had sex with a handful of teenagers. Tonight, find out why her own husband is in trouble for his own scandalous trysts. It‘s all coming up on LIVE AND DIRECT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COSBY: Back now on LIVE AND DIRECT with breaking news in the Natalee Holloway investigation. Deputy Police chief Gerold Dompig says he‘s getting ready to launch a new round of searches in Aruba after getting what he calls a credible tip. According to the Police chief, this tipster says he knows exactly where Natalee Holloway's body is buried on the island.
Back with us right now is private Investigator Bo Dietl. Also former F.B.I. profiler and MSNBC analyst Clint van Zandt, and also Tim Miller from the Texas EquuSearch, who knows that area well. And still with us, of course, is Beth Holloway, of course, the mom of Natalee Holloway.
Bo, let me get to you first. How detailed is it going to be, how tough to pin down this search? And particularly, you just heard from Renfro it‘s an enormous area of the beach, when I was down there.
DIETL: Yes, but they have—they have technology. They have this heat-seeking cadaver technology that they could utilize from the United States. If they welcome the technology over there, I think they could put that to rest. If that body is there in that area of five football fields, that‘s not really that much for a search. And possibly, if the body is there, they can find it.
COSBY: Tim, you‘ve got state-of-the-art equipment. How tough do you think it‘s going to be to pinpoint this and see if this is credible or not?
TIM MILLER, TEXAS EQUUSEARCH: I think in five days, we could make that determination. In fact, I had contact with Gerold Dompig yesterday and...
COSBY: What did he tell you?
TIM MILLER: ... and I offered that equipment again. I let him know how difficult it would be with dogs over there. I mean, we‘ve had people probing the ground and dogs and—you know, and that sand that fills up the holes that we had probed. And with the ground-penetration radar equipment, I think in a matter of three days, with eight of them units out there, Natalee could be found. So we‘re holding off our water search. His response to me yesterday was that under no circumstances is he going to allow us to do any land searches.
Now, Tim, really—he‘s not going to let you do any land searches, which is crazy. And again, we‘re looking at pictures—this is me and Art Wood, when the two of us were down there searching right at that area by the lighthouse. Tim, very quick, did he give you a sense how credible or not this tip was? I mean, he‘s using some pretty strong language.
TIM MILLER: Well, you know what? I still believe Gerold Dompig wants to solve this case. I‘ve got a lot of faith in him. I think he‘s doing what he can do with this case, with what he has to work with. And I‘m here to support him in any way of helping bring Natalee back home.
COSBY: Absolutely. You know, Bo, I want to get you in because I want to show the pictures because you actually were face to fa#e with Joran van der Sloot. You actually served him. He was served, what, once on the plane, and then there‘s the picture right after he got to JFK. Bo, what was that like?
DIETL: Well, you know, this was a very—we only got information on Wednesday that the father was coming in with his family and that Joran was going to be coming into New York. So we were going to fly someone out to Amsterdam to get on the plane because when the plane arrived, we had it all set up. We were going to serve him on the plane. But we also wanted to serve the father and not alert the father that we was going to serve him.
We had a surveillance team at Kennedy which followed the father and the family to the Lucerne Hotel in Manhattan. So we took a room in the hotel, and we waited. We waited until the son got on the plane. We had an operative on the plane. And then when we knew he was in the area and he couldn‘t communicate with his father, we then served the father at 1:00 o‘clock in the lobby.
Now we waited for the plane to come off. Upon the plane landing, the operative served him the papers. We were e-mailed that the papers were served properly. But what I wanted to do is make sure there was not going to be a doubt, so we waited. There was a hold-up, about a two-hour hold-up. There was a watch—he was on the watch list, I believe by the FBI, and they kept him in there about two hours longer from when the plane arrived.
When he came out, immediately, some fellow there came running over to him and threw a coat over his head. Now, Joran‘s about 6-foot-6. He‘s a big guy. And I went over there and I told him, This is an official process. I‘m serving you a summons and a complaint. And this person got in between me, pushed—tried to push me away, but he didn‘t push me too far. I pushed him back. And I served him. I stuffed the papers right into his jacket. And I said, Why don‘t you take the coat off? You look like Darth Vader or something there.
So I followed him, and then I wanted to make sure. He took the papers out, and he crumpled them up and he threw them down on the floor. We should have had him arrested for littering New York City. And then we followed him to the cab, and I kept asking him, Where did you bury that little girl? Why don‘t you come clean? I was—you know, I got very personal. I got two daughters, also. If this guy has nothing to do with it, let him start cooperating, stop lying and start telling the truth of what happened that night.
COSBY: And Bo, can I hear Beth in the background. Beth, what do you want to say to Bo Dietl?
TWITTY: Oh, listen, I hear him loud and clear, and I am with him 100 percent. And you know what I was thinking, Rita? For just a second, I was caught off guard and I almost bit into the information that Dompig—that was coming out of Dompig. But all of a sudden, I had these nine months of flashbacks. And you know, no, I‘m not going to do it because all I‘ve had from Dompig is talk. I‘m going to wait on John to give me an answer because he‘s the only man in the investigation that‘s shown any action. So I‘m not going to bite on it, Rita.
COSBY: And you have a great attorney by John Q. Kelly. You know, Beth, what do you think of—pretty incredible, just the orchestration to get, you know, Bo there at JFK, as you just heard from Bo, the guy—the former guy from Scotland Yard. Pretty amazing. What did you think, Beth, of Bo getting him on one end, someone else on the plane, and then Paulus, somebody in the lobby?
TWITTY: You know, it was just a brilliant move on John‘s part to put
all this together and to execute it, and involving Bo. I‘m just—you
know, look forward to the day that I get to meet Bo. And you know, I just
am just amazed at what all these men have been able to accomplish.
DIETL: John Kelly, one of the finest attorneys, has brought us in a couple months ago, Rita. Nobody knew that they were involved with it. I‘ve had detectives in Aruba through John Kelly, and we‘ve developed a lot of information. And the thing is, obviously, my face in Aruba, everyone knows who I am. So we sent our detectives, the finest detectives in the world there, and we‘re hoping that we can come to conclusion. And we‘re hoping if something happened to Natalee, we hope we‘re going to make them pay, one way or the other.
COSBY: And it sounds like you certainly caught them by surprise. Beth, real quick—I want to keep—I want to actually hold both—I want to hold Beth, actually, if I could. And Bo, thank you very much because I very much appreciate your insight and for you being here and also sharing the pictures.
I want to bring in, if I could, and get reaction to, of course, all these developments that have taken place from someone who actually knows and has spoken to Joran actually in the last few days. That is the person who negotiated, actually, the van der Sloot's‘ recent trip to New York City. LIVE AND DIRECT tonight is the president of Silver Creek Entertainment, Larry Garrison. He also co-authored the new book—it‘s a book that‘s coming out, “Aruba: The Tragic Story of Natalee Holloway and Corruption in Paradise.”
Larry, I got to get your insight because you‘ve talked to Joran in the last, what, few days? When was the last time you talked to him?
LARRY GARRISON, SILVER CREEK ENTERTAINMENT: I spoke to him. But before we get into that, I‘d like you to know that I spoke to Dave Holloway, who‘s been extremely proactive, searching for his daughter in Aruba, working with Dompig and other people. And it is our contention right now that this is old news. We have...
COSBY: This is the tip, you‘re talking about, Larry, right, the tip that Dompig is saying is credible?
GARRISON: Exactly. And it‘s old news. And knowing that “Good Morning America” and “Primetime Live” is airing on Thursday night, all this is, is damage control. It‘s a shame. It‘s—you know, it‘s another roller-coaster that Aruba is putting this family through.
I also want to let you know, on the book that I wrote with R. Stephanie Good and Dave Holloway, that we created a foundation, the Natalee Holloway Foundation for Missing Persons, and to also continue the search for Natalee.
COSBY: So some of the proceeds will actually go to this foundation?
GARRISON: And for other missing persons.
COSBY: Yes, how—how—Larry, how did—everybody‘s wondering—you have this deal with Dave Holloway. How did you—how did you finesse and get the deal with Joran and his family? It‘s opposite ends.
GARRISON: Well, I went undercover, basically, once I started writing the book with Stephanie and Dave. And what we did was, I had to report, as a journalist, both sides of the story. I had spoken to Deepak Kalpoe. I also then befriended Joran van der Sloot. And I believe there are two sides to every story, and any individual has their opportunity to be able to speak out. And we wanted to get the truth.
COSBY: And real quickly, what‘s their mood tonight, the family, Joran van der Sloot‘s family?
GARRISON: Well, I really can‘t answer that question only because there‘s a pending—the “Primetime Live” is going to be out Thursday night, and more or less, I‘m under a gag order with that. I can tell you that it was an ordeal for everybody in New York. Hello?
COSBY: Yes. We got you on, Larry.
GARRISON: Are you there?
COSBY: And I‘m sure it was quite a surprise, too, the whole ordeal, too.
GARRISON: It was really something. Now, Rita, I also want to break for your viewers that you actually were the one who called me up on Wednesday evening, when you saw a blog that he was coming to New York. I think John Kelly did a wonderful job with service, but most definitely...
COSBY: And Larry, I also want to cut you off because we just have a couple seconds left. I also understand they also met with an attorney, too. The van der Sloot's, met with an attorney, is that right, when they were in New York?
GARRISON: I was told they met with an attorney, but I was not privy to what came down with that.
COSBY: All right. Larry Garrison, thank you very much. We appreciate you being with us. Thank you.
GARRISON: Thank you.
COSBY: I want to bring back in, if I could, Beth Holloway-Twitty. Beth, you know, as you hear everything, now that you hear that they also met with an attorney, what‘s your reaction, Beth, about the whole ordeal in New York?
TWITTY: Well, they should be taking it seriously, you know, Rita. You know, there—I think that John has shown them that, you know, they were just permitted to enter the United States and just taunt us, as they‘ve been permitted to do on the island of Aruba and Holland, and you know, that we expect some accountability. And I just don‘t think they ever counted on John putting this plan together, and I think it was surprise for them.
COSBY: Well, Beth, thank you very much, and I hope you get some answers, and some good answers soon, Beth. Thank you very much.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-21 the ARUBAAN's news-source "Aruba Tradewinds Times" reported:

(QUOTE)

Another Chapter In The Disappearance of Natalee Holloway

ORANJESTAD/THE HAGUE-"All I want is to receive a fair chance", words of Joran van der Sloot during the interview done by the Dutch television program Nova in New York. Against the advice of his parents and lawyer, Joran flew to New York last Thursday from The Netherlands for an interview with ABC News.

Anita and Paul van der Sloot flew to New York a day prior to the arrival of their son to still support his decision. Heading back to the hotel after a walk in Central Park, they were confronted by a person who handed them court papers. The parents tried contacting Joran via mobile phone to have him immediately proceed through Customs. It was too late, Joran arrived and immediately received court papers in his hands.

The civil suit accuses Joran van der Sloot of injuring a minor, false imprisonment and interfering with custodial relations. It also accuses Paul van der Sloot for causing injury to a minor. In the lawsuit, Natalee Holloway's family asked the court to rule against the defendants, awarding cash, interest, costs, attorney's fees and punitive damages to be
determined at trial.

Joran described his arrival at the airport in New York as very unpleasant, he was constantly harassed by people that handed him the same court papers. In addition he was interrogated for 3 hours at the airport.

In the interview taken by reporter Twan Huys of Nova, Joran said that leaving Natalee alone on the beach that night is the biggest mistake he made. Joran said that Natalee is not as pleasant as many portray her to be, for one she was very persistent and had too much to drink that night.

Earlier in the day Joran and the two Kaploe brothers agreed together with Natalee to meet at Carlos 'N Charlie's that night. Natalee was out with her graduation class at the club. After midnight Natalee insisted on Joran and the brothers Kaploe for a drive in Palm Beach. Joran said that Natalee’s friends told her to get out of the car. We did stop the car for her to get out but she insisted to proceed on driving and shouted back at her friends.

After driving around at night north of Palm Beach, Natalee wanted to step out at the beach nearby the hotel she stayed at. Both Natalee and Joran stepped out of the car and remained alone, the Kaploe brothers headed back home. Joran said that Natalee wanted him to be with her at the beach (not far north of the hotel she stayed at). Joran told her that he could not stay long as he had school in the morning. He then called Satish
Kaploe via mobile phone to pick him up. The latter was found questionable for a time by Police Investigators on the island.

Joran described the initial lie that he and the brothers Kaploe dropped Natalee off at the Hol,iday Inn hotel as dumb. "We thought that this would all come to a happy ending and that she would appear in a few days", said Joran. Joran lied dropping Natalee off at the hotel because he did not want to be confronted with the story that he left a young lady alone on the beach. It is against Joran's principles leaving a lady alone in the night.

Joran is in the U.S. to have a fear chance to prove his innocence in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway on May 30th 2005. On Thursday evening February 23rd the interview with Joran will be broadcasted during prime time on ABC.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-21 the BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA “Birmingham News" reported:

Missing teen's mom says she seeks answers in suit

The mother of Natalee Holloway said Monday a lawsuit filed against a Dutch teen and his father is an attempt to obtain answers about her daughter's disappearance.

The civil suit was filed last week when Joran van der Sloot and his family visited New York City. It calls van der Sloot a sexual predator who sought out blond tourists and asks for damages to be determined in trial, plus interests, costs and attorney fees.

But Beth Twitty said she's looking not for money but for answers to her daughter's May 30 disappearance in Aruba. Holloway, 18, was last seen leaving a bar with van der Sloot, then 17, and two friends.

"That's the ultimate goal to accomplish," she said Monday. "We expect a little accountability; when you step into the U.S., you're going to have to answer some questions."

The suit alleges van der Sloot is "no stranger to sexual assault on young women," citing claims from three young Aruban women that he date-raped them. It also says van der Sloot's parents knew about his "proclivities" and that he received counseling as recently as May.

Twitty said Anita and Paul van der Sloot told her about the counseling when she met with them at their home on the island last summer.

Van der Sloot was arrested and detained in Holloway's case but later released.

The suit presents three counts against Joran van der Sloot, accusing him of injury to a minor child, depriving Holloway of her personal liberty through force and/or the threat of force, and preventing Holloway from returning to her parents.

It also claims Paulus van der Sloot "created a permissive environment ... in which his minor child's criminal proclivities were permitted to fester and be acted upon, unchecked."

Twitty's lawyers say they have jurisdiction because the case was filed in New York and the van der Sloot's were served with papers there when they arrived to record a television interview.

But a public relations group consisting of Aruban government and tourism authorities says the case will make no difference in the investigation.

"A civil case cannot compel the van der Sloot's to return to New York to appear," the Strategic Task Force wrote on its Web site. "Nor is it clear that if the case is accepted, and a judgment imposed, that ... it will hold force in Aruba."

ABC has been promoting an interview with Joran van der Sloot for its Thursday "Good Morning America" and "Primetime Live" shows.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-21 JOHN Q. KELLY stated to FOX News:

(QUOTE)

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, HOST: It was a perfectly timed, highly coordinated mission, and tonight we have pictures taken the moment Joran van der Sloot and his father were served with a lawsuit. Joran was slapped with the suit the moment his plane touched down in New York. At about the same time, his father, Paulus, got his copy in a New York City hotel.
Former New York City homicide detective Bo Dietl served Joran with a copy of the lawsuit. He joins us live in New York, along with Holloway family attorney John Q. Kelly. Welcome to both of you.
Before we get to the actual service, though, John, I want to ask you: The media seems to be quite jazzed up tonight about something going on in Aruba. Is something going on, or is this the media simply getting each other all jazzed up?
JOHN Q. KELLY, HOLLOWAY FAMILY ATTORNEY: It's the latter, Greta, and for lack of better words, what's going on right now is both cruel and misleading. There's no new developments down there. I talked to Karin Janssen the last couple hours, and what we're seeing here, I think, is a certain network trying to recycle old information, represent it as new information, to promote a certain interview that's coming up in the next day or so. And it's incredibly cruel to do to the family. It's, you know, misleading. It's causing another roller-coaster ride for Beth and Dave, when it's not based on anything new or credible. And it's a shame that this goes on for, you know, these purposes.
VAN SUSTEREN: And I suppose I should give the back story to the viewers. For the last several hours, everybody in the media who's been following this story has been making calls down to Aruba, down to sources, because there was some sort of thought that someone knew where the body was buried. But apparently, this is an old story, but nonetheless, it's out there tonight behind the scenes in all the news markets.
KELLY: There's absolutely nothing to it, Greta, so...
VAN SUSTEREN: OK. Great. And it's an old one at that. Bo, all right, you served Joran van der Sloot at JFK airport. You were part of the second service. The first was on the plane. The second was when he had gone through customs. What happened?
BO DIETL, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Well, John contacted us. We've been involved with the investigation for a couple of months. Matter of fact, I had detectives over in Aruba on this case. We got information around Wednesday that the father was coming in and the son was coming. We were going to send one of our operatives to Amsterdam to fly in, but we couldn't get there in time, so we made a contact with one of our associates out of London. We put an operative on the plane.
What we had to do was, we had to serve them simultaneously because if the father got served first, he'd warn his son, or vice versa. So what happened is, when the plane really took off, we then got the papers. We got the index number on them. We had a surveillance on the family, on the father, when he arrived the night before. We followed him to the Lucerne Hotel. We got a room in the hotel. But we had to wait until we knew for sure that the son was on the plane.
Once we knew he was on the plane, then we gave the OK with the papers for it to be served. He was served around 1 o'clock, in the lobby, and that's the first pictures.
When the plane landed at Kennedy airport, the operative went up to him and served him his first time on the plane, the summons and complaint. At this time, we had to wait about two hours because he wasn't released right away. He was on some kind of a watch list. So when he comes out two hours later, I wanted to make personally sure to John and to the family that he was served, not that he says he never got served on the plane. So we had a video camera. We had still pictures. And I then go to serve him.
He walks out. I thought it was Darth Vader. Guy comes running over to him, throws a coat on top of him, over his head, and he comes walking out. And you can see me serving the papers there. I t%ll him I'm serving him with legal court papers, summons and complaint. He wouldn't take them. I stuffed the summons and complaint down his jacket.
What he did was, as he's walking, he took his jacket of. He crumpled the papers up and he threw them down on the floor. I then followed him again. I told him that he was legally served and we had a little conversation back and there was some person — I don't know if he was his bodyguard — gave me a kind of a shove and tried to get in between me and him being served. And I just kind of shoved him back out of the way. And then I followed him out to the cab and I told him, "Welcome to America."
I just didn't like the audacity of him coming out of there. If you don't do anything wrong — normal people come out of immigration with coats on their head. I mean, you can see what the pictures looked like. He looked like Darth Vader.
VAN SUSTEREN: Who put the coat on his head, Bo? Was it someone who was traveling with him? Was it someone from customs? I mean, any idea?
DIETL: Well, I think I have an idea. It was the same guy — he looked a little bit like Jimmy the Cricket. You know, he was, like, a little, slight guy, and he ran over and threw the coat on him. I believe it possibly was from another network there. And he was the one that was getting between us. This was a legal service. He was interfering with a legal service and I think that people have to not draw that line and come across that line.
VAN SUSTEREN: Was it at the curbside?
DIETL: No.
VAN SUSTEREN: Where was this?
DIETL: When you have the opening when they come out of customs, when they come right out, that the doors open up mechanically. That's when he walked up, so this little Gepetto-looking guy goes running over there, throws the coat on his head. And I went over to him and I told him, I have an official legal service of a summons and complaint. I named him by name. And then the guy pushed me out of the way. He wasn't going to push me too far.
And then I went back up and I shoved the papers in his jacket. I says, "You've been served." And as I'm following him, I said, "Why don't you take your jacket off your head?" I said, "If you did nothing wrong, why are you trying to hide your head?"
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, Bo, John, both please stand by. We're going to have much more in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VAN SUSTEREN: When Joran van der Sloot and his father came to New York for a television interview last week, they were surprised with a lawsuit filed by Natalee Holloway's family. Holloway family attorney John Q. Kelly joins us again in New York, along with Bo Dietl, the man who served Joran with the lawsuit.
John, after filing the lawsuit, it became very public. Did that have any impact on your relationship with the authorities, the prosecutor in Aruba?
KELLY: Yes, but it was a positive impact, Greta. One of the first calls I got Friday morning was from Karin Janssen. She congratulated us on what we were able to accomplish. And you know, it's a good relationship. She understood perfectly why I hadn't told her ahead of time what was going on. She appreciated that I walked her through everything that had gone on afterwards. And I've had several conversations with her since.
And you know, what was good about it, Greta, I think it sort of motivated them, too. The van der Sloot's are calculating. They're smart people. And they've sort of had their way with the authorities down there and always managed to one-up, you know, the prosecution team and the Investigators. And I think, finally, they saw that the, you know, van der Sloot 's can be beaten at their own game, if things are done right, and I think it's motivated them a little bit. It's pushing them a little bit, and I think they're that much more inspired to push ahead with this, now that this happened.
VAN SUSTEREN: You know, John, I think it's odd that the prosecutor would congratulate you. I mean, I think other lawyers might because you pulled off sort of what seemed like the impossible feat in terms of service, but I think it odd that the one who has had the obligation to investigate would call and congratulate you.
KELLY: Well, you know, that we're able to accomplish what we set out to do. You know, it has absolutely no bearing on the work they're doing there, you know, she just felt that we were able to do what we set out to do here and accomplished that. So you know, it's a good relationship. We're sharing information. There's an open line of communication. And you know, I'm happy about that, and I think we're going to be able to make progress. We can share information with her and accomplish things here that she can't do down there. And she's keeping us informed of the progress down there, so that's a good thing, Greta.
VAN SUSTEREN: John, Bo was talking about that it took a while for Joran van der Sloot to get through customs and suggesting he might be on some sort of watch list. He's free to travel anyplace in the world, right?
KELLY: Sure.
VAN SUSTEREN: Any idea why would he be on some sort of watch list? I mean, he's not a drug dealer. He's got no charges pending anyplace.
KELLY: That I don't know, Greta, other than maybe it's a name that shows up on different lists, whether it's coverage, whatever. Bo might be better able to answer that than me.
DIETL: You know, Greta, through our contacts, again, at the airport, and through the Immigration contacts that we have, we found out that he was on a watch list from someone — from the FBI. So possibly the F.B.I. agents that investigated the case in Aruba put his name up there, if he was to surface in the United States, they possibly had an opportunity then to interview him again. So I think it came all about from that. And it would be nothing to put someone on a watch list. It's getting yourself off the watch list is the hard part.
VAN SUSTEREN: Indeed. Bo, I heard that there was a little bit of a scuffle at the airport. What happened?
DIETL: Well, when he first walked out, I said this one fellow come running over and he throws a coat on him, and I tell him, "Lookit, I'm serving official papers, court papers here, summons and complaint." I named him by name. And the guy got in between me and he pushed me. And I'm not a guy that's used to being pushed around, so I pushed him back, and he kind of, like, tumbled over a little bit. And then I followed the guy in there, and I get pushed again. I said, "Lookit, I'm not a pushy-type guy, but you don't push me around like this. I am serving papers here legally." And I expressed that to him. But there was no punches, nothing like that and nothing happened to Darth Vader there — Joran van der Sloot. Nothing happened to him.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So Joran didn't get brought into this pushing thing. It was you and someone else that were involved in that.
DIETL: It was a person that had nothing to do with it, as far as I was concerned, and he shouldn't have gotten in the middle of a legal service like that. And he was really interfering with a court document being served legally upon someone.
VAN SUSTEREN: Did Joran say anything to you, Bo?
DIETL: He looked at me with some devilish eyes, I tell you, very devil, like he wanted to do something to me. I did say to him, "Well, take a swing at me, Mr. Joran, like you did to Natalee." He didn't smile at me. He was very upset with me.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. John, so do you know if they've retained counsel? What's the next step in this lawsuit?
KELLY: The next step is theirs to take, Greta. I was told that they have consulted with counsel here in New York. I don't know if they retained someone, and I certainly don't know what their intentions are with the lawsuit. We just have to wait and see now.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Now, obviously, they came to the United States to be interviewed by ABC. Do you intend to watch this interview, John?
KELLY: I'll catch it at some point. Maybe I'll TiVo it and catch it over the weekend or something.
(LAUGHTER)
KELLY: You know, I'll keep an eye on it.
VAN SUSTEREN: How about you, Bo? Do you have any interest in the interview?
DIETL: I really don't want to listen to the interview, and I think some of the news that you got tonight is perfectly directly involved with the interview, like John said. And as far as I'm concerned, if this young man has nothing to do with it, he doesn't have to keep changing his story and he can be more cooperative. If you have nothing to hide, come forward. If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember what you said, my father used to teach me.
VAN SUSTEREN: John, are you going back?
KELLY: To Aruba?
VAN SUSTEREN: Yes.
KELLY: Oh, absolutely. I'll be back there in the next couple weeks, meeting and poking my nose into a few things and keeping the line of communications open and working on some other things, too. I'll definitely be back down there soon.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Bo, John, thank you both.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-21 MSNBC analyst and retired F.B.I. profiler experienced F.B.I. criminal profiler CLINT VAN ZANDT reported:

(QUOTE)

Criminals' motives are elusive to Investigators
Providing clues as to 'why' a crime was committed prove most difficult

COMMENTARY
By Clint van Zandt
MSNBC analyst & former F.B.I. profiler

“Motive is the reason, the why, sometimes the darkest chapter in the darkest book in the massive library we call the human mind.”

Motive is not an element of a crime that must be proved in court. But some crimes are so unfathomable, such as killing your own spouse and child, that a jury may have a hard time believing anyone could do such a thing. Because of this, prosecutors must show motive, the subject’s reason to commit the unreasonable. The prosecution must explain bizarre behavior to a jury of 12, explain the unthinkable, and show how anyone could, and especially why anyone would commit such an offense.

It was a frightening time to live and work in the Washington, D.C., area. During a three-week period in October 2002 men, women, and children were randomly or not so randomly targeted, shot and killed, no matter their age, sex, or race. Bus stops, school yards, shopping malls, and gas stations were all places where the shooter (or shooters) selected their targets, their victims to be. During those 21-days in October, someone, some domestic terrorist, pulled a blanket of fear over tens of thousands of people from Maryland to the District of Columbia and down through Virginia. Unlike other spree killers (multiple victims with no emotional cooling off period in between victims) or serial killers (four or more victims, usually with an emotional cooling off period between victims), this shooter showed no particular choice in his quarry. Profilers call someone who chooses one kind of victim to target a preferential killer. Therefore, since this shooter or shooters seemed to have no preference, any man, woman, or child could be the shooter’s current or future victim. And the shooter had no reason to stop shooting. The only question was “why” had he started shooting in the first place?

Most investigations require six basic questions to be answered. Readers have known these questions for most of their collective lives. “Who, what, when, where, why, and how?” You answer these questions, you have the criminal, and you solve the crime.
“Who” is simple – that’s the victim, the person who gets raped, robbed, murdered. The “who” is the criminal’s ultimate choice. What he did, when he did it, where he did it, and perhaps how he did it, are usually self evident after the crime.

It’s the “why” that is, many times, hard to understand. Not the “why” that has a simple answer—he needed money, he was frustrated, angry, raging, or stupid. The “whys” that are hard to answer are the less obvious, the less sensible ones; the ones that prove to be the most difficult for us to understand.

Most lawyers who go on television to discuss a crime will say that motive, the why of a crime, is not important. In fact, motive is not a legal element of a crime. However, intent or “mens rea,” the mental purpose of performing an act that is forbidden by law, is a legal element of a crime. Motive is the reason, the why, sometimes the darkest chapter in the darkest book in the massive library we call the human mind.

Motive is important because without an understanding of why people commit certain crimes in the way they do, we are left to begin at square one on every investigation, something we simply don’t have the time or the resources to do. That’s where profiling comes in. If law enforcement knows that certain elements of a crime, and certain evidence found at the crime scene, may suggest the type of person who did the crime, then we are on our way to the “why” of the crime that can then take us to the “who” – the person who committed the crime. This can, unfortunately, be a very long journey. Such was the case with the infamous Unabomber.

In May 1978 the first of a series of bombs exploded that signaled the beginning of an almost two-decade long run by a serial bomber. Investigation by various federal, state, and local agencies failed to identify the elusive bomber who continued his activities into the mid 1990’s. The why of these acts was a continual source of frustration for Investigators. Some tried to make the jump to the “who” too quickly. Many street Investigators believed that the unidentified bomber must be a high school educated blue collar worker in the airline industry, while some of us working in the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit believed the unknown suspect was likely be a highly educated man, someone who was more than he seemed. The challenge was the “why,” the motive, the reason that allowed the bomber to stay focused for so many years. Why had someone begun to send (or just leave) random explosive devices across the country, someone who was smart, with the ability to travel across the country – a trait usually associated with someone older rather than younger?

The unknown bomber was angry at someone, probably an authority figure who exerted control over him somewhere between his home and a subsequent academic or business setting, but why? Years after his first bombing the now much-older bomber finally made a demand we could respond to. He sent a 35,000 word treatise, the so-called Unabomber’s Manifesto, to a number of major newspapers in the U.S. with a demand. Publish his wordy indictment, one that railed on and on about modern society and culture, or he’d blow an airliner full of people out of the sky. Was this all there was – almost twenty years of murder and mayhem so a frustrated academic could get a dull and boring thesis published in a way to guarantee that the world would read it?

It was the winter of 1995 and I had just retired from the FBI. I’d started my own crisis management company. The men and women who worked with me had over 100 years of combined analytical and investigative experience. I was fortunate to work with these people, the best in the world in the area of threat assessment and behavioral analysis. On an otherwise slow December day I was called by a private Investigator from the Chicago area. She had a client who had a question. Could my analytical team and I review the known writings of someone and linguistically compare them to a questioned document, in this case the now published Unabomber’s Manifesto. “Yes, we could,” and yes we did. We suggested to our unidentified client that the person who wrote the letters—the exemplars we were provided to review—and the writer of the Manifesto, were the same person. The rest is history—our ultimate client was David Kaczynski and the letters he provided for our review, analysis, and comparison were written by his brother, Ted, a former college professor who failed in his relationships with women and with work, and subsequently moved to a dirt-floored cabin in rural Montana, the Unabomber’s corporate headquarters, where he carried on his lone bomb-making activities. In Ted Kaczynski’s case he was a one-man corporate board. He made the decision on who to bomb and there was no one to vote against him. His vote always carried, his decision was always final. Linking Kaczynski’s believed 15 bombings had always been the challenge for authorities. Hindsight being 20-20, the crimes all came together when Ted was arrested, but the “why,” as partially explained in his Manifesto, was what had eluded Investigators for most of two decades.

It was the “why” relating to the Washington, D.C., sniper case that challenged authorities in a similar manner. Most remember the massive hunt for a lone white male in a white van, neither of which proved to be the case. Here’s the challenge for profilers. Most profiles are based on statistics. Most snipers are lone white males. As an analyst for television news, I offered that this was the normal profile for such an offender, but I further indicated that this was more likely a team vs. a lone sniper, further suggesting that this was a two-man team, one older with military experience, and one person somewhat younger. I also indicated that – even in the face of so-called eye witnesses—because every white van between Maryland and southern Virginia that was being driven by a lone white male had been stopped and checked out by troopers and F.B.I. Agents, I felt that the shooters were neither white nor driving around in a white van.

Motive though was again the challenge for Investigators – the path to the “who.” As no specific race, sex, or age group was being targeted, society as a whole could have been the target. That is, if you shoot any man, you threaten every man. And how and why did he or they target their victims? It was, after all, almost God-like for the sniper to look at a group of adults and children through the sights of his rifle and get to decide who would live and who would die in the next second.

But another reason to target a wide range of victims could be that the shooter had a specific victim in mind. But were he to kill that lone victim, likely someone close to him, it would be obvious to the authorities that the person closest to the victim could be the likely killer. However what if you kill a number of people and have your “real” target as just one of your ultimate victims. You might, you just might, get away with it, as you would no longer be the obvious suspect in a lone homicide. With multiple murders, the authorities could assume it was a spree killer who “randomly” identified and killed people the assailant knew nothing about. This is what the former wife of John Allen Muhammad believes to be the case. She thinks that she was Muhammad’s and John Lee Malvo’s ultimate target, this so Muhammad could get custody of their common children. Ten dead, three wounded, and a nation terrorized by two men with a rifle who drove around shooting people from the trunk of an old Chevy sedan, all because one man wouldn’t accept the child custody aspects of his divorce decree? Were this to be the two shooter’s real motive, it strains the human imagination as to the “why” of human behavior.

Motive. Maybe not an element that must be proved in court. But, the reason and the “why” that we all want to know.

Email Clint at CVZ@msnbc.com

Clint is a frequent contributor to The Abrams Report, Weeknights at 4 & 6 p.m. ET on MSNBC TV

Clint van Zandt is an MSNBC analyst. He is the founder and president of van van Zandt and his associates also developed LiveSecure.org, a Website dedicated "to develop, evaluate, and disseminate information to help prepare and inform individuals concerning personal and family security issues." During his 25-year career in the FBI, Van Zandt was a supervisor in the FBI's internationally renowned Behavioral Science Unit at the F.B.I. Academy in Quantico, Virginia. He was also the FBI's chief Hostage Negotiator and was the leader of the analytical team tasked with identifying the "Unabomber."

(END QUOTE)



2-22-06

On 2-22 the “AP” reported:

(QUOTE)

Dutch teen says his story about missing Alabama woman is 'truth'

NEW YORK (AP) _ A Dutch teenager questioned in the case of a young Alabama woman who disappeared in Aruba last year says he had planned to go to his house to have sex with her the night she was last seen but instead left her alone on a beach.
In an interview with ABC News' "Primetime," Joran van der Sloot, 18, says he did not have sex with Natalee Holloway because they didn't have a condom. He says they "cuddled for a while" and he last saw her "sitting on the sand by the ocean.

Asked whether he had done anything wrong, van der Sloot said, "leaving her there at the beach."

"I should have brought her back to her hotel or I should have made sure I left her with someone, one of her friends, but I just should have gotten her back to where she should have been," he told ABC in an interview to air Thursday at 10 p.m. EST.

Holloway, 18, was last seen May 30, 2005, leaving a bar with van der Sloot and Surinamese brothers Deepak Kalpoe, 21, and Satish Kalpoe, 18. No one has been charged in her disappearance.

In papers filed for a lawsuit in a Manhattan court last week, Holloway's parents allege their intoxicated daughter, who was on a graduation trip with classmates, left a bar with van der Sloot and the Kalpoe brothers at about 1:30 a.m.

Several of Holloway's friends saw her in a car with the youths and asked her to get out, court papers say, but she did not. The court papers go on to allege she was sexually assaulted.

Van der Sloot and the Kalpoes were arrested June 9, 2005, on suspicion of involvement in Holloway's disappearance. van der Sloot acknowledged he was with Holloway but denied any wrongdoing. All were released.

Asked by ABC why he should be believed, van der Sloot said, "because it's the truth."
"It's time to just tell the truth," he said.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-22 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

RITA COSBY: Tonight, another ground-breaking development in the Natalee hallway investigation. For the first time, we are seeing video of Natalee Holloway the night that she vanished. This may be the last video ever captured of Natalee. In this surveillance tape from the Excelsior Casino, not only do you see Natalee sitting at the blackjack table with friends, but the prime suspect in her disappearance—you see him there—Joran van der Sloot, is just a few feet away at the same table. Obtained by ABC News, this is being made public amid word of a possible new search for Natalee. They were at the casino before they all went to Carlos and Charlie's that night, where Natalee was last seen.
On the phone with us right now tonight from Aruba is Julia Renfro from the “Aruba Today” newspaper. Julia, how long have you known about this tape and its existence?
JULIA RENFRO, (the transplanted AMERICAN in ARUBA who moved to ARUBA 17+ years ago and owns an interest in many ARUBA businesses including an ARUBAAN's news-source): Well, actually, Beth Twitty told me already on the 30th of May that she had seen the video, and that's how she identified Joran van der Sloot in the first place.
COSBY: And we're looking at—this is, in fact, Natalee entering the casino. You saw the video before, right? Under what circumstances did you see it? And did you see more than what we're able to see now, Julia?
RENFRO: I've probably seen quite a bit of the tape, and the one thing that you do notice in the parts that I have seen is that there is little or no contact between Joran and Natalee.
COSBY: Yes, it's interesting. In fact, let me play a little—this is a comment that Joran van der Sloot made in the interview that he did with ABC. He talks about how he's portrayed with the media. And then we'll put it in reference to the tape. Here's what he has to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , SUSPECT IN NATALEE HOLLOWAY DISAPPEARANCE: I think I've been portrayed unfairly. I've been portrayed as a murderer and a rapist and everything that I'm not.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: Do you think, Julia, when you see the tape, does it maybe help him in any way?
RENFRO: Well, it certainly doesn't hurt him because he went into the casino prior to the girls. He was playing, and the girls came and sat next to him. And there is very little contact between the Mountain Brook kids and Joran throughout the whole tape. There's an occasional win, where everybody gets excited, and you know, there's a few little conversations between Joran and some of the other Mountain Brook students, but really nothing between Joran and Natalee.
COSBY: And in fact, Joran further says in the interview, he says, “I sat down there, and then within five minutes, there was a group of girls from Mountain Brook school”—Natalee's school—“that came up to me and sat down next to me. And they wanted to play, as well. They had already been drinking that day and had drinks with them,” saying that he had drinks with them.
Do you get the impression from everything you've heard, Julia, that he didn't know them before the Excelsior? It doesn't look like he knows her, almost.
RENFRO: Oh, he absolutely didn't know any of them. He had not met any of them, at that point. That was the first interaction he had had with any of the girls.
COSBY: And how long before Carlos and Charlie's—before they went to Carlos and Charlie's?.
RENFRO: At the point of the video where you have, it's probably about two hours before they actually went to Carlos and Charlie's. And Joran didn't even show up to Carlos and Charlie's until 12:30 that evening. And at about 10 until 1:00, they were already moving people out. And by 1:00 o'clock, Carlos and Charlie's was empty. So there's still very little contact between Joran and these young ladies.
COSBY: And I want to show also and ask you a question about the search real quickly because this is, again, what the chief of Police, chief Dompig, said to us. He said, “Based on this new information, we strongly feel that a body is buried somewhere in those areas,” talking about in the beach areas. “These new searches are because of a tip that we received last month that is very credible.”
Real quick, why—are you getting any sense that there's any urgency in this search, as we're looking to, hopefully, to resolve this?
RENFRO: Well, I have not spoke to Mr. Dompig, but I did speak to Arlene, who did speak to Dompig, who didn't exactly say that, according to Arlene. And it sounds like that was a journalist that, you know, just went a little bit overboard in her statements.
COSBY: All right. Well, thank you very much, Julia. We appreciate it.
So what's the reaction on the island of Aruba to this tape? And also, more importantly, when might we see a new search for Natalee? And were these statements by the chief taken out of context or not?
LIVE AND DIRECT tonight is Steve Cohen. He's a special adviser to the Aruban government. Steve, first of all, let's get to the tape. What's your reaction when you look at the video?
STEVE COHEN, ARUBA “STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS TASK FORCE” MEMBER: Well, first, our reaction is that this tape was a piece of evidence, like all the tapes are.
COSBY: So how did it get out, Steve? That's the other question?
COHEN: Well, I think...
COSBY: If it's supposed to be such a part of the investigation.
COHEN: Well, I think that there are leaks in all investigations. There are so many agendas that are competing here, the reconstruction agenda of the van der Sloot's, the Beth Holloway-Twitty agenda in terms of continuing to put pressure on the family and Aruba, the agenda of Dave Holloway and his forthcoming book, the agenda of Larry Garrison, their agent. You put all these different agendas together and you sort of get a jumble. And of course, in Aruba, what we're concerned about is something very simple and straightforward, is what happened that night? How did Natalee disappear? Was anyone responsible? And did any of them commit a crime?
And this tape, therefore, really doesn't help much in terms of the pursuit of this, which is why I think, in terms of the evidence of the case, we knew that they met beforehand. We knew that the nature of their relationship there was not very close, as Julia told you just before. And also, we also know about this tape that there are many other tapes that show activity before the time when Natalee disappears.
COSBY: You know, we also—we've seen Joran talking a little bit. Obviously, he did the interview with Dutch TV and now the one with ABC that's coming up. Let me show a quote because he was asked, you know, Why did you lie? Why did you change your stories? It's a fact that he's changed his story several times. And he said, quote, “I was scared. I didn't want anyone to know. I didn't know anyone to know I left her on the beach.”
I mean, Steve, do these inconsistent statements still trouble you a lot?
COHEN: I think that the investigation is definitely troubled by the inconsistency of the statements. And please understand—we want your audience to understand that the primary scenario that's still being investigated is what involvement, if any, Joran and the Kalpoes had in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. That is our focus.
In terms of the digging, I want to get to that. There's no question that chief Dompig feels that there is a need to continue digging or excavation by the dunes. That will commence shortly. I won't give you an exact time because I really don't know the exact time, but we will...
COSBY: But why wait? Real quick.
COHEN: Well, I think—I don't think it's a matter of waiting, except for he wants to make sure he has everything together that he needs to do a meticulous search.
COSBY: Let me also—because earlier tonight, on Dan Abram's show, one of the chaperones, the American chaperones, was talking. Let's just listen to a little bit of what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOB PLUMMER, CHAPERONED HOLLOWAY TRIP: These kids were 18 years old, legal to be drafted in our country's service, legal to do what they wanted to do. So we were there in case they needed us just for an emergency, medical emergency or whatnot. We were not there to baby-sit these kids. And that was made well known to us before we ever went.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: I mean, that's what they say, but Steve, you know, we know that some of the kids have been questioned. Is there a chance the chaperones are going to be questioned, too, just in case they saw something?
COHEN: No, I don't think so. I think the information we need in terms of witnesses from the Alabama teens has been concluded. And you know, all of us think that the people that are responsible for this disappearance of Natalee are not the people in Alabama but are more likely to be one of the three suspects. And until that's proven one way or the other, this case will not conclude.
COSBY: All right, Steve. Thank you very much.
And now that we're seeing the surveillance tape of Natalee and Joran at the casino for the first time, what role could this video that you're looking at play? LIVE AND DIRECT right now tonight is pri6ate Investigator Vito Colucci. Vito, you've seen the tape. What do you glean from it?
VITO COLUCCI, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Absolutely nothing, Rita. It'll be shown, if there's ever a trial, as some background information, but it really doesn't give anything. All the main events happened from Carlos and Charlie's on. So it's not really—I mean, it's good. It's news. It's on TV for the first time. But other than that, Rita, it doesn't really mean anything.
COSBY: What do you make of the timing that it came out now, that it was, quote, “leaked” now?
COLUCCI: Well, you know, if they think this is going to help van der Sloot, it really is not going to help him. And I'm so amazed at his statements that he made to “Primetime” that he is a normal teenager. He says—There's absolutely no reason to believe me, he says. He says, I wouldn't believe myself. And...
COSBY: What does that say to you as an Investigator, Vito?
COLUCCI: His own words are going to get him in the long run, I hope. If this was our country, it would get him in the long run. I don't know about over there. He's asked why is he coming forward now? He says, Because it's time to tell the truth now.
But let me say one thing about this search, Rita, if I can, in the sand dunes, OK?
COSBY: Yes, why is it taking so long, Vito? You know, we just heard from Steve Cohen, and he said they're trying to get the right equipment. We know they've turned down some of the best equipment in the U.S.
COLUCCI: Let's let the viewers understand this. The deputy chief of Police gets what he calls a credible tip that her body is buried in the sand dunes, about 500 yards, five football fields this ensues here. He leaves it on his desk. You had EquuSearch on last night, Rita, that said that they can find a body in that area in three to five days, but the Aruban government has not allowed them to do that. So you figure out where we're going with this because I certainly can't. After 30 years of investigative work, this is totally ridiculous. They have said they can find the body. If there's a body there, they said give them three to five days, Rita.
COSBY: And exactly. If you have the information, go for it. Why would you wait? Vito, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-22 ABC correspondent CHRIS CUOMA stated to FOX News that in the 2-23 ABC interview, Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT claims that when he was at the “Excelsior Casino on 5-29 he was not interested in NATALEE, but was interested in one of her friends. CUOMO stated that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT claims that his “plan was to take NATALEE to his home for sex, but when they got close to his home he changed his mind because of his father and brothers being there, so, he asked NATALEE if they could go to her “Holiday Inn” hotel room, which he says she declined. ((but recall that Prime Murder Suspect SLOOT had told all of the MOUNTAIN BROOK classmates that he was a tourist student from HOLLAND who was also staying at the “Holiday Inn!!!!)) CUOMO stated that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT claims that after he left the “Excelsior Casino” and had returned home that he phoned “various friends” to ask them if they could give him a car ride to “Carlos 'N Charlie's,” but it was Current Murder Suspect DEEPAK KALPOE and Current Murder Suspect SATISH KALPOE who actually ended up giving him the ride. CUOMO stated that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT claims that it was Current Murder Suspect SATISH KALPOE (not Current Murder Suspect DEEPAK KALPOE ) who gave him a ride home after he left NATALEE alone on the “Marriott Hotel”/fishermen's huts beach. (the original alibi-lies called for by Current Murder Suspect DEEPAK KALPOE was to keep Current Murder Suspect SATISH KALPOE's name out of the alibi-lie for who picked up Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT from the “Marriott Hotel”/fishermen's huts beach) CUOMO stated that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT claims that he was not wearing a watch the night NATALEE vanished, but if that is true, how does Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT know the, supposed, times of, supposed, events so precisely? CUOMO stated that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT claims that the original alibi-lies were formulated by the Current Murder Suspects KALPOE’s, not by the Murder Suspects SLOOT’s. ((!!!!))

On-2-22 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

DAN ABRAMS: We have talked about this story a lot on this program. Now we've got a videotape. You're looking at just released video of Natalee Holloway and suspect Joran van der Sloot together at an Aruban casino the night she disappeared almost nine months ago. It was obtained by ABC News.
Joran is in the lower left of the circle. Natalee is three people to the right of him. They spent the night at a black jack table before leaving for a walk on the beach where Joran says he left Natalee the night she was last seen. ABC got the video and the first sit-down interview with Joran.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , CHIEF SUSPECT IN THE NATALEE HOLLOWAY CASE: I
sat down there and then within five minutes, there was a group of girls from Mountain Brook School that came up to me and sat down next to me. And they wanted to play as well. They had already been drinking that day and had drinks with them. We played black jack for a while and I told them whether or not to hit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: That was the very interview that led to Joran and his father getting served with a lawsuit on behalf of Natalee's family. Joran and his parents were flying to New York for the ABC interview. Joran from the Netherlands where he's in school. His parents from Aruba.
Paul van der Sloot was served at his hotel and this—you can see that in the video. And Joran was served as soon as his plane touched down in the U.S.
Joining me now my pal ABC News senior legal correspondent Chris Cuomo, who got the interview with Joran. Chris, good to see you.
CHRIS CUOMO, ABC NEWS: Good to see you my friend.
ABRAMS: So bottom line, Joran says he had nothing to do with Natalee's disappearance, right?
CUOMO: Absolutely. He maintains it consistently. Now and obviously the big issue is why didn't he say that right from the beginning? Indeed he did say right from the beginning he had nothing to do with her disappearance. But the story was a very different one from the one he's telling today.
ABRAMS: Did you push him on the inconsistent statements? I mean he said different things at different times about what happened that night.
CUOMO: Yes. Look, I'm no Dan Abrams but I pushed him the way I felt appropriate. Obviously the lies are a big problem. And you know we pushed him for two reasons, right? One is because there are substances of inconsistencies.
The second reason is that you want to see how he reacts without crossing the line from journalism to prosecutor. You want to see one question. Does he ever think about it? How sure is he about it? Does he provide detail about it? Does his story waiver? Does he give odd rationales for it? That was another reason to pursue this interview.
ABRAMS: Here's what Joran says about why he gave the different stories.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: I was scared. I was—I didn't want anyone to know.
I didn't want anyone to know I left her at the beach.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: He admits now, right? I mean he's not challenging the fact that he said initially that he dropped her off at the hotel and then later on that he changes his story.
CUOMO: Yes. He now acknowledges that story was bogus. And Deepak and Satish Kalpoe, the two young men who drove him and Natalee to the beach also say the "Holiday Inn" story was bogus. Where the stories now diverge is about well then what did happen?
According to Mr. van der Sloot , he says they went to the beach. They had a romantic rendezvous and he goes home, picked up by one of his friends, Satish. The Kalpoe brothers however have now recanted on that story and say neither of them picked him up. You know this.
But it adds another layer to what you need to ask him about and to see why it makes sense. You know when we're dealing with people who have told inconsistent or false stories, a big part of the intrigue is well why did you tell that story? Why did you use this detail? What were you getting at? Because sometimes the method of deception may reveal what was being hidden from the truth.
ABRAMS: Does he concede that at least this looks really bad for him?
I mean the last one seen, changes his story, et cetera.
CUOMO: Yes. Absolutely. I think one of the interesting things about this interview is his demeanor. He does seem a little damaged by this. He does seem contrite. And yet at the same time, he does have a little bit of a sense of indignance about him. He doesn't think he's been treated well by the family or by the media even though he lied about the events of that night.
ABRAMS: Yes. Here's what he said about that during your interview.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: I think I've been portrayed unfairly. I've been portrayed as a murderer and a rapist and everything that I'm not.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: There's no sort of Perry Mason moment, though, in this interview. There's no moment where you get the gotcha moment, right?
CUOMO: Well, there have been months and months of investigation by numerous you know prosecutors and Police authorities, and they have not found a smoking gun. I don't think that is what it is really about. Other than your attempt to throw me under the bus and try to diminish me my interview...
ABRAMS: No, no, no, no, no, no...
(LAUGHTER)
ABRAMS: I don't mean it like that. I mean...
CUOMO: No, I know what you mean.
ABRAMS: ... because people are going to ask, they're going to want to know—you know the bottom line to the interview, right, and you said at the outset that he's saying that he had nothing to do with it. But I think that people are also going to want to know, you know is there anything, which we're going to be able to pull from this.
Look, I'm fascinated watching this guy. I would have loved to have gotten this interview. But you know somehow—I don't know. Every once in a while it's going to happen where you get the big one and I don't, so this is one of those rare cases. So with that said, you know people...
CUOMO: Mark it up to one more piece of bad judgment on his part.
ABRAMS: Exactly. People are going to want to know, you know they're going to want to know is there something from this and there is. It sounds like there's a lot of detail, right...
CUOMO: Yes.
ABRAMS: The devil is going to be in the details.
CUOMO: Right. In all honesty, this is an interview that's worth watching. Why? Because until now, you've heard about all of this but not from him. And when you're trying to find the truth, you want to hear it from the mouth of the person who is supposed to be telling it. And I think just in that alone...
ABRAMS: Yes.
CUOMO: ... it is worth it. Because you'll now have fodder for whatever opinions you came into it with. And more importantly, you will hear the questions you want put to this young man put to him. I promise you that.
ABRAMS: Yes. Is it bad that I'm going to admit that I'm going to watch—I don't know. I'm going to watch it...
CUOMO: I watch you.
ABRAMS: Well, you know I'm fascinated by this. All right. Here is Bo Dietl on the program last night. He's the one who served Joran van der Sloot. And I was asking him because I had heard that one of the producers over at ABC was roughed up by Bo. Here's my question and his answer. I want you to talk to me about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: We're hearing from people over at ABC that you roughed up one of their producers who was on the scene there and...
BO DIETL, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: If anything, I was pushed by someone. I don't know if it was a producer. Someone pushed me and I think the tape states exactly what happens and I tell the guy you can't push me. I'm doing an official service.
ABRAMS: Isn't he then thrown on the ground by a couple of people who were with you?
DIETL: No. No. He pushed me and I kind of pushed him back. I said I'm serving a summons. No one else touched anyone else.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Chris, this was someone who was working with you, correct?
CUOMO: Yes. Absolutely.
ABRAMS: And what happened?
CUOMO: Well, what was happening is you know in the general course of things when you have an interview flying in, you go and get them at the airport and you bring them to the location for the interview. And that's what my producer was going.
Look, to traffic in this, if that's what Dietl wants to do, then he can. Obviously the answers to what happened and what did not happen are on his own tape. Because while he was serving process, he was also having it all videotaped by his own cameraperson. So the answers are there. It's not something for us to traffic in, but certainly if he wants to, he has the tape.
ABRAMS: Chris Cuomo, good get, good interview, good stuff. Thanks a lot. Appreciate it.
CUOMO: Thank you pal.
ABRAMS: You can see Chris' entire report tomorrow night on prime time on ABC.
Joining me now MSNBC analyst and former Connecticut prosecutor Susan Filan and defense attorney Jonna Spilbor. All right, Jonna, bad idea for Joran to go public?
JONNA SPILBOR, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I am mortified just thinking about the interview. Look, here's the thing, Dan. I have a philosophy and it goes like this. Always tell the truth. Just don't always be telling it. And that philosophy is always on point when you're dealing with a defendant or in this case, a potential defendant.
Here's my question for Chris Cuomo. Why did this guy give the interview? He's acting as if he's already been acquitted, you know, and he's far from it. Charges could be leveled on him at any time. And when you give a public statement like this, which is forever...
ABRAMS: Well I'll answer for him...
SPILBOR: ... memorialized on tape...
ABRAMS: I'll answer for him, OK...
SPILBOR: All right.
ABRAMS: Because when you're a reporter, trying to get an interview, you don't say to the person doing the interview hey putz (ph) don't do this interview. That's for the lawyer to do.
SPILBOR: No...
ABRAMS: That's for his lawyer to do.
SPILBOR: No, exactly.
ABRAMS: Right.
SPILBOR: No, no, no. I'm not—this is a really good get—and I'm sorry that you didn't get it, Dan.
ABRAMS: Yes.
SPILBOR: But I want—if I'm advising Joran as his attorney, I'm going to sit him down and say don't talk. And if you talk, you are an idiot. And he talked. So there you have it.
ABRAMS: Yes. Susan, you know I wonder at some point, though, someone like Joran I think has to make a statement. Meaning, he's made so many statements to the Police at this point that they have, I'm sure, everything he said on record. And I know prosecutors are going to try and use, you know if he makes something—a little detail ends up being different, it can come back to hurt him. But I wonder at this point whether it was a smart strategy or not.
SUSAN FILAN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: Well he's obviously trying to clear his name. He had a hearing in Aruba trying to get his name cleared. He thinks that he's been treated unfairly. He thinks he's been branded as a rapist and a murderer. And this is his attempt to clear himself.
But I think that they're still suspicious of him and they're looking at him very carefully. And this interview is going to hurt him. It is one more piece of the puzzle. And I guarantee you, and I haven't seen it yet, and I'm going to watch it, too that there's going to be something different in this interview and these answers than what he gave before.
And that is going to hurt him. And it is not going to be because time has elapse and his memory has changed or faded. It's because he's trying brick by brick to etch himself out as a suspect. And he's not going to be able to do that.
ABRAMS: All right. Susan Filan and Jonna Spilbor, if you can just stick around. Because coming up, a lot of people wondering what Natalee was doing at the casino late at night.
Up next, an exclusive with the man who was in charge of her trip. The chaperone finally speaks out.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ABRAMS: We are back with an ABRAMS REPORT exclusive in the Natalee Holloway case last seen nearly nine months ago. Natalee was in Aruba last May celebrating her high school graduation and after a night at a casino and Carlos N' Charlie's bar she never came back to her hotel.
Since then, many have asked where was the chaperone? Why was she out so late? Why was she at a casino? Joining me now to answer those questions in an exclusive interview, Bob Plummer, teacher and the chaperone on the Aruba trip.
Bob thanks a lot for taking the time. We appreciate it. So tell me, what happened? I mean a lot of people are saying where was the chaperone? Where was the chaperone?
BOB PLUMMER, CHAPERONED NATALEE HOLLOWAY'S ARUBA TRIP: Well, number one. We had been—we had met with the students and the parents before we went down there. And we were not there as chaperones. We were there mostly for contact purposes in case there was an emergency.
That was understood by the parents, by the kids. These kids were 18 years old. Legal to be drafted in our country's service. Legal to do what they wanted to do. So we were there in case they needed us for an emergency, a medical emergency or what not. We were not there to baby sit these kids. And that was made well known to us before we ever went.
ABRAMS: Some of them were 17 though. Did that matter? Did it matter if they were 17 versus 18 as to your supervision?
PLUMMER: They did not go anywhere like that if they were 17. If they were underage, they didn't go into the bars or anything like that.
ABRAMS: And what was done to make sure of that though? I mean what was—was there—were you involved in monitoring them to make sure they didn't go into certain places?
PLUMMER: There were three or four. And we knew who those kids were and we didn't have to worry about that. We knew that going in. And they knew it also. See, that's part of the problem here. And that's part of the reason why I decided to come on the show was to dispel these myths about well these kids were just down there for a drunken party, a drunk fest and were out of control.
They were breaking things and were breaking the law. And that's totally false. And that's what is really irritating me the most, is people assuming things like that about these kids that they don't know. And that couldn't be further from the truth.
I can't tell you how many adults we had come up to us and tell us what good kids these were, how well behaved they were, how they conducted themselves like adults. And they were some—you know they were kids we should be proud to be associated with. And I am and I was then and I still am.
ABRAMS: When did you or anyone who was with you realize that Natalee wasn't there on the return trip?
PLUMMER: The next morning when we're checking passports, checking off a list. We had a list that we—I met with the kids every day, the whole chaperones, the whole group. We met with the kids every day and I would physically see them. Not if—you know if someone said well so and so is in the shower or so and so is asleep, no, go get them. Bring them here.
So we knew you know where they were. That next morning, we went and woke them up. We physically went to each room. The chaperones did to wake the kids up to make sure that they were awake, getting their stuff together so that they would not miss the bus to the airport. We had two separate charters going to the airport. And so when we got that first bus off and was in the process of starting to get everybody together for the second bus, about 10:00, that's when we realized she was not there.
ABRAMS: And what did you do when you realized she wasn't there?
PLUMMER: We immediately went to the room, started talking to her roommates. And after, you know pretty quickly, 10, 15, 20 minutes we determined she was not there on the grounds. We notified the security there at the hotel and told them you know we were concerned that she had not come back because that was not something in her character.
ABRAMS: And what happened next? You go to the security and then did you contact her parents immediately?
PLUMMER: Yes, within about 30 minutes. We called the person that had set up the trip. And then they called her parents to tell you know that she was not there because we—the buses were getting ready to leave to go to the airport and she was not there to get on the bus. So yes, it was pretty quick after that we notified them that you know something is not right.
ABRAMS: And I assume that the friends and the—that you spoke to had said almost immediately that they had seen her with Joran van der Sloot or someone who they described as him and Deepak and Satish...
PLUMMER: Yes.
ABRAMS: Right?
PLUMMER: Yes. We—I would say it was not long after that. We already had that name from the kids. We knew you know the name of who that was and who that she was last seen with.
ABRAMS: Had you seen him before?
PLUMMER: Vaguely. You know I would not say that I remember seeing you know this gentleman in the casino around the hotel because you know was not looking for him so I can't say that you know for sure that I did.
ABRAMS: Did you—again, when you say that you didn't see him at the casino, there was a monitoring process in place where you would see which kids were out at which places and you say that the 18-year-olds, for example, you know you couldn't control everything that they did, et cetera, but were you responsible, for example, for making sure that certain pe/ple didn't drink too much?
PLUMMER: No. No. That was not our job and didn't have to worry about it. Like I said before, out of all the kids down there, I guarantee there was not more than a handful that we had to even at one time or another, even though it was not our responsibility. If I thought someone might have had a little too much, I would say, look, you know I think you've had a little too much. Why don't you go to the room?
Even though we were not supposed to do that, it was more us doing it out of just a concern for these kids because these were kids that we had you know watched go through school and you know had a little bit of concern for. But no, I didn't—that was not our responsibility. And like I said, it never became a problem.
ABRAMS: Do you think...
PLUMMER: But also, the kids...
ABRAMS: Yes...
PLUMMER: ... the kids never—they never really left anywhere. We were there at that resort every day. I think out of the four days we were there, I was off the premises of that resort for two hours on Saturday afternoon when we went to—went into town to shop a little bit. Other than that, myself, the other chaperones, we did not leave that resort.
And the only time that the kids did, they had a snorkeling trip set up for half the kids one day and then half the kids next day. And then also other—besides leaving going there, the only other place they went was down to Carlos N' Charlie's in the little area there around the bar.
ABRAMS: Did you see Natalee at Carlos N' Charlie's that night?
PLUMMER: No, I didn't go.
ABRAMS: OK. Did any of the people who were running the—who were chaperoning, did any of them see...
PLUMMER: One of the other adults went, yes, even though he was not required to go, he did go, yes.
ABRAMS: What did he say about what he saw there?
PLUMMER: Other than just the kids having a good time. He didn't say there was no one out of control. There was no one rowdy, no one didn't—you know didn't—didn't seem like they were really drinking too much. That was the indications I got.
ABRAMS: Did he describe Joran's demeanor?
PLUMMER: Not that I can recall, no. And that's the thing too...
(CROSSTALK)
PLUMMER: You know he was probably not looking for this guy because at that point in time no one was specifically looking to identify this guy. I mean you know he was not—no one knew that he was a danger at that point.
ABRAMS: Why are you going public now? I mean this has been many, many months later. It sounds like you're frustrated.
PLUMMER: Yes, frustrated because the misinformation and the lies that have been told about either the kids or about Natalee's parents, what went on. How the kids control themselves or didn't control themselves. It just got so irritating listening to that. You know as far as what people think of the chaperones, I could really care less because I'm comfortable with what we were doing.
We were doing what we're supposed to do. The parents of the kids are comfortable with it. The kids are comfortable with it. So as far as that is concerned, I'm not really concerned with that. But the fact that people continuing to question the behavior of these students, the behavior of Natalee's parents and as far as their motives and what they're doing, it just gets ridiculous after a while.
ABRAMS: And when you say that, you mean why would Natalee's—because we get e-mails all the time. Why would Natalee's parent have sent her on this kind of trip, et cetera?
PLUMMER: The thing is too I tell people over and over again, this could happen anywhere. I mean why is it that because she was sent on this trip—that it could happen anywhere. People don't go missing every day on the streets of America and they're never found? I mean why is it such a big shock that they let her—and most of this—one thing, too. Most of these students are very well seasoned travelers. These kids have had opportunities provided to them...
ABRAMS: By themselves though...
PLUMMER: They've traveled more than most adults...
ABRAMS: Traveled by themselves?
PLUMMER: ... they're not that naive.
ABRAMS: Traveled by themselves?
PLUMMER: Pardon me?
ABRAMS: They'd traveled by themselves?
PLUMMER: Yes, sir.
ABRAMS: Yes.
PLUMMER: I'm sure they probably have.
ABRAMS: So in retrospect, anything that you would have, could have, should have done differently?
PLUMMER: No. Not at all. I mean you know like I said, we met with the kids each day. We were around them all day every day. But like I said, these were 18-year-old students who were going to be leaving home within two months, going to different cities throughout the United States and some out—throughout the world to different universities, living on their own, going places, wherever they wanted to do, doing what they wanted to do. So you know what are you supposed to do?
ABRAMS: Let me ask you a final question. Tell us what...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: ... Natalee was like. You must have gotten to know her at least a little bit on the trip.
PLUMMER: A very sweet girl, was—she was not a very I guess what you'd call a party person. She was pretty much a reserved student, always had been. Fairly quiet. Just a very nice, outstanding young woman.
ABRAMS: Bob Plummer thanks a lot for taking the time to come on the program and I guess the term could be clear the record. Thanks a lot.
PLUMMER: Yes. Thank you.

(END QUOTE)



2-23-06

On 2-23 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS ABC TV channel 7 reported:

(QUOTE)

Aruban casino boss had ties to Chicago mob
Missing Alabama teen last seen at casino

February 23, 2006 - Authorities on the island of Aruba have not been able to solve the mystery of what happened to Alabama teenager Natalee Holloway. She disappeared while on a high school trip last spring. The ABC7 I-Team has learned new details about the casino where Holloway was last seen, an Aruba casino run by a convicted high-ranking Chicago mobster.

The unsolved disappearance of 18-year-old Natalee Holloway has commanded worldwide attention. It has been widely reported that the last place Holloway was known to be alive was the Excelsior casino connected to the "Holiday Inn" where she and her classmates were staying.

The I-Team has learned that the casino where Holloway was last seen is operated by Chicagoan Michael Posner. The intelligence report on Posner lists him as a prominent member of the Chicago outfit for more than 40 years.

According to federal law enforcement, Michael Posner's most recent mob assignment was boss of illegal rackets in the north suburbs. Posner was convicted in 1987 of threatening wayward gamblers with death and running prostitutes out of this Lake County strip club.

Through his Chicago lawyer, Posner maintains that he has been clean for 15 years and since 1998 has operated the Excelsior casino on the Caribbean resort on the island of Aruba.

Last May, honor student Natalee Holloway was staying at the resort on her high school graduation trip when she disappeared. One of the last places she was seen alive was in Posner's Excelsior casino.

In security tape obtained by ABC News, Holloway is seen at a table seated next to Joran van der Sloot, a local who is the prime suspect in the case. van der Sloot admits having had a romantic encounter with Holloway, but in an exclusive interview to air Thursday night on Primetime, he says he is no criminal.

"I think I've been portrayed unfairly. I've been portrayed as a murderer and a rapist and everything that I'm not," van der Sloot said.

Casino boss Michael Posner denies that he knows van der Sloot and denies ever extending him casino credit. Posner's lawyer Allan Ackerman says Posner was in Chicago when Holloway vanished and returned to Aruba the day after.
Now 64 years old, here's the intelligence report on Michael William Posner:

* aka Michael Rubins and Irving Goldstein.
* his family still resides in Riverwoods.
* his criminal profile lists involvement in illegal gambling, strip clubs and vending machines.
* criminal history dates to 1960 includes numerous arrests and successful tax and racketeering prosecutions.

Posner says it was he who voluntarily turned over this casino surveillance tape to Aruban authorities and that he is furious they have allowed ABC News to broadcast it.
Posner says he has paid the expenses for private Investigators to come here and assist in the search for Holloway and according to his lawyer: "He has nothin' to do with nothing" in the murder case.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-23 the “Aruba Strategic Communications Task Force” reported:

(QUOTE)

The ABC Primetime Interview Offers Nothing New

American viewers are being given the opportunity to hear Joran van der Sloot, “up close and personal” on PrimeTime on ABC. The interview, which has received much promotion, and conducted by Chris Cuomo, offers nothing new to anyone following the Natalee Holloway case.

It’s another opportunity for Joran and his family to present their side of the night Natalee disappeared. But, it is a familiar story. He claims they were together, cuddled, left her on the beach. He offers his remorse for leaving her, but contends he did nothing more, and knows nothing more about what happened to her.

While there is always value in actually hearing from those directly involved in an investigation, viewers, who have not followed the case, will be hard pressed to determine from this interview what is truthful and what is not.

For Aruban Investigators, the interview and the tape of Joran gambling with Natalee and her friends, offers nothing of new value.

It has always been known that:

1. Joran met her before Carlos and Charlie’s.
2. He was the last to be with her.
3. His claims he left her alive.

Investigators were not aided by the civil case filed by John Kelly. The information presented was based on some facts, conjecture and anecdotes. All of what was known and claimed to the Aruban investigation team.

All of the competing agendas are not yielding any information that will further the investigation in any obvious manner. The agendas include:

1. The Holloway-Twitty need to pressure the van der Sloot's and continue to impose pressure on Aruban authorities through a carefully orchestrated media campaign.
2. The efforts of the van der Sloot family to reclaim the image of son Joran and force his exoneration by the Dutch courts.
3. The publicity needs of book agent Larry Garrison on behalf of David Holloway's upcoming book.
4. The continuing need of US cable programs to use the story to hold onto slipping viewer interest.

All of these agendas do not coincide with the direct efforts of the investigation team to continue to put together a case that will point to what actually happened to Natalee Holloway and whether or not someone is criminally responsible for her disappearance and probable demise.

In that regard, efforts continue to construct the case, including an expected renewal of excavation of a plot of land in the dunes by the Lighthouse.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-23 “People Magazine” via Internet service provider "America Online" reported:

(QUOTE)

Van der Sloot : No Sex With Holloway

Joran van der Sloot, the Dutch teenager who was one of the last people to see missing Alabama teen Natalee Holloway, says that he intended to sleep with her but did not.

"My intention was to take her to (my) house to have sex with her," van der Sloot tells ABC's Primetime in his first televised interview Thursday, according to the New York Post. "I asked if she wanted to have sex, and she was fine with it."

However, van der Sloot says the pair never did sleep together. "I didn't have a condom with me, though, in my wallet, and I won't have sex with a girl without a condom."
Surveillance tapes obtained by Primetime show van der Sloot sitting at a blackjack table with Holloway, and he admits to spending time with her the night she disappeared.

"I sat down there (at the blackjack table) and then with five minutes there was a group of girls …that came up to me and sat down next to me," he says. "They'd already been drinking that day."

Last week, Holloway's mother, Beth Holloway-Twitty, sued van der Sloot in a civil suit accusing him of imprisoning and sexually assaulting her daughter. van der Sloot , who has not been criminally charged in connection with Holloway's disappearance, denies the charges.

As for how he's been treated in the media, van der Sloot says, "I think I've been portrayed unfairly."

Holloway, 18, disappeared during a class trip to Aruba last May.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-23 the MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI NBC TV channel 11 reported:

(QUOTE)

Holloway: "Interview Full of Lies"

Natalee Holloway's father, Dave Holloway of Meridian, says Joran van der Sloot is lying.

That's after watching parts of an exclusive ABC interview with the prime suspect in Natalee's disappearance in Aruba.

Van der Sloot admits he has lied in the past about the night he spent with Natalee Holloway, but he says he's telling the truth now. He says he left her, unharmed at the beach the night she disappeared and he went home.

"Do you buy anything he's saying?" asked this reporter.

"When somebody lies the first time and then they lie again and implicate two other people, you can't buy anything they say from here on out," said Holloway.

Holloway sat down with us to watch the interview with van der Sloot, and he says there are too many holes for him to be believed. Chief among them, he said, is how the Dutch teen says he left his shoes on the beach and how that isn't proof that he was panicked when he left.

"For someone to say he left his shoes on the beach and jumped in the car and left, something happened," said Holloway. "You don't run off and leave your shoes and then start making up a bunch of lies."

And that is what Holloway said he believes most of what van der Sloot is saying is.

"You think he lied from the beginning and he's still lying, just trying to find a story people will buy?" asked this reporter.

"I think so," Holloway said. "I think you get into this lying process and you lie until someone believes. There may be some truth in what he's saying, but certainly, there's a lot of lies."

Holloway says he hopes eventually, van der Sloot 's lies will catch up to him and one day he will finally know what happened to his daughter on what was probably the last night of her life.

Natalee Holloway, who lived in Birmingham at the time, disappeared on May 30, 2005, the final night of her graduation trip to Aruba.

On June 9, 2005, Joran van der Sloot was arrested on suspicion of her murder. He was never formally charged. On Sept. 3, 2005, he was released from jail.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-23 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

DAN ABRAMS: We're back. Joran van der Sloot, the main suspect in Natalee Holloway's disappearance, is speaking out in an exclusive interview with ABC News, admitting now that he was planning on having sex with Natalee.
Quote—“My intention was to take her to my house to have sex with her. I asked her if she wanted to have sex and she was fine with it. I didn't have a condom with me, though, in my wallet and I won't have sex with a girl without a condom.”
This just released surveillance video shows Joran and Natalee together at a casino in Aruba walking in and then sitting near each other. That's the night she disappeared. Now, Joran says he regrets leaving Natalee behind on the beach the last night she was seen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , CHIEF SUSPECT IN NATALEE HOLLOWAY CASE: At that moment in time, for me it wasn't the wrong thing, but it's definitely the wrong thing to do. I mean it's not something a real man would do. It's not normal. It's not right at all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Joining me now MSNBC analyst and former Connecticut prosecutor Susan Filan, criminal defense attorney Michelle Suskauer and MSNBC analyst and former F.B.I. Investigator Clint van Zandt.
All right. Let me play a little bit more from Joran van der Sloot. This is number one. This is what—how he says he reacted when he heard that Natalee was missing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: The first thing that popped into my head was (EXPLETIVE DELETED) was something happened to her. What if she went swimming, I was thinking after everything she told me she probably might have gone back to her hotel, hooked up with—gone to someone else, hooked up with someone else and wanted to stay another day on the island.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Oh, Clint, you know when he says stuff like that, you know...
experienced F.B.I. criminal profiler CLINT VAN ZANDT, FORMER F.B.I. PROFILER: For crying out loud, Dan...
ABRAMS: Right. I mean even—let's even assume for a moment, OK, that he's totally innocent...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: ... that he's been totally unfairly treated, et cetera...
VAN ZANDT: Sure.
ABRAMS: ... to then just throw out about a woman who is almost certainly dead the notion that, oh, well maybe she wanted to hook up with someone else on the island.
VAN ZANDT: What we see here, Dan, is classic, where he dehumanizes, he devaluates the victim. And you know pretty son he's had nine months to finally come up with some kind of story. We give him three more months and he's going to become a victim of Natalee. She drug him to the beach, she almost beat him to death. He fought her off. I mean his story, Dan, has had nine months to evolve to this point and this is the best he can tell us?
ABRAMS: Yes. Michelle, this...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: ... I mean come on, this is...
MICHELLE SUSKAUER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well you know he really
· another thing is—you know you said let's presume him to be innocent.
I mean I don't know—it would be nice to presume him to be innocent. I mean everybody's already jumped on the...
ABRAMS: Well we don't have to...
SUSKAUER: ... bandwagon...
ABRAMS: Wait. Wait. We're not a court of law.
SUSKAUER: No...
ABRAMS: We don't have the power to take away...
SUSKAUER: No, no, I understand that...
ABRAMS: ... his freedom here...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: ... and as a result we can talk honestly and openly, unlike in a courtroom, where they intentionally stack it in favor of the defendant because the government has the power to take away his freedom...
SUSKAUER: OK and you don't want to get...
ABRAMS: I do...
SUSKAUER: ... you don't want to get started...
ABRAMS: I've said this so many times...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: I—on this program I will not and cannot—I've said it many times—presume people innocent. Because that would mean that in every case I'm presuming that the Police got it wrong. It would mean that in every case I analyze...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: ... I say I'm going to presume the Police got it wrong. In this case he hasn't even been arrested.
SUSKAUER: OK...
(CROSSTALK)
SUSKAUER: We're going to save that conversation for another time because as a defense lawyer it is an absolute uphill battle when you're in the...
ABRAMS: I'm so sorry.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: So good luck to you inside the courtroom.
SUSKAUER: OK...
ABRAMS: That's not what we do on this program.
SUSKAUER: OK, but Dan, Dan, he really had nothing to lose by going on television, because everybody's already demonized him, anyway. So he really...
(CROSSTALK)
SUSKAUER: ... it was—in terms of P.R. he really didn't have anything to lose, but no, I mean changing his story 500 times, yes, that's very harmful to him.
ABRAMS: Here's what he said about why he changed his story.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: I didn't want anyone to know. I didn't want anyone to know I left her at the beach.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why would you lie if you had nothing to hide about Natalee Holloway?
VAN DER SLOOT: I lied because yes, I was scared. I had a girlfriend at the time. I didn't want my dad to think bad of me. I didn't want my friends to think bad of me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: All right, on the other side of the coin, here, Susan, not an entirely horrible defense.
SUSAN FILAN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: I think it's an awful defense.
ABRAMS: Why?
FILAN: Because it's so blatantly inconsistent. First he makes her out to be somebody like himself...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: Look, I agree with you on that one.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: He shouldn't—that was a dumb, insulting thing to do.
FILAN: Trying to hook up with somebody else. Well maybe that's what he's like. Surely she's not like that. We've certainly heard from her mother and her friends and other people that have spoken about her character. That's not what she was like and then to say that I didn't want my dad to know, I didn't want my girlfriend to know. So he's a liar and a cheater and he...
(CROSSTALK)
FILAN: ... lies to his own dad. There's absolutely nothing redeeming in his story whatsoever...
ABRAMS: Well no, look, he wants—he's happy to admit that he's a liar and everything else...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: ... just as long as you don't view him as a murderer.
(LAUGHTER)
ABRAMS: I'm serious.
FILAN: Well it's not working.
ABRAMS: I think he'd be—I think he would accept all the scorn for everything else, but.
FILAN: Yes, but you know when they say in one lie lies several lies, so if he's lying to his dad, he's lying to his girlfriend, do you really think he's telling us the truth? Do you think he's being truthful...
ABRAMS: I don't know...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: I don't know. I don't know.
SUSKAUER: I mean he admitted he's a liar.
FILAN: It's preposterous.
ABRAMS: Yes.
FILAN: Yes and an admitted liar then cannot be afforded the opportunity to be believed when he's trying to get himself out of murder.
VAN ZANDT: No, if he wants to do, Dan, if he wants to do this why doesn't he do a Scott Peterson imitation? Grow his hair long, dye it red, wear sunglasses, and disappear...
(CROSSTALK)
VAN ZANDT: ... somewhere for two years...
ABRAMS: Yes.
VAN ZANDT: ... and it's going to go away. But instead he insults the intelligence of anyone who watches a program like this and says oh here comes lie number 21. See if he'll buy this one.
SUSKAUER: OK, but you know this is also not an adult too. This is a 17-year-old kid at the time, who—you know 17-year-olds and teenagers you know have a tendency to go into self-preservation mode and make up all kinds of things. So you know I mean he was also 17. So...
ABRAMS: All right. Let me switch topics for a minute. We had an exclusive interview with the chaperone from the trip. Everyone had been wondering—so many viewers writing into this program, what about the chaperone, what about the chaperones, where were they? Here was the chaperone—number five—on this program last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOB PLUMMER, CHAPERONED NATALEE HOLLOWAY'S TRIP TO ARUBA: We met with
the kids each day. We were around them all day, every day. But like I said, these were 18-year-old students who were going to be leaving home within two months, going to different cities throughout the United States and some out—throughout the world to different universities, living on their own, going places, whatever they wanted to do, doing what they wanted to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Susan, I accept that. I mean look, I think that this notion that oh everyone's blaming the chaperones. And you know his position was look we were just told to sign—the parents all signed papers that basically said we were there in case there was an emergency, we were the contacts, we were making sure the 17 years old weren't going to the bars. And in Aruba it was legal for 18-year-olds to go to a bar. I mean there wasn't enough chaperones I assume for every chaperone to be monitoring every person.
FILAN: By my math there was one chaperone per 20 students. And the thing is his statement was inconsistent. First he says we're not there to monitor and we're not there to supervise them. But then he says we made sure that there was a head count. That they were in their room and if they weren't and someone said they were, we made them come.
Well what is it? You're policing them or you're not? The other thing that I thought was ridiculous is he says they're going to be going off to college soon, well they are not yet. And when you do go off to college, you get on campus, you get an orientation. You get some kind of a transition from being a kid living under your parent's roof at home and having been...
ABRAMS: When you go on this kind...
FILAN: ... going out into the world.
ABRAMS: Wait a sec. Wait a sec. Then the bottom line is if that—if it's the sort of moralistic position about don't send—I guess your position is then that Natalee's parents are at fault for sending her on this trip?
FILAN: Absolutely not. My position is be square about what your position is. Say it like it is. You're either there to really Police and monitor those kids or it's a free for all...
ABRAMS: Why can't it be somewhere in between? Why can't it be the reality that they're not there to monitor each and every one of their movements, but they're generally there to make sure that the kids are all right. And you can say well they didn't do a very good job. OK, you know someone ended up being hurt and missing and they noticed it the next morning. So now we're blaming the chaperones for everything that happened?
FILAN: I'm not blaming the chaperones. I just didn't think his statement added up, I thought he was talking out of both sides of his mouth. And that was the problem that I had. Tell us what it was. What was the actual situation? You're there to monitor them or it's a free-for-all and they're on their own. I don't think that what he said squared. I thought it sounded like...
ABRAMS: Clint...
FILAN: ... very defensive explanation...
ABRAMS: Am I being naive, Clint, to just...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: ... believe that maybe it was somewhere in between as to the role of the chaperone?
VAN ZANDT: You know what the reality is, Dan, is parents beware. If you drop your 4-year-old off at daycare or you send your 17-year-old off to spring break, you have a responsibility to know where they're going and to talk to them about it. But when you launch them out...
ABRAMS: I'm not willing to blame the parents on this.
VAN ZANDT: That's the way it goes.
ABRAMS: I'm sorry.
VAN ZANDT: No.
ABRAMS: I know a lot of my viewers are because we get e-mails like this all the time.
VAN ZANDT: No, but there's a balance there, Dan. The parents take the responsibility by talking to their child and saying take care of yourself. But just, you know you cannot tell five chaperones to chase 150 kids all over an island of 62 square miles. It's just not going to happen.
ABRAMS: Michelle...
(CROSSTALK)
VAN ZANDT: They can't do it.
ABRAMS: Quick final word, Michelle.
SUSKAUER: I say the chaperones do have some responsibility and I'm surprised that they weren't named in any civil suit, because they should be.
ABRAMS: And you're basing that on what?
VAN ZANDT: (INAUDIBLE)
SUSKAUER: On the fact that you know what, they do have some responsibility...
ABRAMS: You mean just...
SUSKAUER: I'm sure that the parents...
ABRAMS: ... general sort of moral culpability.
SUSKAUER: No. That the parents are not sending these kids alone to Aruba. They sent them knowing that this is a fun place, of course, but that there are going to be chaperones...
VAN ZANDT: ... who would ever chaperone...
(CROSSTALK)
VAN ZANDT: ... a group like this again? Who would ever voluntarily be a chaperone again?
ABRAMS: Yes. Yes. No...
VAN ZANDT: Yes.
ABRAMS: Anyway. All right. Look, I know the e-mails are already coming in. Everyone's—you know a lot of you have been writing in saying you know you can't stand the chaperone. We got the e-mails later in the show. But I don't know. I found it to be kind of credible.
Susan Filan and Michelle Suskauer and Clint van Zandt thanks a lot.
VAN ZANDT: Thank you.
SUSKAUER: Thank you.
ABRAMS: You can catch Joran's entire interview tonight on prime time 10:00 p.m. on ABC.


On 2-23 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

RITA COSBY: And now we're going to move on to our other big story tonight, Aruba. Joran van der Sloot is finally telling his side of the story in the Natalee Holloway case, this as we learn that Joran's family hired a New York-based attorney. Anita van der Sloot confirmed the news for LIVE AND DIRECT today. This new lawyer will fight a civil suit filed by Natalee's parents when the van der Sloot's came to the U.S. As we first told you on Tuesday, the van der Sloot's met the attorney before leaving New York on Monday.
Tonight, the prime suspect tells his version of what happened the night that Natalee disappeared in Aruba almost nine months ago. Today, we had a preview of Joran's interview with ABC News, including some of his outrageous comments about what Natalee may have done the night she vanished.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , SUSPECT IN NATALEE HOLLOWAY DISAPPEARANCE: The first thing that popped into my head was (DELETED) what if something happened to her? What if she went swimming? I was thinking, after everything she told me, she probably might have gone back to her hotel, hooked up with—gone to someone else, hooked up with someone else, and wanted to stay another day on the island.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: And LIVE AND DIRECT tonight is Natalee's father, Dave Holloway. You know, Dave, what do you make of these comments, saying that Natalee might have even wanted to stay on the island?
DAVE HOLLOWAY, NATALEE'S FATHER: Oh, hardly. I saw some of the other previews earlier today, and one of the previews that really struck me was the fact that he had mentioned that he really couldn't believe hisself. You know, he's lied so much that even he would believe his own liar. So you know, I don't put real much—very much credence in what he's had to say.
COSBY: You know, I want to play a little clip, Dave, if I could.
This is Joran talking about the night that Natalee vanished.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: I didn't want anyone to know. I didn't want anyone to know I left her at the beach.
CHRIS CUOMO, ABC NEWS “PRIMETIME”: Why would you lie if you had nothing to hide about Natalee Holloway?
VAN DER SLOOT: I lied because, you know, I was scared. I had a girlfriend at the time. I didn't want my dad to think bad of me. I didn't want my friends to think bad of me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: Do you believe him, Dave? I mean, do you believe what he's saying now?
HOLLOWAY: Well, I don't know. You know, sometimes you say enough lies, and then finally, you may tell the truth. We don't know if it's the truth or not. We do know that they lied about the "Holiday Inn." They implicated two security guards. And then afterwards, after they supposedly went to the beach, he now has three stories, or he did have three stories of how he got home, whether he walked, did Deepak take him home, and now it's Satish took him home. So you know, you don't—you don't know really what to believe from him.
COSBY: And in fact, we had Deepak and Satish's attorney on the other night, and he said that is absolutely not true, basically suggesting that, you know, Joran is lying. You're seeing a little division there, Dave, which is interesting.
I want to show another quote, if I could, Dave. This is Joran talking about that night. And he says, “My intention was to take her”—and he's talking about Natalee—“to my house to have sex with her. I asked her if she wanted to have sex, and she was fine with it. I didn't have a condom with me, though, in my wallet, and I won't have sex with a girl without a condom.”
You know, what does this say to you about how he viewed your daughter, Dave? I'm sure that's hard to hear.
HOLLOWAY: Yes, it is hard to hear, and you know, it just tells me how these guys were. You know, he probably—they probably did go to his apartment. That's what I believe because his apartment is separated from the house. You're not going to take a girl to the beach. And I think something—if you'll recall, in some of the earlier statements that mentioned something bad happened. And I think something bad happened with all three of them involved. That's why we haven't had a break in the case. They're all sticking together. And they probably got her as close to the "Holiday Inn" as they could without anyone seeing them. And the closest place was the beach north of the Marriott. And then they went directly across the street, as confirmed by the gardener, and that's where they started making up their story, I believe. And then after that, you know, we're not sure what happened.
COSBY: You know, he says, though, that he left her on the beach. I want to play—this is what he—sort of his excuse as to why he left her on the beach, which a lot of people seems so unrealistic. Let me play it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: At that moment in time, for me it wasn't the wrong thing, but it's definitely the wrong thing to do. I mean, it's not something a real man would do. It's not normal. It's not right at all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: And he's sort of making excuses for it. Now, the other thing I want to play for you, Dave—this is about the sneakers. I've always wondered this. Where are his sneakers? In fact, I was told early on that one of the brothers even said, You should ask Joran where his sneakers are, because, remember, they were missing that night. This is how he explains it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: I had left them on the beach. I'd walked to the car. We got in the car, and right then there, I couldn't go back because we were going home.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: Dave, do you buy that, he couldn't go back to get his own sneakers because he was going home?
HOLLOWAY: No. You're not going to leave your sneakers on the beach, and you're not in that big of a hurry. So I don't buy that idea at all. If he got rid of his sneakers, it's two things. Either they were too muddy or he lost them somewhere in the mud or whatever, or they had blood on them.
COSBY: Yes, do you think they may hold the clues to this case, Dave?
HOLLOWAY: You know, there's some tips and some information from the other two kids, from what we hear, that those shoes may hold some information.
COSBY: Yes, a lot of people have wondered that. In fact, he also talked about the confrontation, of course, with your ex-wife, with Natalee's mom, Beth Holloway. This is how he described the confrontation when she said, Look, where's my daughter?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: What she said to me—she screamed at me was, Tell me where my daughter is.
CUOMO: And did you?
VAN DER SLOOT: I told her that I don't know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSBY: Do you believe that “I don't know,” Dave? I mean, do you think there's still a lot more to the story?
HOLLOWAY: No, you know, you've got to look at all the lies and what all they've come up with. And you know, why would—if anyone had anything to do with it, why would they lie so much? And you know, and I've got to say this. In, you know, the United States, if somebody's truly innocent and the Police ask them to submit to a lie-detector, everyone that's innocent, there's no problem. And I've wondered why he has not subjected himself to that yet. That would resolve the whole thing, if he passed a lie-detector test with flying colors. But I don't think that's going to happen.
(CROSSTALK)
COSBY: ... he also hasn't voluntarily gone back to the authorities. Remember, they wanted to pull him in, Dave, but he wouldn't even do that, either.
HOLLOWAY: That's exactly right.
COSBY: You know, one thing he has done is he and his family, as we were just reporting, Dave, they got a New York attorney, sort of preparing for the civil suit that you and Beth filed. Are you ready for—what, it sounds like it's going to be a long fight.
HOLLOWAY: Well, you know, I'm sure he's going to fight the jurisdiction and forum. So you know, we've been through this roller-coaster ride before on a lot of other issues. It's in John Kelly's hands, and hopefully, he can do something with it.
COSBY: Dave, please stick with us because I want to bring in now, if I could, Bob Plummer. He was one of the chaperones who traveled with Natalee and her friends to Aruba. You know, Bob, there's been a lot of questions. What did you guys do as chaperones? What was your role?
BOB PLUMMER, CHAPERONE ON HOLLOWAY TRIP: Well, number one, I think you have to use the term chaperone loosely. It was made very clear to us in meetings before the trip that we were there primarily just to act as liaisons, to act as a contact in case maybe one of the kids got sick, needed medical attention, something like that. We were not there to hold their hands. They were in Aruba as legal adults, and we were not there to baby-sit them. And that was made very clear before we ever went by the parents and the people that arranged the trip.
COSBY: Now, Bob, were any of those chaperones in the casino or in Carlos and Charlie's that night?
PLUMMER: Yes.
COSBY: In both? First the casino. Were they in the casino?
PLUMMER: Yes.
COSBY: What was the mood in the casino? Because we've been seeing, obviously, the new surveillance camera video of her and Joran sitting at the table. What was the mood? How'd the chaperones describe it?
PLUMMER: Well, it's just—you know, it was mostly the students from the trip and us in there. We made up the majority of the people, but most of the kids just, you know, having a good time, trying to enjoy their time there.
COSBY: OK. And then they go on to Carlos and Charlie's, and I understand there was a chaperone there, right?
PLUMMER: Yes.
COSBY: Was there a lot of drinking...
PLUMMER: Even though that was—that was...
COSBY: What was the mood like, Bob? What was the mood in Carlos and Charlie's that night?
PLUMMER: From the indications—I was not there, but from the indications of the man that went, they were having a good time, but there was no one out of control. There was no one over the edge, no one doing anything that would have been construed as needing to be pulled or reined back in.
COSBY: Did they realize that Natalee went into a car with three strangers?
PLUMMER: I don't know that he did. I think some of the students might have seen him, but they had seen him before, evidently had met him there before that night, so might have been a little bit comfortable with him.
COSBY: When did they realize, the chaperones, that Natalee was missing, and what did they do?
PLUMMER: The next morning, when we were actually loading these students on—we had two separate buses that were going to take the kids back to the airport. And the first one, after we got it loaded, checking passports, checking to make sure everyone's there, and came down and was about to start getting the other group of students ready to get—catch the bus, and it was at that time—I guess that was probably somewhere around 10:00 o'clock that they informed us—her roommates informed us that she had not come back that previous night.
COSBY: OK. So then the bus, you realize she's not there. Then what happens? Doesn't somebody say, Hey, stop the bus, let's not leave?
PLUMMER: No, no, no, no, no, no. You misunderstood. There were two separate buses going back to the airport because we were on two separate charter flights. This first bus—she was not supposed to be on this first bus. They were checked off. Everyone was on that bus with their passports. So we're going back in the resort to start getting the next group of kids together, to make sure they've got all their stuff together and they're ready to go, so that they'll be ready when the buses come to get them to take them to the airport for the second charter flight.
COSBY: Yes, but that's what I think a lot of people...
PLUMMER: And that's at that point...
(CROSSTALK)
COSBY: ... is why did everybody sort of take off and go on and say, Oh, well, let's not worry about Natalee. Let's just—let's just take off and go. A lot of people don't understand how everybody could still have left.
PLUMMER: You're misunderstanding. Everybody did not leave. The first bus, half of the people on the first charter, they went ahead and left to go catch their charter. We were still there because we were not flying out until the second charter.
COSBY: But then the second charter still took off, right, as scheduled.
PLUMMER: Yes.
COSBY: So the big question is...
PLUMMER: Because there were other...
(CROSSTALK)
PLUMMER: It was not a charter—it was not a charter plane. There were other people on that plane. But we also thought it was more important to get the rest of the students back home. What good is it going to be for to have the rest of those students down there with the situation that we had going on? We thought it more important, and also the people we talked to back in Birmingham thought it was more important to get everybody back.
COSBY: But a lot of people, Bob—and I realize, because you're not the only chaperone. There were a number of chaperones. A lot of people are saying, How could you leave when there was a missing person?
PLUMMER: One chaperone stayed behind.
COSBY: Just one?
PLUMMER: Yes.
COSBY: Let me bring in Dave Holloway. Dave, do you think there was more the chaperones could have done? Obviously, Bob's kind enough to come on the air to speak on behalf of all of them. But hearing now that just one stayed behind, do you wish that maybe—maybe more would have been done, Dave?
HOLLOWAY: Well, you know, hindsight's 20/20, and you know, you try to work the plan the best you can. You know, the only issue I have is that, you know, we bring kids into an environment that they may not be used to. you know, that was a tradition with Mountain Brook. But you look at the drinking age in the United States is 21. And you know—you know, the parents were warned and stuff that, you know, you bring kids in, you know, to an environment that has a drinking age of 18, and you know, you've got to be a little bit more careful when you get in a situation like that.
COSBY: And Bob, I am going to give you the last word. And again, I do appreciate you being on. Do you wish things had been done differently?
PLUMMER: I don't really know anything that could have been done differently. You know, meeting with the kids each day and warning them to be aware of the people around them and to stay with their friends, and we told them every day—you know, even though it's not our responsibility, we told them every day, Make sure that you're with a group of your friends, you know, wherever you happen to go. And—but that's—you know, naturally, you always think of anything else you could have done, but in looking back and talking with other people, there's really probably nothing else that could have been done.
COSBY: All right, both of you. Thank you very much. We appreciate you being with us.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-23 CNNHN reported:

(QUOTE)

TED ROWLANDS, GUEST HOST: Tonight, Natalee Holloway's parents speak out.
Now that the chief suspect in her disappearance, Joran van der Sloot, has talked, nearly nine months after their beautiful daughter vanished in Aruba, Natalee's mom, Beth Holloway-Twitty, and her dad, Dave Holloway, talk about trying to keep hope alive. And they will tell us about their high-stakes lawsuit against Joran van der Sloot and his father -- that and much more next on LARRY KING LIVE.

And hello, everybody. I'm Ted Rowlands, sitting in tonight for Larry.

Joining us, besides Beth Holloway-Twitty and Dave Holloway here, right off the bat, we're going to talk to John Kelly, the attorney for Beth and Dave Holloway; plus, here in Los Angeles, Mark Geragos, defense attorney; and Mary Fulginiti, former federal prosecutor, as well.

Recently, the Dutch teen, Joran van der Sloot, the chief suspect in the case against Natalee Holloway, did an interview for ABC's "Primetime Live." Throughout the hour, we are going to show you clips from that interview and get reaction from Natalee Holloway's parents. It was an extensive interview, and we have a number of clips from it.

We are going to start by taking a look at one of those. This is Joran van der Sloot talking about leaving Natalee Holloway on the beach.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "PRIMETIME LIVE")

CHRIS CUOMO, ABC NEWS (voice-over): According to Joran van der Sloot, after a romantic encounter, he leaves Natalee Holloway sleepily staring at the stars on a beach in Aruba.

(on camera): Did it seem like a wrong thing to do, leaving a girl on the beach like that?

JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , SUSPECT IN NATALEE HOLLOWAY DISAPPEARANCE: At that moment in time, for me, it wasn't the wrong thing. But, I mean, it's not something a real man would do. It's not normal. It's not right at all.

CUOMO: But you did it?

VAN DER SLOOT: Yes. CUOMO (voice-over): But, as dawn breaks in Aruba, Natalee is gone. She and her classmates are scheduled to return to Alabama that morning. But Natalee apparently never made it back to her hotel.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROWLANDS: Beth Holloway, you see that. I know you saw a few other clips played throughout the day today, but you have not seen the entire interview.

What do you think when you see Joran van der Sloot and you see him basically pleading his case, saying he did nothing wrong here?

BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, MOTHER OF NATALEE HOLLOWAY: You know, that is what he has done all along, though, so, I mean, it doesn't surprise me.

But I think that what now everyone can witness is, is, every time Joran lies, there are just more that evolve. And, you know, we are -- I -- I don't even think we're close to the bottom of the story yet.

ROWLANDS: What do you think happened? He's claiming that he left your daughter on the beach, after being with her for a number of hours.

She wanted, he claims, to have sex with him. He says he didn't have sex with her because he didn't have a condom, and he never has sex without a condom. And, for whatever reason, he leaves her on the beach.

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: Well, I think, as far as, you know, Joran saying that he left Natalee on the beach, I -- I think that the reason why he continually changes who picked him up that night at the fisherman's hut is because, you know, that -- that is not what happened.

You know, there were some witnesses that came forward this summer that nailed the three suspects all in the same car, near the pond, which is across the street from the Marriott. So, I just don't think that Joran has given us anywhere near the correct version of -- of how it ended that night.

ROWLANDS: Do you have a feeling of how it ended? Do you have any one theory that you think happened to your daughter, or are you just not sure?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: No, I'm not sure. I know it doesn't look good.

I mean, why would Joran have -- have fabricated a story so early, when we arrived on the island? And why would he have, you know, gone ahead and implicated the two security guards, or had his father or someone in the Police department to help him to do that. I mean, Joran wouldn't have had -- wouldn't have had knowledge of Mickey John and Abraham Jones.

So, you know, it doesn't -- you know, everything shows that it's -- does not look good at all for the outcome of -- of what they did with Natalee that night.

ROWLANDS: You recently filed a lawsuit, and served a lawsuit on not only Joran, but his father, claiming that Joran was a predator. And you claim that he sexually assaulted your daughter. Do you think he killed her as well?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: You know, I have never -- I have never gone there. I -- you know, I -- I have tried to stick with the admissions that Joran has given us.

As I said earlier, I mean, it's just -- it does not look good for Natalee, what they did with her, or why would they have fabricated this story so early on?

John Kelly is the attorney for Beth and Dave Holloway.

Tell us about this lawsuit and what you're trying to gain from it.

JOHN Q. KELLY, ATTORNEY FOR BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY AND DAVE HOLLOWAY: Well, a couple things, Ted.

Short term, we want to show the van der Sloot's that, you know, having not cooperated with the Investigators in Aruba, they weren't going to be able to just come to the United States with impunity, and put a spin on their story, and give their version, without consequences.

We wanted to let them know we were watching their every move. And we wanted to let them know we would use every tool at our disposal to get answers to the questions that we need, mainly, where's Natalee?

Long term, I want to sit down, be able to take their depositions under oath. I want to be able to ask Joran face-to-face and Paulus face-to-face the tough questions, and see what their answers are then.

ROWLANDS: You name Paulus -- that's Joran's father -- in this lawsuit...

KELLY: Yes.

ROWLANDS: ... claiming, basically, that he allowed what you describe as a time bomb to go out at night and prey on young women. Is it -- is it a bit of a stretch to try to implicate the father here?

KELLY: Well, I don't think so.

I mean, everything in the complaint, Ted, is taken from Police investigative reports or the statements of the three suspects. In addition to the supervision issue, you know, Joran was out that night. He was even out the next night, when Beth and the others arrived there at midnight in a casino, obviously, you know, just having his way with his father and doing what he wanted, with his father's knowledge.

But, in addition, one of the statements from one of the other suspects indicated that Paulus van der Sloot has advised the three of them not to use e-mails to communicate, because their hard drive could be used as evidence, not to use their cell phones, because they can be traced, to get their stories straight early on, before they started talking to Investigators.

And a number of sources have even said he was the one that made the statement, "No body, no crime."

So, no, I don't think it's a stretch at all.

ROWLANDS: Beth, I know that you have been critical of the Aruban officials, especially early on in the investigation. Has your feelings towards them gotten better over time, worse over time? And what is your relationship with them? And how -- and where is the investigation?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: Well, as far as our being just displeased with the investigation, I mean, absolutely.

I mean, since we have left the island, they really have not shown us -- us any action in the investigation. And, you know, of course, we didn't have any communication with the officials past August. And that's why John -- we hired him, because, you know, thank goodness, he has been able to reestablish that communication, and at least maintain that communication.

But, of course, we -- we were displeased, and -- and have been from the beginning with the Arubaans, you know, just a lack of sense of urgency in the entire investigation.

ROWLANDS: Mark Geragos, what...

MARK GERAGOS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I was going to ask John a question, if I could.

KELLY: Sure.

GERAGOS: John...

KELLY: Yes.

GERAGOS: By the way, I think it's an extremely smart move. I mean, if this investigation is dead in the water, the way to jump- start it is to file a civil lawsuit.

Do you anticipate that they're going to move to stay the action, so you can't do any discovery, basically hold the lawsuit in abeyance?

KELLY: Well, first of all, thanks, Mark. I appreciate that.

Yes, I think, down the road, you know, there are -- I'm sure you're familiar with it -- there are a couple of other procedural hurdles we have to get past first. But, when you get to the substantive issues, they would be, depending on -- under conflicts of law, which law applies, be able to, you know, take the Fifth, and -- and seek a stay, until the criminal investigation was over.

But, you know, we take -- we take each...

GERAGOS: And it certainly...

KELLY: We take each obstacle as it comes, as you know.

GERAGOS: Yes.

And I certainly -- it certainly doesn't help the son's case for him to be out there talking and then to allege the Fifth, I suppose.

But the one other thing that intrigued me, though, is you named -- by naming the father and making him a defendant, does that make it easier for you to get discovery out of him, as opposed to if he was just a third-party witness?

KELLY: Well, sure. He's a -- he's a named party. And once we establish jurisdiction, get into the discovery process, he -- you know, we don't need to subpoena him. He's a -- is a named party. He has got to appear when noticed to appear for deposition. So, you know, that -- that is helpful.

GERAGOS: So, that's probably one of -- it's a real helpful reason to name him as a defendant.

KELLY: You're absolutely right, Mark. Thanks.

ROWLANDS: That lawsuit was served on both of them.

Coming up, we are going to talk about how they tracked down both Joran and his father and served that lawsuit. Also, we are going to hear from the attorney for the Kalpoe brothers, the other two young men that were last seen with Natalee Holloway -- that coming up.

You're watching "LARRY KING LIVE."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "PRIMETIME LIVE")

CUOMO (voice-over): In the video obtained by ABC News from a confidential source, Joran van der Sloot appears to be coming in to the casino. And this appears to be Natalee.

Here, she and her friends are next to van der Sloot, as he plays card. You can see, in this photograph, apparently taken on the same day, the young women are wearing the same clothes.

In van der Sloot's very first sit-down interview, he told how he met Natalee Holloway at the casino, how he later joined Natalee and her friends at a nearby nightclub, and about the time he spent with her after they left the bar together, even as her friends begged Natalee not to go.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "PRIMETIME LIVE") CUOMO: When you heard that a girl had gone missing on the beach, what did you think?

VAN DER SLOOT: Well, the first thing that popped into my head was (EXPLETIVE DELETED) what if something happened to her? What if she went swimming? I was thinking, after everything she told me, she probably might have gone back to her hotel, hooked up with someone else, and wanted to stay another day on the island.

CUOMO (voice-over): In the coming days, the search intensifies. Where was Natalee? Kidnapped? Drowned? Murdered?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROWLANDS: Beth Holloway, when you watch that, what goes through your mind?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: Oh. What goes through my mind are the repeated lies that Joran has given just over and over and over again.

I just don't know how much more that the family can take, just hearing from him and -- and his endless lies.

ROWLANDS: He -- right -- he basically said right there that he doesn't know if she went swimming, or maybe went back to the hotel to hook up with somebody else.

I don't know if that means finding another friend, or what he was trying to imply. But, knowing your daughter, at 3:00 a.m., 2:00 -- 2:00 in the morning, would -- would she be gallivanting around and looking to hook up with somebody?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: You know, knowing Natalee, I know definitively that Joran van der Sloot knows exactly what he did with her that night.

(CROSSTALK)

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: He knows exactly.

ROWLANDS: All right. Thanks, Beth.

We're to quickly talk to David Kock. He is the attorney for the Kalpoe brothers. These are the two young men that were with Joran van der Sloot the night that Natalee went missing.

What are -- what are your thoughts, David, of Joran speaking out and claiming now, a little bit -- a different version, that he left Natalee on the beach and went off with your two clients?

DAVID KOCK, ATTORNEY FOR SATISH KALPOE AND DEEPAK KALPOE : Well, I think the only consistent thing from the last statements that he gave is that he left Natalee on the beach.

I must say that his statement, even about leaving, have been changing. At a certain moment, he was stating that he walked home. First, he said he called one of my clients, Deepak, to say that Deepak picked him up. When he was confronted with facts, I mean, records from Internet records proving that Deepak was at home at that time, then, he had to give another explanation.

So, then, all of a sudden, it was Satish who picked him up. After that, he did not give any more statements. So, in -- in that aspect, he is consequent now, but he hasn't been consequent during the investigation.

ROWLANDS: Your clients, Deepak and Satish, they do admit that they were with Natalee Holloway and were in a car. Did they admit to, as Joran says in this interview, any sexual assault on Natalee? He basically says that -- that they were involved in some inappropriate activity.

DAVID KOCK: No, not -- not at all, not at all.

And just, it sound -- it's very new to me now, what -- what he is saying now about my clients, because, at a certain moment during the investigation, he also admitted that they just dropped him. It was just a matter of if they picked him up, yes or no, but not that they had any kind of contact with the disappeared girl.

ROWLANDS: So, what -- what are your clients saying happened?

DAVID KOCK: Well, they -- they dropped him with the girl, upon request of Joran next to the beach at Marriott's, drove home, went home. And they got a call -- not they -- Deepak got a call from Joran at about 2:30 in the morning, and then, afterwards, they -- an -- an Internet message a little later. That's all.

ROWLANDS: And your clients were arrested not only once, but twice.

DAVID KOCK: Yes.

ROWLANDS: What is their status now? They're still suspects. Do you anticipate that they will be arrested again?

DAVID KOCK: I think not based on the facts as they are right now. I mean, I -- I doubt it.

As you said, they are still suspects, because there's still an ongoing criminal investigation. It has not been closed yet. So, formally, they are still considered suspects.

ROWLANDS: OK.

David Kock, attorney for the Kalpoe brothers, Satish and Deepak Kalpoe, joining us on the phone from Aruba, thank you for your time.

Beth, what do you -- what do you think about the Kalpoe brothers and -- and their role in this? Do you believe that they had a role in this, and they are not coming forward, or -- or do you think that they are being truthful? HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: I know one thing that Deepak Kalpoe did in August was, when the gardener came before the judge of instruction to give sworn testimony of witnessing those three suspects together in the Kalpoe brothers' car that night at the pond, across the street from the Marriott, it was in front of the prosecutor, in front of the defense, the judge of instruction, Deepak and Satish Kalpoe, Joran van der Sloot.

Deepak panicked. He panicked when the gardener gave that testimony. That very afternoon, he called an Aruban girl to help him establish an alibi. She, in turn, panicked. She called FBI. She dialed the 1-877-NATALEE number and told them that she did not want to be involved in this.

So, I mean, that was a -- definitely a red flag that Deepak knew that he was being nailed in that car with the other two suspects at the critical time.

ROWLANDS: Mary, what...

(CROSSTALK)

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: Otherwise, he would not -- otherwise, he would not have made the call.

MARY FULGINITI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Yes.

You know, I agree with Beth on this. I think, look at the actions of Deepak here and his brother, as well as the actions, obviously, of Joran van der Sloot, are not only very suspicious. I mean, they are just bad.

I mean, they look bad. We have got a series of ever-changing stories, according to this complaint. And they have had access to the Police reports, at least 12 different versions. We have got e-mails. There are -- there is other correspondence, and text messages, and phone messages that seem to contradict their stories.

So, my heart goes out to you, Beth, because I know you're just looking for answers, and you want to know what happened to your daughter. And -- and I know it's frustrating, because, obviously, they can't compel these individuals to tell the truth. And it's pretty clear that they haven't told the truth in the past. In fact, they have admitted it.

But I had a very interesting question, I hope, for John, in particular.

You said that you had -- you were privy to a lot of the Police records and files and, I presume, some of their evidence with regard to this case prior to preparing the complaint.

KELLY: Sure.
FULGINITI: In particular, you have got some allegations in here. The most damaging ones, I think, are in paragraphs 36 through 39, which really say that they kept her against her will, she was sexually assaulted, and she was fondled and touched, without her consent, by Joran and his accomplice -- accomplices.

And I'm just wondering, did you gather that from actual statements that were provided to the Police, or other evidence, or was that just sort of a summary of -- of everything that you looked at and put together?

KELLY: First of all, hi, Mary. How you doing?

(LAUGHTER)

KELLY: As far as the question goes, it's -- everything in the complaint, all the -- the allegations, are taken right from Police investigative reports. And a large part of those Police investigative reports are the statements of the three suspects, including the allegations in those paragraphs you referred to.

FULGINITI: OK.

ROWLANDS: All right, we are going to take -- we need to take a quick break.

(LAUGHTER)

KELLY: Yes.

ROWLANDS: And, before we do, we want to say that LARRY KING LIVE repeatedly has tried to reach the attorney representing the van der Sloot's to invite him or his clients on the show. And those calls have not been returned.

When we come back, we will talk more about this lawsuit and have more clips from that interview from Joran van der Sloot.

Stay with us. You're watching LARRY KING LIVE.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "PRIMETIME LIVE")

CUOMO: This has been in the media. It has been in the print media. It has been on television. It has been on cable television. It has been all over the place in America for sure. How do you think you have been portrayed in this?

VAN DER SLOOT: I think I have been -- been portrayed unfairly. I have been portrayed as a murderer and a rapist and everything that I'm not.

CUOMO (voice-over): van der Sloot has been the main suspect in the case since soon after admittedly lying to Police about dropping Natalee off at her hotel. But what other lies may he have told? And is he now, finally, telling the truth?

(END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROWLANDS: Joining us now from Meridian, Mississippi, is Dave Holloway, father of Natalee Holloway, and a part of this lawsuit which was served on Joran van der Sloot and his father.

Joran van der Sloot, doing a recent television interview, talked about that lawsuit. Let's take a listen to a clip about the lawsuit.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "PRIMETIME LIVE")

CUOMO: What do you make of the lawsuit?

VAN DER SLOOT: I think their lawsuit is ridiculous. I mean, I came here as a part to -- to talk to you guys, and to tell the story, and to be able to get it into the open. And the -- everything in that lawsuit is not true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROWLANDS: Dave, your reaction to not only the lawsuit comment, but seeing this young man pleading his case?

DAVE HOLLOWAY, FATHER OF NATALEE HOLLOWAY: Well, he -- he indicated that the allegations were not true.

John just mentioned that all of those were taken from the Police records. So, you know, he has had the opportunity to lie to the Police on and on and on, and there's no penalties in Aruba for lying. If we can -- if this lawsuit is successful, and we can get him here, there will be penalties for lying under oath.

ROWLANDS: What do you make of his story that he left your daughter on the beach alive and well, and just left because he was tired and wanted to go home, basically?

HOLLOWAY: Well, you know, he has told us a number of lies from the beginning, obviously, the "Holiday Inn" story. They implicated the security guards.

And, then, they settled in on the fact that they left her at the beach north of the Marriott. You know, and then he -- and then they have lied a number of times on how they got home. I think there was one about, he walked home. The second one was that Deepak took him home. And now he has settled on the fact that Satish probably took him home.

ROWLANDS: John Kelly...

(CROSSTALK)

HOLLOWAY: So, I'm -- I'm not sure to buy anything.

ROWLANDS: John Kelly, realistically, what are the odds, do you think, you will get your opportunity to depose this young man or his father? KELLY: You know, we are taking this very seriously. And we think there is a very good chance that we will have a chance to depose him at some point.

The -- the ultimate decision is going to be in the discretion of a -- a judge. And when you have got a judge that is going to be able to exercise his discretion, after looking at all the facts, you know, you're in the fight. And that's where we want to be right now, Ted.

ROWLANDS: You filed this in New York.

(CROSSTALK)

ROWLANDS: There's no tie to New York.

Mary, I guess you did some research.

And, obviously, you guys did a lot of research.

This could still fly.

FULGINITI: Yes.

(CROSSTALK)

FULGINITI: I mean, John knows that very well.

(LAUGHTER)

FULGINITI: Yes.

Basically, the minute somebody steps foot in a state, you really avail yourself to the -- the laws of that particular state. So -- and, as for subject matter jurisdiction, I think you probably do have in it New York. The only issue will be whether or not the judge wants to exercise his or her discretion to kick it. And that will be in his or her discretion, if he feels...

GERAGOS: Right, because they're -- they're going to come in, and they are going to argue that this is not a convenient forum, that they shouldn't be tried there.

And they will give all of the reasons for that. And John is going to argue, well, it was convenient enough to come here to do an interview; it was convenient enough. You could fly here. So, obviously, that is not an impediment to you.

And, so, actually doing the media interview is going to be one of the worst things that they could have done, in terms of trying to defend against this lawsuit. Number one, it allowed John to serve them. Number two, it gave them the ability do file it in New York. And now he's going to -- it diminishes any argument that they have that this case shouldn't be in New York.

ROWLANDS: Dave Holloway, what do you think happened to your daughter?
HOLLOWAY: You know, that's a good question. And that's what we're trying to find out.

And, Ted, that's -- that's the reason we filed this lawsuit, is, we need some answers, and we need to find out what happened. If we knew, you know, that would -- that would be some sort of closure.

ROWLANDS: Beth, how difficult is it not having your daughter with you and -- and not knowing exactly what happened to her?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: You know, I don't think there's any way that I could explain to you the nightmare that the family has experienced since May 30.

And I know one thing. I know now how other parents of missing loved ones feel. And I tell you, it's just -- it's a never-ending nightmare. But you just have to have hope and faith that -- you know, that you have got people that will get to the bottom of it.

FULGINITI: You know what? I have to say, as a former prosecutor, and now, obviously, defense counsel, I'm always amazed when suspects, people who are still suspects...

(LAUGHTER)

FULGINITI: ... not only talk about the case, but go on national television and give, you know, whatever side of the story they may to want to give about it.

GERAGOS: Well, that's why -- that's why I say, the -- for both parents and, obviously, for their lawyer, you couldn't ask for anything better, because it gives you the ability to bring this lawsuit and to pursue this.

I -- you know, talk about an inconvenient forum. For them to have to go down to Aruba to try to do something, obviously, they have met with great frustration, in terms of the authorities. And I don't know what -- whether they have tried to do something civilly down there. But I -- I'm sure that the laws are a little bit more difficult and in -- nowhere near as convenient.

So, not only does it give them the opportunity to have somebody make, as Dave was saying, what, the fourth or fifth different statement; you wonder who is counseling them at a certain point, as to why they're doing this.

FULGINITI: Oh, absolutely, because it's like, this -- what I have -- excerpts I have seen, actually, have not been very flattering of this young boy. They just haven't.

To say that he left the beach because he wanted to get home and he had to go to school the next day, and that's why he left her alone, I mean, that doesn't look good. It -- once again, it just looks like another string of bad fact and bad -- you know, bad judgment calls, or whatever you might want to call it.

So, I'm -- I'm just amazed, because, even in the Peterson case, he chose to go on, you know, one of the morning shows.

GERAGOS: He went on with Ted. He went on with Ted.

FULGINITI: Robert Blake, obviously, did the same thing. I mean, ultimately, it doesn't help them. I think it really hurts them.

ROWLANDS: All right, we are going to talk more about the interview, what he said in it. And we will hear more clips.

You're watching LARRY KING LIVE. Stay with us.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "PRIMETIME LIVE")

CUOMO: You keep mentioning Aruba: "I'm sorry for Aruba. This is bad for Aruba."

Let me ask you, in the scheme of things, who cares about Aruba? Isn't this really about what happened to this girl and whether you had anything to do with it?

VAN DER SLOOT: No. I do. I care. I care about Aruba.

CUOMO: Why?

VAN DER SLOOT: I have lived there my whole life. I love Aruba. I love the people that live there.

That -- that is my home. Aruba is my home. And I care that people would boycott Aruba and that people would say stuff about Aruba that is not true. So, I do care.

What I'm trying to say is, I understand if Natalee's family is mad at me, and she -- they point their attention towards me.

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DER SLOOT: What I do not understand is that -- why they would go boycott Aruba.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROWLANDS: Welcome back to LARRY KING LIVE. I'm Ted Rowlands, sitting in for Larry tonight. We're talking about the interview that Joran van der Sloot did, basically telling his side of the story in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. We're talking with Natalee's parents, who have filed a lawsuit against not only Joran van der Sloot, but against his father as well. They allege that Joran van der Sloot who basically a predator who used not only -- who used alcohol but also date-rape drugs. In the interview that Joran van der Sloot did, he addressed the issue of date-rape drugs. Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: The lawsuit defines you as the predator. Is that fair? VAN DER SLOOT: No, that's not fair at all.

CUOMO: There are allusions in paragraphs 12 and 13 that you use date-rape drugs, that you give them to women, that there is a pattern of this, that this is what you do. Your response?

VAN DER SLOOT: That's not true at all. I've never had a date-rape drug with me. I've never had one in my hand, and I've never even seen anyone give anyone a date-rape drug.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROWLANDS: Dave Holloway, do you believe him?

HOLLOWAY: No, I don't. I had an individual, in fact, a very good source that indicated to me that they had heard him brag about it at a school. So...

ROWLANDS: Brag about using ecstasy, or...

HOLLOWAY: Using date-rape drugs.

ROWLANDS: On other women. And Beth, when you listen to him and you watch him, he basically is telling a much different story to a national or international audience about his potential culpability here. What are your feelings listening to him?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: Well, the one thing that I heard you reference a while ago is predatory type behavior. And one thing I wanted to let you know was that when I arrived on the island, I went to the "Holiday Inn," was probably there within about 45 minutes of getting to the island, and I only had a portion of Joran's name. I can't remember if I had the Sloot part, or Jordan, but when I began describing him to the "Holiday Inn" night manager who was on duty, she knew exactly who he was. And she said, yes, I know exactly, that's Joran van der Sloot. He tends to prey upon young American tourists. So I thought that was pretty unique.

GERAGOS: Did they ever put that woman in front of an Investigator interview her, the authorities?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: No, that would probably be pushing it if they did that. I'm sorry, you know, I shouldn't have said that. Maybe.

GERAGOS: How much of this investigation did you actually have to do yourself? How much of the pushing them or pushing the authorities did you have to do?

HOLLOWAY-TWITTY: Oh, I think that between Dave and I and Jug and Dave's wife Robin, I mean, if we hadn't have remained so aggressive on the island, there just wouldn't have been an investigation. And you know, thank heavens for the media, because that really kept them moving this summer.
ROWLANDS: At one point in the interview, Joran said, "I asked her if she wanted to have sex," talking about being on the beach, " and she was fine with it. I didn't have a condom with me, though, in my wallet, and I won't have sex with a girl without a condom." Making the statement basically that he would not engage in this type of behavior, because he didn't have a condom, but without saying it saying that your daughter may have. And Dave Holloway, that doesn't sound like your daughter from what we know about her. What do you make of this young man talking about this on national television?

HOLLOWAY: I think that was one of his excuses of why they stopped at his apartment. His apartment, by the way, is detached away from the main residence. And, you know, if you've got an individual that you're going to take advantage of, it's not likely that you're going to go to the beach. You're going to go to your apartment. And we believe that's where they stopped, and that's where the incident occurred.

ROWLANDS: John Kelly, would you like to file a lawsuit against the Kalpoe brothers?

KELLY: They're more welcome to come over here and interview with any network or cable station they want. We'll accommodate them.

Yes, I would like to -- on a more serious note, I don't like to be flip about that, but yes, we'd certainly like to sit down and ask some questions under oath, too. We feel they have a lot of information, and we certainly would like them to share it with us.

ROWLANDS: Is there a risk, Beth and Dave, to -- in filing this lawsuit, that you're maybe prolonging never finding answers and getting your hopes up? Do you worry about never actually finding out about what happened to your daughter?

HOLLOWAY TWITTY: No, I really don't. I think, as I said earlier, I really think that, you know, I just keep that hope and faith that we will get to the bottom of this. I think there are too many things that are going on right now, and I think there are things that are still yet to happen. So I feel that it's very possible to get to the bottom of what happened to Natalee that night.

ROWLANDS: Dave, are you optimistic you will find out the truth?

HOLLOWAY: I've been optimistic from day one. You know, three kids cannot commit the perfect crime, unless they have had help or assistance. You know, the day I arrived on the island, I met with the detectives. And you know, they had already interviewed these three kids. And the -- we were directed back towards Carlos'n' Charley's. Oh, she's probably over there, and she'll show up. Well, you know, these three kids already fooled the detectives once. And then several days later, all of a sudden, the security guards were arrested.

Well, fool me twice. And you know, it just goes on and on and on. And you know, I have a concern and still do with the investigative team.

GERAGOS: Dave, did they ever -- did they ever do any kind of search or DNA or find any kind of forensic evidence in the apartment? You said that you believe that that's where, if something happened, that that's where it took place. Do you know, or did they disclose to you whether or not they did any kind of a search there and developed any kind of forensic evidence?

HOLLOWAY: Well, they say they did a search of Joran's apartment. I have got a photograph somewhere taken approximately two, three weeks, maybe a month afterwards, with a moving van in front of the house. And you know, it kind of strikes me, why someone would buy new furniture -- if that's what they were doing -- while their son is in jail? You know, and it kind of leads me to believe -- I'm only speculating -- that maybe they went furniture shopping to swap some of this furniture out to get rid of evidence. That's only speculation, but you know, there's a lot of clues out there.

ROWLANDS: OK. A lot of questions as well. Dave Holloway, Beth Holloway-Twitty and John Kelly, thank you all for joining us. We're going to say goodbye to them. We will be back with Mark and Mary, the full panel, and more clips from that Joran van der Sloot interview. You're watching LARRY KING LIVE. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROWLANDS: Welcome back to LARRY KING LIVE. I'm Ted Rowlands in Los Angeles. We're talking with Mark Geragos, defense attorney. Among his past clients, Scott Peterson, Michael Jackson, Wynona Ryder, Susan McDougal and Roger Clinton. Also in Los Angeles, Mary Fulginiti, former federal prosecutor. She was an assistant U.S. attorney in Los Angeles and has conducted investigations with the FBI, the D.E.A. and the IRS.

In San Francisco, Michael Cardoza joining us, famed defense attorney, former Alameda County prosecutor as well. In Miami, Stacey Honowitz, Florida assistant state attorney specializing in sex crimes and child abuse. And in New York, Dr. Robi Ludwig, psychotherapist.

Let's pick up our discussion with what we were just discussing, Mark and Mary. What are the odds of this lawsuit actually producing any fruit for this family, getting any answers? Aren't the van der Sloot's just going to throw this thing out and...

FULGINITI: Well, the van der Sloot's can't throw this out. It's got to be a judge in New York...

ROWLANDS: Not respond to it?

FULGINITI: They can not respond. They can choose to not respond to the lawsuit at all, which will -- but a default judgment will then be entered against them. And then, you know, as John would have told us, they can thereafter try to attach or get some of their assets for whatever the damages they are able to prove.

GERAGOS: I don't minimize it, but it's an uphill battle for the Holloways. You are going to be in front of a judge who is going to be normally inclined to throw something like this out. And it's just a matter of what they've got in order to support, as we were saying before, whether or not the fact that they have come up there, they've subjected themselves to an interview in that state and whether or not they can show that the controversy is strong enough there, and that there's reasons to (INAUDIBLE).

FULGINITI: I mean, the problem is, Ted, that there's nothing that occurred in New York, except for the fact that they got off a plane in New York. I mean, nothing about this lawsuit happened in New York. There's no witnesses that we know of that are in New York.

GERAGOS: John Kelly is in New York.

FULGINITI: That's it, their attorney is in New York. So it's going to be difficult.

GERAGOS: It is forum convenience for John. And that's not a bad thing.

ROWLANDS: They're asking for unspecific damages -- or unspecified damages, but really they are asking for answers here. And the odds of getting answers relies on getting a hold of this young man and his father and being able to depose them under oath. The odds of that happening, one would think, are pretty long.

FULGINITI: Well, I think that they're looking for the civil discovery process, if this case can stick in New York, to sort of help them provide them with the answers. You're right, I mean, this family is desperate to figure out what happened to their daughter and to hold those individuals that they feel are responsible accountable for those actions.

GERAGOS: I was just going to say, one of the problems is, normally when you file a lawsuit like this, one of the greatest tools you have is the ability to go out, take depositions of other people, of other witnesses, and go out and subpoena documents, and kind of investigate and use it to ferret it out.

The problem here is it's a state court lawsuit, as you know. So you're somewhat limited in what you can do outside the state of New York, and as Mary says, then, you know, it's not like all the evidence or the gravamen of this offense is in New York. That presents a problem.

FULGINITI: Or Aruba. I mean, how are you going to subpoena people from Aruba?

GERAGOS: Exactly.

FULGINITI: Not an easy process. So.

ROWLANDS: Right. Michael Cardoza...

CARDOZA: Yes, Ted.

ROWLANDS: Good idea, this lawsuit?

CARDOZA: Sure it's a good idea. It's going to make the Holloways feel a whole lot better, and they just might get some more information. But one thing that strikes me, if they do default in this particular case, that means the Holloways will get a money judgment against Paulus and his son Joran. And if they make any money through books, television, movies, they can attach that. It might be a little bit difficult, but at least they could chase that money down.

What really strikes me about this is why did Joran show up here? I am thinking, you know, Joran, you come here to the United States. There are people that have made up their mind about you. Certainly you're not going to change their mind. When they watch you on television, if they believe you did it, everything they watch, they're going to say, see, it corroborates what I was thinking. If there are people who think he didn't do it, they will be watching the same thing and they'll be saying, see, it proves he didn't do it. So Joran is not going to change anybody's mind. I think it was a foolish mistake to come here to the United States.

GERAGOS: And plus, all he had to do is to tell ABC, fly down to Aruba and be interviewed down here.

(CROSSTALK)

FULGINITI: ... from the Netherlands. He didn't have to set foot here at all. I mean, we're on satellite.

CARDOZA: I know. That's why I wonder, where was the defense attorney in this case? Kid, stay home. Don't go. Make them come to you. This makes absolutely no sense at all to me.

You know, Ted, one of the things that strikes me, when they were on the beach and they were talking about, you know, having sex and Joran said, oh, I didn't because I didn't have a contraceptive with me, I about fell off my chair. I thought, you're a 17-year-old kid and you're not going to have sex because you didn't have a contraceptive with you? Oh, that really smacks of the truth.

The other thing he said at that time, though, in his interview was, she told me to put her down. What was he doing? Was he carrying her somewhere? That was an interesting comment, I thought.

ROWLANDS: Right, and he was talking, from his point of view, I think he was talking about taking her to her hotel room and she said she didn't want to go.

We're going to hear more from that interview as well, and get more reaction. Right now, we want to check in with Anderson Cooper, who is in New York with a preview of what is ahead on "ANDERSON COOPER 360." Anderson.

ANDERSON COOPER, HOST, "AC 360": Good evening, Ted. We're following a fast-breaking story out of Phoenix, Arizona tonight, high- rise hostage situation. A man has taken a hostage at gunpoint. Police are on the scene. We will also be on the scene with some live reports. We'll also talk to a hostage negotiator about how to get this man out of that building and get that hostage back safe and alive.

Plus, it's one of the most secretive religions in the world, the Church of Scientology. What is the truth about the faith, and why are so few outsiders ever able to get a look inside? We'll bring you a rare interview with one of the church's top officials. That and more at the top of the hour -- Ted.

ROWLANDS: All right, thanks, Anderson. We will look forward to that at the top of the hour. When we come back, we'll check in with Stacey Honowitz and Robi Ludwig hear more from that Joran van der Sloot interview. You're watching LARRY KING LIVE. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROWLANDS: Stacey Honowitz is an assistant state attorney in Florida. Stacey, from what you've seen from this interview and the fact that you specialize in sex crimes and child abuse, do you believe Joran van der Sloot? Does his story make sense?

STACEY HONOWITZ, FLORIDA ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: Well I don't know how you can believe him. This is the fourth or fifth story that he's already told. But what I find so interesting, and I'll ask my colleagues Michael and Mark, who certainly defend murderers and rapists.

GERAGOS: Did she drop the accused? What happened to accused?

HONOWITZ: I mean, I can't believe that you would be shocked that he would come here -- the accused. Why they'd be so shocked that he would come over here? I mean, they have dealt with defendants before that I'm sure are very arrogant, that think they are above the law and do not listen to their advice. And for all we know, somebody over there might have advised them not to come over, not to speak to the media.

(END QUOTE)


(continued)
On 2-23 ABC News reported:

(QUOTE)

Joran van der Sloot Talks About Natalee Holloway

(Feb. 23) - In an exclusive interview with ABC News' Chris Cuomo for "Primetime," Joran van der Sloot, the Dutch teen seen with American Natalee Holloway the night she disappeared from Aruba in May, said he planned to have sex with her when they left a bar together.

"We were planning on going to my house, because she said she wanted to go to my house," he said. "My intention was to take her to the house to have sex with her."
But the couple did not end up sleeping together, he said. "I asked her if she wanted to have sex, and she was fine with it," he said. "I didn't have a condom with me though in my wallet, and I won't have sex with a girl without a condom."

Holloway, who was visiting Aruba on a school trip, met van der Sloot at a casino the night she disappeared. How they met and what went on between them has been the focus of endless speculation by officials and Holloway's friends and family.

Holloway sat at a blackjack table with van der Sloot in a casino the night she disappeared, according to a videotape obtained exclusively by ABC News from a confidential source. The tape shows grainy images of the two -- along with a group of Holloway's friends -- at the Excelsior Casino on what may have been the last night of her life.

"I sat down there and within five minutes, there was a group of girls from the Mountain Brook school that came up to me and sat down next to me and they wanted to play as well," van der Sloot told Cuomo. "They'd already been drinking that day and had drinks with them. We played blackjack for a while, and I told them whether or not to hit."

A Night on the Beach

Later that night, Holloway was seen leaving Carlos 'N Charlie's with van der Sloot, who said she did not seem drunk, though she had been drinking.

"She didn't seem drunk," he said. "She seemed like she drank a lot, but there's a difference between someone being absolutely drunk and someone ... actually having had a couple drinks."

((PHOTO CAPTION: ''We were planning on going to my house, because she said she wanted to go to my house. My intention was to take her to the house to have sex with her.''))

Holloway left with him by choice, he added. "There was this guy. I don't know who he was but he screamed to Natalee to get out of the car now. Deepak [Joran's friend] told her, 'If you want, go ahead and get out of the car' and she's like, 'No, I want to stay with you guys.'"

Van der Sloot said he spent time on a beach with Holloway before leaving her there -- the last time he saw her "she was sitting on the sand by the ocean."

"We cuddled awhile on the beach just laying there ... until I said, about time to walk her back to her hotel," he told "Primetime." "At that moment, she said she didn't want to go back to her hotel and she wanted me to stay with her, because it was her last night. I tried to convince her to go back to the hotel and she said just put me down."

He said he made a mistake when he left Holloway at the beach. "I should have brought her back to her hotel, or I should have made sure I left her with someone, one of her friends, but I just should have gotten her back to where she should have been."

'I Didn't Want Anyone to Know'

Van der Sloot admitted he had a reputation in Aruba as a ladies' man, but he said he has been portrayed "unfairly" as a "murderer and a rapist and everything I'm not."
"In Aruba that was part of my lifestyle ... going out, being single and picking up girls," he said. "Going out with them, having a good time and then saying goodbye."

Aruban authorities have seen the tape obtained by ABC News and have used it in their investigation into Holloway's disappearance. Beth Twitty, Holloway's mother, has also seen the tape. She told ABC News she had viewed it on the first night she arrived in Aruba to search for her daughter but had seen only the portion that appeared to show van der Sloot.

Soon after admittedly lying to Police about having dropped Holloway off at her hotel, van der Sloot became the main suspect in the case.

Van der Sloot -- along with Deepak Kalpoe and Satish Kalpoe -- was arrested June 9 on suspicion of involvement in Holloway's disappearance. van der Sloot admitted that he was with her but denied any wrongdoing. All were released after a court ruled that there wasn't enough evidence to hold them. van der Sloot said he didn't want to tell the truth because he was scared.

"I didn't want anyone to know," he said. "I didn't want anyone to know I left her at the beach."

He said he is a "normal teenager," adding, "I like playing sports. I go to college. I hang out with friends."

At the same time, he told "Primetime" that his version of events is hard to believe. When asked why, after all the lying he's done, his word should be credible, he said, "There's absolutely no reason to believe me."

"I would probably not believe myself, no," he added.

Yet, he said, it was important that he tell his story.

"Because it's the truth," he said. "It's time to just tell the truth."

(END QUOTE)



On 2-23 CNN reported:

(QUOTE)

NANCY GRACE, HOST: Tonight, breaking news out of Aruba. In the case of an
18-year-old American girl, Natalee Holloway, state`s chief suspect, judge`s son Joran
van der Sloot, the last person seen with the Alabama girl the night she disappeared --
well, he travels to New York and speaks out on national television, trying to explain his
best, explain to the world why he lied about Natalee`s disappearance and more. And
also tonight, we put van der Sloot`s every word under a microscope.

…

And breaking news tonight in the Natalee Holloway missing girl mystery. Chief suspect,
Aruban judge`s son Joran van der Sloot, speaks out, telling yet another version of the
night the 18-year-old Alabama beauty vanished off the island of Aruba. And he does it
on national TV!

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , SUSPECT IN NATALEE HOLLOWAY DISAPPEARANCE:
I knew her for one night. I should have just stayed home and this wouldn`t have
happened to me.

BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, NATALEE`S MOTHER: When Joran tells one lie, more
evolve.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you have sex with her that night?

VAN DER SLOOT: That`s -- first of all, that`s none of your business.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did anything else happen that night?

VAN DER SLOOT: No. Well, yes.

TWITTY: Joran van der Sloot has admitted to having sex with my daughter in one of
his statements. We do know that.

VAN DER SLOOT: She grabbed my hand and took me with her for me to take jelly shots
off her. When her parents showed up at my door with her picture, I didn`t even know who
Natalee Holloway was. I didn`t even know her name.

TWITTY: The Aruban government has audio and videotape of these confessions coming
from Joran van der Sloot.

VAN DER SLOOT: I was at the wrong place at the wrong time, maybe even with the
wrong people. And I just hope that the truth comes out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Oh, yes, he did. He said wrong place, wrong time. Now, have you ever heard
that excuse before? Before we make any snap judgments, let`s take a look at Joran Van
Der Sloot, the judge`s son`s, most recent version of what happened the night he claims
he have left a defenseless 18- year-old girl alone on a beach in another country at 3:00 AM.
Roll it, Rosie (ph)!

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS CUOMO, ABC NEWS "PRIMETIME": Did it seem like the wrong thing to do, leaving a girl on the beach like that?

VAN DER SLOOT: At that moment in time, for me it wasn't the wrong thing. I mean, it's not something a real man would do. It's not normal. It's not right at all.

CUOMO: But you did it.

VAN DER SLOOT: Yes.

CUOMO: When you heard that a girl had gone missing on the beach, what did you think?

VAN DER SLOOT: Well, the first thing that popped into my head was (DELETED) what if something happened to her? What if she went swimming? I was thinking, after everything she told me, she probably might have gone back to her hotel, hooked up with someone else and wanted to stay another day on the island.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: And that's not all. Joran van der Sloot, the judge's son, last one seen with Natalee Holloway, her parents broken-hearted over her disappearance.

Straight out to Beth Twitty, Natalee's mother. We'll show you more of that interview in just a moment. Beth, what do you make of Joran van der Sloot speaking so freely through a -- for a network television, but yet when you were there, trying to get him to talk to you, trying to get him to come search for Natalee the morning after, instead, he and his dad, the judge, had a poolside summit with a bunch of defense lawyers.

TWITTY: Oh, exactly, Nancy. And one thing that is so frustrating to us and -- there were so many times where Joran would just simply place his fingers in his ears because he was not going to answer anymore questions with the interrogators. I mean, he merely toyed with them over the summer. I mean, it's just -- it's so not true that Joran was interrogated on a daily basis over and over again. I mean, he -- you know, he gave the statements early on, but from then on, I mean, he was just advised either not to talk or, you know, continue to change his story because in Aruba, it's in your best interest just to continue lying. I think the only thing that a judge would do is maybe frown upon the lies.

GRACE: To Nicole Deborde, defense attorney joining us tonight. Why is it that he refused to return to Aruba to speak to Police about Natalee's disappearance, but he will gab for hours to the network TVs?

NICOLE DEBORDE, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I think talking to the networks about his case is probably a mistake on his part. But I think that one thing that we can all say that he is guilty of is bad judgment. And that is a completely different thing from being guilty of a murder or being guilty of a crime. And he's an 18-year-old kid who's responding to pressure in the ways that an 18-year-old kid will respond to pressure. Mistake, yes. Does it mean he's guilty of a crime? It really doesn't.

GRACE: Beth Twitty, response?

TWITTY: You know, why would Joran have fabricated stories so early, when we appeared on the island? And you know, Nancy, not only did he make up the story about how he dropped Natalee off at the "Holiday Inn," but just think of all the orchestration that took place for him to come up with the two security guards. Joran van der Sloot wouldn't have known Mickey John and Abraham Jones. That had to have come from his father, someone in the Police department. Someone had to know those two men had, you know, some discrepancies in their past or some issues in order to -- for Joran to implicate them in Natalee's disappearance. I mean...

GRACE: Well, what's interesting to me -- well, everything you're saying is interesting to me. But as a trial lawyer, Beth, what sticks out is you took a -- you managed to get yourself on a private plane and get down to Aruba pronto. At that time, Joran van der Sloot would hardly speak to you, but yet he had already created what we now know for a fact to be a lie by his own words, specifically blaming the two minority security guards, that were immediately thrown behind bars. They had never even met Natalee Holloway, yet they languished behind bars -- I had their moms on this show, crying for their release. Joran van der Sloot stood by and let them be falsely imprisoned, saying that he had seen them with her the night she went missing.

Not only that, tonight we learn from this new interview he has given to network news that he claims he left with Satish Kalpoe. Kalpoe says, No way. Right, Eric?

ERIC MARRAPODI, NANCY GRACE PRODUCER: That's right, Nancy. You know, I had the chance to speak with Satish and Deepak Kalpoe's attorney, Elgin Zeptofeld (ph), yesterday, and he says, you know, that's just not the case, that Satish -- his attorneys are saying he did not pick up Joran van der Sloot after they dropped him off right there at the Marriott beach, near those fishermen's huts, which, of course, would be the third version of Joran van der Sloot's story to Police.

GRACE: OK. So now we see the three young men beginning to splinter in their stories. OK, there's new sound. There's a new interview from Joran van der Sloot, who speaks so freely to a camera but refuses to speak to Police. Let's take a listen to more of his most recent version of Natalee's disappearance.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: How do you think you've been portrayed in all this?

VAN DER SLOOT: I think I've been portrayed unfairly. I've been portrayed as a murderer and a rapist and everything that I'm not.

BO DIETL, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: The father is served about 1:00 o'clock on Thursday, in the hotel lobby, which you'll see this videotape that I have here of him being served in the hotel lobby with his family. The next thing you'll see is also on the plane. These are pictures of Joran being served by our operative on the plane, upon the plane landing at Kennedy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: To Eric, our producer, who has spent so many weeks down in Aruba investigating this case. Eric, where did they stay here in New York City?

MARRAPODI: Nancy, they were staying at a hotel on the Upper West Side. It's called the Lucerne. It's a hotel that ABC News frequently puts up their guests when they bring them into town to do an interview..

GRACE: What was the name of it?

MARRAPODI: The Lucerne is the name of the hotel.

GRACE: Pretty, pretty posh. All right. While the mom and dad of Natalee Holloway are combing the countryside, begging for help, they're bunked up at a five-star hotel. OK. No comment.

Let's take a look, Rosie, if you could, the last video that we know of showing Natalee alive. We have obtained that tonight. This is Natalee Holloway at a local casino, spotted with Joran van der Sloot. Rosie, do you have that for me? All righty.

Now, what's so significant about this video is that it forces Joran van der Sloot to admit he was with her the night she went missing. This is -- it's grainy, but there you see Joran van der Sloot at the casino where Natalee was that very night. They are actually shot together. There you go. There's Natalee with her little friends from Mountain Brook high school, senior trip, and Joran van der Sloot. Take a look in the circle.

Now, that beautiful footage -- now he is stuck. If it weren't for that footage, Beth Twitty, he could have come up with a whole different scenario of what happened that night, but there is that footage that nails him in that location, and there may be footage from Carlos and Charlies, but there are many, many witnesses that saw him leave with Natalee Holloway's from Carlos and Charlies. So he's got to come up with a story that fits this video footage.

TWITTY: Oh, exactly. And I think that Joran had always been -- he'd always admitted that he left Carlos and Charlies with Natalee.

GRACE: Yes.

TWITTY: He had to do that. But what he was vague about, extremely vague about, Nancy, was having seen Natalee before, as he -- as we can tell he has in the Excelsior casino. He's been very vague about that.

GRACE: Let's take a look, Rosie, at more of his most recent version. Everyone, tonight, we are talking about the unsolved mystery surrounding Natalee Holloway, an 18-year-old American girl who went missing on her high school senior trip. Her plan? To devote herself to helping other people, to become a physician. She had the grades to do it. She never came home.

Here's more of what the judge's son had to say. "My intention" -- and he makes no bones about it -- "was to take Natalee to my house and have sex with her. I asked her if she wanted to have sex. She said she was fine with it. I didn't have a condom with me in my wallet, and I won't have sex without a condom." Now, there's a principled guy. "I won't have sex without a condom."

Rosie, let's see what else Joran van der Sloot had to say about that night. "I lied, yes. I lied because I was scared. I had a girlfriend at the time. I didn't want my dad to think bad of me. I didn't want my friends of think bad of me."

Let's see the rest, Rosie. Long story short, he was so worried about what other people thought, he didn't come join the search to find Natalee the next morning. "I didn't want anyone to know I left her at the beach. I left them on the beach. I walked to the car. We got in the car, and right then, there, I couldn't go back because we were going home."

He's talking about his shoes, which many people think, why would a guy suddenly leave a girl alone on a beach and leave without his shoes?

Let's see the next one, Rosie. van der Sloot says, "There's absolutely no reason to believe me." "Would you believe you?" van der Sloot, "I probably would not believe myself, no."

To Beth Twitty. Response?

TWITTY: Oh, Nancy, it's hard to even respond to something like that. I mean, you know, I'm just glad that he is coming out and speaking on camera because I heard a clip that you -- a sound bite earlier, and he does -- when he tells one lie, more evolve. And it just is mind-boggling how we are all just witnessing this from Joran.

GRACE: What do you find to be the most disturbing aspect of his new version?

TWITTY: Well, I think the most disturbing aspect would be where now he is implicating Satish that came and picked him up. And in several of his statements an early on, he was saying that Deepak had picked him up from the fisherman's hut. But you know, Nancy, the bottom line is that didn't happen. The gardener that came forward in August was a very credible witness, and he had all three suspects nailed at the critical time by the pond. That's the bottom line on how all those three boys were together.

GRACE: What do you make of the fact that they are now splitting ranks, that they are splitting ranks as to who picked Joran van der Sloot up that night?

TWITTY: Well, I mean, I think that could probably be helpful in forcing some type of answers because it sounds like to me there's kind of some dissension among these three suspects. And you know, as they were doing early on, they were beginning to implicate each other as -- you know, as -- I think that that's a sign that maybe it will force some more answers coming from them.

GRACE: Beth Twitty, you have seen Police files that we have not seen. His statements that he made at the time to Police are very different than what he is telling network news tonight.

TWITTY: Oh, absolutely. Absolutely, they are. I mean...

GRACE: Well, for instance, take a listen to this, Beth. Let's get that back up, Rosie, if you could.

Do you recall telling me that Joran van der Sloot gave a perfect and accurate description of Natalee's underwear? (INAUDIBLE) gave that to Police, Beth?

TWITTY: Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, Nancy. Yes, he did. He was very graphic. You know, the words that he used to describe -- I mean, he was, you know, very graphically detailed, sexually explicit, yes.

GRACE: So how is it that now he's saying all they did on the beach was cuddle, that she wanted to have sex and he refused her?

TWITTY: Well, Nancy, it's just simply untrue. I mean, the statements were given early on. They're very, very detailed, I mean very detailed. So he was forthcoming even with witnesses the first night, when we arrived on the island. He was, again, very graphic in his description of the sexual assaults he committed against Natalee.

GRACE: And of course, to David Oblon, defense attorney. Every time he gives another televised statement -- I believe this is his fourth version that he's given to TV, much less to Police and others -- you know the pro3ecution must just be licking their chops.

DAVID OBLON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I'm not sure who's advising this guy. Whoever It is, he should be hanging up his briefcase because, you're correct, every time that there's an inconsistent statement, that creates more and more suspicion. But suspicion does not make a murderer.

GRACE: True. True. You always have to have that little disclaimer, don't you, David.

OK, we'll all be right back, but to tonight's "Case Alert." The South Dakota senate passes a bill banning abortion almost entirely. Doctors now facing serious prison time for performing abortions unless the mother's life is in danger. South Dakota will now allow no exceptions for cases of rape or incest. The bill is designed to start the fight to overturn Roe v. Wade. It now heads to the South Dakota house.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DIETL: ... series of pictures you're going to see now are photos of Joran being served as he walked out of immigration. Now, when the plane arrived, there was about a two-hour delay before he came out. The INS, the immigration services, had grabbed him. He must have been on some kind of watch list. Eventually, the released him to come out.

As the doors opened, this young man, I didn't know who he was, runs over to him and throws a coat over his head. And at this time, I went up to him and I told him, Look, I am going to serve you with official court documents, a summons and complaint. This is official service. Of course, in serving the summons and complaint, you have to put the papers on them. If they don't want to take them, you touch them. I ended up putting the papers right into his jacket, at which time I followed Joran, and he took the papers out, crumpled them up and threw them on the ground. And I continued to follow him, as you can see in these pictures, into a taxicab, at which he went and took off.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Beth, you had just -- we were talking about the fact that Joran van der Sloot -- he swears now there was no sex between him and Natalee -- gave a very detailed description of Natalee's underwear, the embroidery on it and all that. But you just revealed a new fact to me I didn't know.

TWITTY: Not only did he know specific details about her underclothing, but also just a physical description of her, so...

GRACE: Without her clothes on.

TWITTY: Yes.

GRACE: I put it as gently as I possibly can.

TWITTY: Yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Tonight, Joran van der Sloot suddenly has a case of the gab. He spoke for hours to one of the networks. They'll be airing that tonight.

Straight out to Beth Twitty. Beth, what do you find when you're hearing his new statements, the fact that he's so willingly speaking and cooperating with networks -- that there are book deals floating around, yet Natalee is still missing. And what he is telling the TV cameras is a far cry from what he told Police.

TWITTY: Well, Nancy, it looks like to me Joran's ready maybe to sit down in New York and answer to some questions from -- sit through some depositions. Looks like he's ready to talk. So maybe he needs to do it under oath.

GRACE: To Scott Balber. He's a civil attorney for the Holloway- Twitty family. Scott, what do you want to gain, other than having all these parties, Joran van der Sloot and his judge father, under sworn oath in a deposition? What do you hope to gain out of the civil suit? What do you want to learn.

SCOTT BALBER, CIVIL ATTORNEY FOR NATALEE'S FAMILY: Well, quite frankly, we want to learn what happened that night, what became of Natalee, and we want an opportunity to get some answers.

GRACE: To Eric Marrapodi. Eric, how does this ABC interview compare to what he has said in the past? Compare and contrast, Eric.

MARRAPODI: Yes. You know, when we look at Joran's interviews, he's done four television interviews. The first was with an Aruban television station, a program called "Exclusivo." The second, of course, was the ambush interview style that "A Current Affair" did with him there in Holland. And also, last weekend while he was in town, he did an interview with a Dutch program called "Nova," in addition to this "Primetime" interview. Something that he left out in the "Nova" interview was this issue about the sex and not having a condom, an interesting omission for those of us who've watched this case for so long.

GRACE: Wouldn't you say it's a pretty big point?

MARRAPODI: It's a very interesting point. Another person who's watching this tonight is going to be Karin Janssen. We spoke with her tonight. She'll be watching this interview, as well.

GRACE: The prosecutor.

MARRAPODI: That's right, the lead prosecutor on this case.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TWITTY: I still remain optimistic. I know it's hard to do it, but what other hope do we have but to rely on the Aruban criminal justice system? And we just hope that it will prevail. We hope that Aruba will show us they do have enforceable laws, such as perjury and obstruction of justice and rape.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: To criminal profiler Pat Brown. Why is it so significant that Joran van der Sloot cannot shut up?

PAT BROWN, CRIMINAL PROFILER: Well, a lot of people can't shut up when they're trying to make up a story that they're trying to convince you with. This is a rather psychopathic behavior. And I can't call him a psychopath, but I can say he is exhibiting psychopathic behaviors, one of arrogance that, I can pull this wool over everybody's eyes, one of blaming the victim, and he's always blaming Natalee. Hey, here again we have, She wanted sex, I didn't. That's a new one added in her. And...

GRACE: Well, actually, he was saying she wanted unprotected sex and I didn't.

BROWN: Even worse.

GRACE: I'm such a great guy. To Eric...

BROWN: Exactly.

GRACE: ... Marrapodi. Eric, you were telling us about four televised interviews. What were you saying about the major inconsistencies between them?

MARRAPODI: You know, the major inconsistencies that I think prosecutors are going to be looking at tonight are the inconsistencies between what he said to Police in interrogation rooms and what he said on these programs. A big one we can point out tonight to you is, of course, who picked him up when he left the beach? Did he walk home? Was it Deepak that picked him up? Was it Satish? Now in this interview, he's saying it was Satish who picked him up from the nearby fishermen's huts and took him back to his place at home -- a big discrepancy.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BO DIETL, FORMER NYPD DETECTIVE: Why don't you come clean and tell us where you buried her body?

JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , LAST SEEN WITH NATALEE HOLLOWAY: ... back, I would have made sure she got back to her hotel safely, but I can't change that now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: The judge's son there in Aruba, Joran van der Sloot, was the last person seen with Natalee Holloway, OK? He is stuck with the fact that he is video with her at a casino. He is stuck with the fact that her whole high school senior class saw him leaving with her, leaving Carlos and Charlies. He is now stuck with not one, not two, not three, but four televised interviews. Ouch. That's got to hurt the defense. Owie.

To Beth Twitty, this is Natalee's mother joining us tonight, what, if anything, do you think that Aruban prosecutors will do with his most latest statement?

TWITTY: Well, I hope that they see that now Joran has not only changed the pickup from being Deepak to Satish. And they need to go back, Nancy, go back to August, go back when the gardener's statement was given before the judge of instruction, sworn testimony, the defense, the prosecutor, Deepak, Satish, and Joran.

And what happened was his statement was credible and Deepak panicked. He panicked that very day, made a phone call to a girl looking for an alibi. This young woman became very upset and concerned, made a phone call to the FBI. She did not want to be involved in it.

They need to go back. There were numerous times when their alibis were destroyed repeatedly.

GRACE: What do you make of his statement, his most recent statement that, OK, she wanted to have sex with him. He didn't want to have unprotected sex because he's so responsible. He takes her to a beach. He leaves her there alone around 3:00 a.m. and then makes off without his shoes.

Beth, why did he leave his shoes behind?

TWITTY: You know, that's been a question all along, Nancy. And I really couldn't figure out if there was one tennis shoe that he left behind or if it were both.

But I think what I was hearing from one of you2 panel of guests tonight -- and she's so right -- I mean, as if Joran can only place the blame on Natalee for everything that has transpired. Every phase of it has been due to her fault. And it has to be some type of sociopathic or psychopathic behavior that he just places everything on Natalee.

GRACE: Now, Joran van der Sloot has given yet another statement, everyone. Huge mystery. The world is watching the tiny island of Aruba. What, if anything, will they do next? Well, here's yet another version on a silver platter. Take a listen to Joran van der Sloot. This is volume four.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did it seem like a wrong thing to do, leaving a girl on the beach like that?

JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , LAST SEEN WITH NATALEE HOLLOWAY: At that moment in time, for me it wasn't the wrong thing. But, I mean, it's not something a real man would do. It's not normal. It's not right at all.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But you did it?

VAN DER SLOOT: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you have sex with her that night?

VAN DER SLOOT: First of all, that's none of your business.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's just a question.

VAN DER SLOOT: Yes. But it's absolutely none of your business.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, what -- I mean, did anything else happen that night?

VAN DER SLOOT: No. Well, yes, I kissed with her. But neither me, Deepak, or Satish ever had sex with her, and no one ever said otherwise.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: So, Beth Twitty, back to the original statement, as you keep going, you saw those Police statements. You saw that he described the embroidery on her underwear, that he described her body without clothing on it. So now how can he say this?

TWITTY: I don't know, Nancy. For the life of me, I don't know. But those statements were there. I hope they're still there. And something else that I noticed when he was with the Dutch -- I'm sorry, with Jerry Wagsstaff on that "Current Affair" interview, he also states how Natalee was drunk, that he was drinking, too, and that he says that the Aruban authorities tried to pin it on him as a rape case, but he says it was totally consensual. I mean, you know, Natalee was not able to choose her will that night.

GRACE: Let's compare what Joran van der Sloot is saying now to what he said before.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VAN DER SLOOT: I knew her for one night. I feel horrible that I even went out that night without my father knowing. I should have just stayed home and this wouldn't have happened to me. It would have happened to another person.

I just try to look at it that I was at the wrong place at the wrong time, maybe even with the wrong people. And I just hope that the truth comes out, that there just comes some clarity in this case.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But do you understand -- I mean, how could a girl just disappear?

VAN DER SLOOT: I don't know. I think that's the million dollar question.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What would you do now?

VAN DER SLOOT: I would have just stayed home that night. I wouldn't even have gone out. It was Natalee who asked me to go out with her. It was her that asked me to come to the club. It was her that was yelling at me to go dance with her, and I said -- and I went to go drink something with my friends.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you that irresistible? I mean, is that what...

VAN DER SLOOT: No, that's absolutely not what it's about. I don't know. When her parents showed up at my door with her picture, I didn't even know who Natalee Holloway was. I didn't even know her name.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: To forensic psychiatrist Dr. Dave Davis, Dr. Davis, just out of curiosity, how did you get to the set tonight?

DR. DAVE DAVIS, FORENSIC PSYCHIATRIST: Came in a car.

GRACE: Came in a car. Did you drive?

DAVIS: No, I came with a chauffeur.

GRACE: Now, if I asked you that in an hour and you told me that you hitchhiked to the set or you took MARTA -- you're in Atlanta, right -- what do you make of the fact that Joran van der Sloot is now changing his story about how he got away from Natalee that night? That, first of all, he said Satish Kalpoe came and got him in a car, and now Satish Kalpoe says, "No, no, no, no, no, I didn't."

DAVIS: Well, circumstantial evidence is not what it always might appear to be. These people were under the influence of alcohol. Who knows what will happen? And I certainly don't think he's a psychopath just because he gives a different version of what happened. He's a young man who was under tremendous pressure at the time, so, you know, he's being interviewed by the Police.

GRACE: You're kidding me. Wait, wait, wait. He can't even tell the truth about how he got home?

DAVIS: If he were a psychopath -- you know, he's admitted that he did some things wrong, that he made a mistake by leaving her there on the beach. And I certainly don't think that it's bad for him to have not wanted to have sex with somebody that he didn't know very well without a condom. That's good medical...

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: Well, sir, sir, sir, sir, sir, sir, let me ask you to review his statement. Because in his statement, he states he was an island lothario that made it his business to go to bars and casinos every night, pick up a new woman, have sex with her, and then, in his own words, say goodbye. So I don't know how honorable.

He's not exactly a knight in training. I'm hearing in my ear Jossy Mansur is now joining us. He is the managing director and editor of ARUBAAN's news-source "Diario" magazine.

Jossy Mansur, can Aruban prosecutors actually use these interviews against Joran van der Sloot?

JOSSY MANSUR, EDITOR, ARUBAAN's news-source "Diario": Of course they can.

GRACE: How?

MANSUR: Because they're statements made by a suspect that is still a suspect for q5ite some time to come. And I've seen cases in Aruba where any audio or videotaped interviews (INAUDIBLE) have been used very successfully in the courts of law in Aruba.

GRACE: Now, let me ask you this -- and this could close the book on any prosecution of Joran van der Sloot or his father -- have they asked for a speedy trial?

MANSUR: They have not asked for a speedy trial. Their lawyers have asked for a dismissal of Joran as a suspect now, and not keep him according to the length that the law states that he should be kept as a suspect, which is two years.

GRACE: To Beth Twitty -- this is Natalee's mother joining us tonight -- Beth, I know that you have filed a civil lawsuit. Now, most people wait for the criminal case to go forward, then they use all that evidence in their civil lawsuit. Why a civil suit?

TWITTY: You know, Nancy, this was truly a brilliant move on John's part. And, you know, really, this is really a movement towards, you know, getting some answers, getting him here on U.S. soil, hopefully getting to the bottom of this.

And, you know, as far as the family's concerned, Nancy, you know, John Kelly's the first man that's come in the investigation that's actually been able to produce some results and, you know, is dedicated to getting to the bottom of it.

GRACE: And you're referring to John Quillian Kelly, right?

TWITTY: Yes.

GRACE: Everyone, helping Ms. Twitty on the case is John Q. Kelly, who won the O.J. Simpson civil lawsuit to the tune of $33 million.

You know, I find it very, very suggestive, Pat Brown, that he can't even keep his story straight about how he got home that night.

BROWN: Oh, absolutely. The story is changing over and over, had nothing to do with him being an innocent young man. That's a liar.

And let me tell you, though, in the stories he tells, there is truth in there, if you really listen. He said three true things. I wish I hadn't gone out that night. I wish I had brought her home safely. And a real man wouldn't have done what I did. That's the truth.

GRACE: To our producer that has researched and investigated the case down in Aruba, Eric Marrapodi, Eric, do van der Sloot's current account match up with the Kalpoe brothers?

MARRAPODI: No, it doesn't. And the point that it does not match up is on how Joran got home. Satish Kalpoe, through his attorneys, has told us, "Hey, look, I didn't take the guy home."

GRACE: What about the reward?

MARRAPODI: It's important to remind our viewers around the world, Nancy, especially those watching in Aruba, that this is, of course, an open case. A $250,000 reward for information leading to Natalee Holloway's whereabouts; $1 million for her safe return.

GRACE: Final thought tonight, before we take you to yet another case, to Beth Twitty, Natalee's mother -- Beth?

TWITTY: Well, Nancy, you know, I really feel as if something the family can hang onto now is, you know, John Kelly getting to -- you know, having more successes than this. And I know he's enlisted the help of Scott Balber and Jerome Katz (ph) of Chadbourne & Park. So I'm looking forward to some successes there.



On 2-23 “Sleuth” summarized the 2-23 ABC News “Prime Time” interview of Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT :

(QUOTE)

Joran: it is about time people see the other side of the story. i would probably not believe myself.

But this is the truth. time to tell the truth.

I am ready to tell the truth.

Showing video of casino.

Here we see joran entering the casino.

I sat down, and within 5 min there were a group of girls wanting to play as well. they had drinks and had been drinking all day.

She did not seem interested in me. No, I was interested in another girl.

Even when the real moment i started to pay attention to her was in c and c.

The girls ask him and their friends to join them. Deepak parked car. we walked into the club around 12. On way to bar, Natalee was on stage dancing,, she screamed at me to come and dance with her.

I was like no, i can.t then she wanted me to do a jellyshot. she took me by the hand. she jumped on the bar and told me to do a jelly shot.

She was coming up to me. I was not pursuing her at all.

We went to another bar onopp side, and she asked what shot do i suggest. i told her baccardi cause it was what i liked.I was not planning on gettingher drunk at all. I saw her as someone who was trying to have fun. she was drunk. It was her idea to keep the night going. she came with us, and pass her friends. they do not seem happy.

Deepak told her she could go, but natalle wanted to stay with us.

I thought everything was fine.

Joran and n start kissing. I kissed her first,i may have said she started to kiss me first. i have said alot of things

My intention to taking her to my house was to have sex with her.

Just after 1 in aruba.

Joran and natalee have been drinking.

Joran: Unusual for me to be with a girl with two guys. I decide not to take her to the house.

natalee said she wanted to go to beach to see sharks. I told her there are no sharks inaruba. she said no,there are. so i told deepak to go to the lighthouse. she was saying where she was from, where she went to school. she told me about her mom. she told me her mom was hitlers sister. i have no clue what she meant. it came up, not a part of the conversation. one of her friends told the Police that she said the same thing.

I thought she was joking. but she said she was serious.

We never got to the lighthouse. i asked her if she wanted to go to the hotel, so we went to the beach next to her hotel. we got out, and i told deepak i would call him later to come pickme up.

we walked out on the beach, she seemed ok. there were alot of couples on the beach. i took of my shoes, they got sand in them. we walked to water and we were kissing. we then walked to another part of the beach to fishermans hut. we sat again, we made out.

As i remember she was laying on top of me, touching each other, she put her hands in my pants, and i put my hand in hers. no intercourse, i asked her if she wanted to have sex, and she was fine with it. i had no condom. i won't have sex without a condom.

i though she was attractive, nice.

I thought it was just a mutual hook up for the moment.

I decided to go home because of school the next day.

I thought it was time to walk her back.

she did not want to go back.

she did not want to go back to alabama.

she was falling asleep, closed her eyes while she was on my chest.

she wanted me to stay with her. she did not want to go home to alabama.

i called deepak.

i tried to convince her to go back to the hotel. i jokingly picked her up and she told me to put her down.

She was sitting onthe sand by the ocean.

at that moment it was not the wrong thing to do. but i did it.

At that moment i wanted to go home and go to school the next day.

Satish pcked me up. I left without my shoes.

I did not panick. i left them on the beach . i could not go backwhen i remembered because we were going home.

natlaee and the shoes have never been found.

after leaving her drunk and alone, joran says he went home.

Records seem to confirm he is at home. emails deepak. checks scores and a porn site.

When you heard a girl had gone missing:

Joran: what if something happened to her. what if she went swimming. she probably hooked up with someone else. wanted to stay another day on the island.

He and his friends make up a story.

Joran: We should have told the truth. but we decided i did not want anyone to know i left her on the beach.

first impression of HOLLOWAY-TWITTY:

i walked up to her. she was holding a picture. she screamed, tell me where my daughter is. I told her i don't know.

he also told them that he and his friends dropped her off at the Holiday inn. a complete lie.

Why would you lie if you had nothing to hide?

I was scared. i had a girlfriend. I did not want anyone to know i left her on the beach. there was not alot of thought, we were making it up as we went along.

family showed up.

then deepak made up the story about the security gaurds.

that she fell out of the car.

For no specific reason, we said that. just to add detail.

He said he would have told the real story if the family did not show up. they were putting pressure on us. they made us lie. they were searching for a girl, and i lied but how they acted towards my friends and family was not a normal way to act. satish and deepak decided it was ok to lie about this.

everyone is searching for natalee except joran and his friends.

joran: deepak and i and satish keep talking maybe it is time we went to the Police and tell them what happened.

No. I did not kill or harm her.

No, i did not see her in distress.

I know these answers mean alot to her and her family.

Joran: everything we did was consensual.

( i had a huge post ready that was lost in the hiccup)

Boycott:

When they wanted to boycott aruba, that is where they went too far.

Joran: i realize it is frustrating for the family.

It is important for me to go on with my life.

I have awesome friends in aruba in holland. i have been portrayed as everything i am not. I am a normal teenager. i play sports, go to college. sometimes i feel like i need help in dealing with my emotions.

When they come out, they are all built up.

i cry all day . it is not easy to be happy.

often i have these days.

If i were to see her, i would hate her. Yes, i would hate her if she ran away from home, i would hate her.

I want closure too. if i end up getting cleared because of lack of evidence. but if this case gets solved. i think this will end for me and for everyone when the truth comes out.

Next; what natalees parents are doing to keep story going.

the case is not solved.

mother is launching campaigns to keep student safe.

dave has written a book.
…
Deepak parked his car behind CnC and it was already late and Natalee was on the stage dancing and she screamed to him come and dance with her and she came and grabbed his hand. Well then come and take a jelly shot and she jumped on the bar and told the bartender to give her a jelly shot.

By now it was closing time and he got the last drink he gave her 151. CC said were you trying to get Natalee drunk. Joran said no she had a lot of drinks and CC asked him were you drunk he said no. She told her friends she was coming with him. Joran said he and Natalee started kissing in the back seat of the car. CC asked him who initiated it and Joran said he did. We were planning on going to his house was because she said she wanted to got to his house.

We never went to the lighthouse. She said I don’t want to go to my hotel and I was thinking where do I take her and we went to the beach next to her hotel. They dropped him off and he told Deepak he would call him later. How was she walking did she seem OK to you. Yes there were other people on the beach other couples. I asked her if she wanted to go back to the hotel and she said no and she wanted to go to the north end island (fishermen's huts).

CC asked what happened. As I remember it she was laying on top of him and she put her hands in his pants and I put my hands in her pants but so sex. I won’t have sex with a girl without a condom. I thought she was attractive and I thought she was nice. It was just a mutual hookup for the moment. We cuddled awhile on the beach and she did want to go back to the hotel and she wanted him to stay here. She fell asleep and she had her head on his chest. She wanted him to stay with her there and she didn’t want to go back to Alabama. I jokingly pick her up and put her in his arms. She was sitting in the sand by the ocean. Did it seem the wrong things to do. At that time he did think It was the wrong thing to do. Deepaks brother Satish picked him up and wanted to go home. Why would you forget you shoes on the beach (he is smirking).

(END QUOTE)



On 2-23 BOB PLUMMER, one of the 7 chaperones to the MOUNTAIN BROOK, ALABAMA high school classmates on the ARUBA trip stated to FOX News:

(QUOTE)

VAN SUSTEREN: Bob, first of all, how many students went on this trip?
PLUMMER: About 130.
VAN SUSTEREN: Out of the 130, what percentage, loosely, were actually adults, were 18 years old?
PLUMMER: I think there were only maybe five or six that were not.
#VAN SUSTEREN: All right. And as Natalee was 18 at that time, she was an adult?
PLUMMER: Yes, ma'am.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. How many chaperones went on the trip?
PLUMMER: There were seven.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Go back to May 29, that Sunday. Did you see Natalee that day?
PLUMMER: Yes. We met with the students every day to make sure that everything was fine, that, you know, nothing was happening, that everything was going OK with them. So yes, we met with them earlier that day and then saw them again that afternoon or that evening at dinner in the casino.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So when was the last time you remember seeing Natalee?
PLUMMER: I would have to say that it was probably that night in the casino.
VAN SUSTEREN: And was she drinking at the time?
PLUMMER: I couldn't specifically say if she was or not. The whole time we were down there, I never recall really seeing her drink a whole lot, period.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. But as a practical matter, was there any sort of agreement or impediment to her drinking any way? She was 18-year-old adult. I mean, were there any specific instructions or anything like that?
PLUMMER: No, that was entirely up to the discretion of the students.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. When you last saw her about 9 o'clock, where did you go, back to your room?
PLUMMER: No, we actually stayed down with a bunch of the students there around the casino and the pool area probably until about 11:30 or 12:30, somewhere in that neighborhood.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. So when was the next time you heard Natalee's name or heard that she might be missing or something?
PLUMMER: The next morning, when we were getting the first set of buses off to the airport and they had checked off the first bus that was going to take the first set of students back to the airport, and came out of the bus and we're getting ready to get the second group together, of which Natalee was a part, and at that point, that some of the students came up and said, We've not seen Natalee since last night.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Did any of the students say where they had last seen her?
PLUMMER: Yes. They right away said, you know, they saw her actually leaving with these guys in a car, a silver car.
VAN SUSTEREN: What did you do then?
PLUMMER: We immediately got the students together, her roommates, and just, you know, asked them some general questions about what time it was, went back to the room, and just getting her stuff together, and actually got her stuff together and brought it to the front of the resort because we were hoping maybe she would just show up late, and that way, we'd already have her stuff together so we'd be ready to go without missing her flight.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Did you ever meet Joran van der Sloot or see him?
PLUMMER: Not that I can recall. You know, I probably did see him there around the resort or the casino, but you know, was not looking for him at that time, had no reason to be looking for him, so I can't recall if I did, no.
VAN SUSTEREN: Did Natalee give you any trouble, or any friends give you any trouble up until that last day when you saw her? Was she a troublemaker, in other words?
PLUMMER: No.
VAN SUSTEREN: What's she like?
PLUMMER: No. None whatsoever! None whatsoever. That's the primary reason for me coming and speaking out now is to dispel a lot of the misinformation and the lies and rumors and innuendo about how the students were acting on this trip. You know, a lot of people said they were out of control, they were drinking too much, they were just drunk all the time, and that could not have been further from the truth. As I've told other people, there were a lot of families at this resort with their kids. And I can't tell you how many adults came up to us, the chaperones down there, and told us how well behaved, how polite these students were.
VAN SUSTEREN: Were you the one who notified Beth that her daughter was missing, or at least hadn't shown up to the bus?
PLUMMER: No. We actually called back to Birmingham and talked to one of the ladies that had arranged the trip, and she called Beth.
VAN SUSTEREN: And then at that point, I assume you boarded the plane and you came home, and Beth's mother arrived sometime later, is that right?
PLUMMER: Yes, ma'am.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, Bob. Thank you.
PLUMMER: Yes, ma'am. Thank you.

(END QUOTE)



2-24-06

On 2-24 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com" reported:

(QUOTE)

ARUBA – Last year, the average rate of a hotel room in Aruba was 174.24 dollars. This was 21.7 percent lower than the year before. Also the occupancy and the average proceeds per room were higher than in 2004. Despite the disappointing results of the second half of 2005, the hotel sector had closed the year 2005 with good results.
The Central Bureau for Statistics (CBS) had computed that the average occupancy was 81.7 percent, which is 1.7 percent higher than the year before. Also the average proceeds per room went up with 14.9 percent to 93.63 dollars. The CBS concluded from an analysis made of the quarterly results, that the second quarter of 2005 had the best results. The timeshare-sector closed the year with an occupancy of 78.2 percent; that is a growth with 4.7 percent compared to the year before. Remarkable is that this sector did better business in the second half of 2005. The average price for a timeshare unit last year was 156.33 dollars; a proceeds of 12.7 percent higher than in 2004.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-24 ARUBAAN's news-source "Amigoe.com" reported:

(QUOTE)

Joran van der Sloot tells his ‘truth’

ARUBA – Natalee Holloway had drunk some, but was not under the influence of alcohol on the evening of her disappearance. She did say something strange about her mother. “She said that her mother is Hitler’s sister.” This is what Joran van der Sloot, the main suspect in the case of the disappeared girl, said in Primetime on the American TV-station ABC that was broadcasted on Thursday evening.

It’s the first time that the suspect gave a detailed interview. He recently refused to talk to the Aruban and Dutch media. It was also the first time that the Americans could hear the other side of the story.

“It is time to tell the truth”, said Joran in the interview. He admitted that so many lies were told. He said that Natalee had insisted in staying behind on the beach near fisherman's hut. “Looking back, I should have never left her there.” At that moment, after she kept insisting, it didn’t seem wrong to him. The plan was actually to take her to his house, but he didn’t do this, because his brother and father were home. They didn’t have sex on the beach, “because I had no condom in my wallet and I do not have sex without a condom.”

Joran says that Natalee was in control that night. The brothers Deepak and Satish Kalpoe drove them first to the lighthouse, to ‘see the sharks’, because Holloway wanted that. The plan changed along the way and they were dropped at the beach close to her hotel. They walked to fisherman's hut where Joran left Natalee behind, because he had classes the next morning, but before he left they have cuddled and kissed some.

It was Satish Kalpoe that picked him up and not Deepak as he had told the Police in an earlier version. He said that he had convened with Deepak to say that and so leave Deepak’s younger brother out. According to the lawyer of the two brothers, David Kock, none of them had picked Joran up, but Joran said that they are lying and he doesn’t know why. He didn’t comment on the suggestion of the interviewer Chris Cuomo that Satish drove back to the beach after he had dropped Joran home.

At first, the three boys lied to the Police saying that they have dropped the girl at her hotel. “I didn’t want my father to know that I have left her behind alone. Besides, I had a girlfriend at that time,” was Joran’s reasons for this lie that Deepak made up. Deepak also made up the lie about Natalee tripping over when she got out of the car and that a security guard had caught her. Joran says that the Police believed their story. Before they were arrested, the three boys got together every day to talk to each other. Joran was afraid to tell the truth. His father Paul didn’t know the facts of the case, pointed Joran, who was arrested on the day of his graduation. He said that he was heavily interrogated for many long days and that a Police officer had also hit him. “There was an officer that didn’t like me. He hit me in my head off my chair.” Joran couldn’t stand the fact that his father was also arrested.

From everything Holloway had told him, he assumed that the girl had returned to her hotel to meet somebody and would have stayed in Aruba for another day. The girl’s family that immediately came to Aruba in a private plane approached him very aggressively. “They yelled at me. You don’t do that, even though your daughter is missing.” In the citation of the Family Holloway/Twitty that Joran was given in New York, he is being accused of three date-rapes after having put drugs in the drinks. “That’s not true,” said Joran. “I have never done such thing.” One thing he hopes, that the case is solved. “I won’t be cleared if the case is not solved.”

(END QUOTE)



On 2-24 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

DAN ABRAMS, HOST: Coming up, Natalee Holloway's mother is with us to respond to what suspect Joran van der Sloot said about her in an exclusive interview.

…

ABRAMS: Coming be, Natalee Holloway's mother gets the final word after suspect Joran van der Sloot's big interview. He says he'd probably hate Natalee if he saw her today and had some harsh things to say about Natalee's mom. So what does Beth Twitty think? We'll ask her next.

…


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ABRAMS: He's the one everyone been waiting to hear from, Joran van der Sloot, the main suspect in Natalee Holloway's disappearance. Natalee last seen almost nine months ago, just a day before she was supposed to head home to Alabama from her trip to Aruba celebrating her high school graduation. Joran and the other two suspects, Deepak and Satish Kalpoe were the last to see her. In an interview on ABC's primetime, Joran insisted he had nothing to do with Natalee's disappearance.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you kill Natalee Holloway?
JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , CHIEF SUSPECT IN NATALEE HOLLOWAY CASE: No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you harm Natalee Holloway?
VAN DER SLOOT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you help someone else who harmed Natalee Holloway?
VAN DER SLOOT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you see Natalee Holloway in distress?
VAN DER SLOOT: No.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Joining me now is Natalee Holloway's mother, Beth Holloway.
Beth, thanks a lot for coming on the program. We appreciate it.
BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY'S MOTHER: Thank you, Dan.
ABRAMS: So what do you make of this interview that Joran did, now you've gotten a chance to hear it, what's your reaction?
TWITTY: Well you know I think my reaction is, you know as usual, Dan, Joran places all the blame on Natalee, all the initiation of any of the activities where they went that night, you know how she behaved that night. You know it just seems to be going right along with Joran's M.O. of always placing every built of responsibility on Natalee and it's just—it's so difficult for him—for me to sit here and let him do that.
ABRAMS: Yes. He talked about when they met at the bar and here's what he said about what actually led them to start really talking.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: She took me by the hand and she took me to the bar and she jumped on the bar, laid down and told the bartender to give me a jelly shot to put in her belly button and take the jelly shot off her.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Is that one of the comments that you're talking about?
TWITTY: Exactly, Dan. I mean there again he's making Natalee look as if—you know it's almost as if he's trying to say that she asked for it. That everything—every aspect about it was due to her initiation.
ABRAMS: How do you feel about the comments that he made about you? I mean he talked about your interaction with him, but he also said—made a very hurtful comment that he claims Natalee had said that—some horrible things about you.
TWITTY: Well, they're just simply untrue. There again, I mean, you know there was a comment where Joran was saying that I was—something about I'm Hitler's daughter, that I was yelling at him and you know, Dan, that night I remained seated in the back seat of a car the entire time. I was so stunned that I couldn't even get out of the car to approach Joran. I mean he approached me in an aggressive matter. I didn't even approach Joran.
ABRAMS: Yes. This is—here's again what he said. He says that the first time that you all met, you were screaming at him. Here's what he said and then I want to hear you—hear what you have to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: All she said to me, she screamed at me was tell me where my daughter is.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And did you?
VAN DER SLOOT: I told her that I didn't know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: And that's not the way it happened?
TWITTY: No, Dan, I was seated in the back seat of a car, and the door was ajar and Joran is the one who approached me in the car and yes, I did in a firm manner ask him what did he do with Natalee and you know he just kept hitting his chest and throwing his head back and was just so arrogant and so condescending to me and you know, Dan, I was so stunned that I couldn't even hardly come up with anything besides, you know, what did you do with Natalee? And it's just—what he's saying is just simply untrue and I hope that all of your viewers see straight through this.
ABRAMS: How do you feel about the fact that he did the interview? I mean on the one hand, I've got to assume it's difficult for you to listen to. On the other hand, you know you filed this civil lawsuit and I'm sure your lawyers have told you that as a legal matter, having more statements out there is better.
TWITTY: Well, I think you're exactly right and one thing I'm really glad is that Joran is willing to travel to New York. He's shown us it's very convenient for him and he's willing to give interviews, so I don't see why now, since John Kelly has—you know we filed this civil lawsuit that he can come back and answer questions from him under oath, so I think it was a positive move on Joran's part as far as us proceeding forward in a civil suit.
ABRAMS: You know I was struck by some of the things that he said that you know even if he believed some of this stuff, for him to say it now was at the very least in bad taste. He said—talking about the first—when he first found out that Natalee had gone missing, the first thing that popped in my head was he said an expletive.
What if something happened to her? What if she went swimming? I was thinking after everything she told me that she probably might have gone back to her hotel, gone with someone else, hooked up with someone else and wanted to stay another day on the island.
TWITTY: You know, Dan, and if anyone believes that, then how can we go back and see that Joran had fabricated that story within several hours of the family arriving on the island, and you know, Joran didn't know Mickey John and Abraham Jones. He had to have help from adults, whether it was in the Police department, on the island of Aruba.
Somebody knew the history of those two suspects to implicate them. You know this didn't come from Joran van der Sloot and Deepak and Satish Kalpoe. I think of all the work and organization that went on behind this one lie is incredible.
ABRAMS: Joran was asked about the allegation in the lawsuit that he has used drugs to drug women, and assaulted other women in the past, or at the very least, mistreated them, and he said simply not true. He's never used any sort of date-rape drug; he's never had anyone who's complained about his behavior et cetera. How are you so certain that it has happened in the past?
TWITTY: There were two—I know of two young girls. One was 16 and one was 14 years of age, and it was difficult for these girls to do, but they did come forward. They had to hire an attorney. They gave statements to the Police. You know, these were real girls that were coming forward.
We don't know what happened or what transpired, why that never went any further than it did. We don't know if it had something to do with—I was told that Dennis Jacobs (ph) had strongly—had talked to the girls and was really putting the pressure on them to retract this, so you know, we just don't know how far that some individuals in that Police department were going to go to put a stop to those girls coming forward. But they were real girls and they had been assaulted by Joran under the influence of drugs.
ABRAMS: How hard was it for you to watch this interview?
TWITTY: Oh, I—you know, I saw it last night and I don't want to see it again, Dan. I don't want to watch it ever again.
ABRAMS: Because watching I assume even him speak about anything has got to be hard for you.
TWITTY: You know and I think it is and the most difficult part is that I see Joran is able to somewhat try to defend himself, although every time he does, he really just more lies evolve, but you know Natalee can't do this, Dan. She's unable to defend herself, just as she was that night that she was in the car with those three suspects. She's in the same position today.
ABRAMS: Yes and this is what Joran said about how he'd feel if Natalee turned up alive.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What would you say to Natalee if you were still able to speak to her?
VAN DER SLOOT: If I were to see her, if I—if she were to be found tomorrow, I think I'd hate her. I'd hate her...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Yes, that has to be hard to hear.
TWITTY: Yes. Well...
ABRAMS: Let me ask you this...
TWITTY: It's just one (INAUDIBLE).
ABRAMS: How certain are you that Joran van der Sloot was involved in Natalee's disappearance?
TWITTY: Involved in her disappearance? He is responsible. He and Deepak and Satish Kalpoe are solely responsible for the disappearance of Natalee.
ABRAMS: You are entirely convinced?
TWITTY: They are the suspects.
ABRAMS: You are entirely convinced?
TWITTY: They're the—yes. They are the suspects that took my daughter from that establishment that no one has seen since. And Joran has admitted to sexual assault that he committed against her. He has placed himself being the last one seen with her, so yes, they are solely responsible in the disappearance of Natalee.
ABRAMS: And he denies ever having sexually assaulted Natalee. In fact, as you know, he is basically saying, you know, I asked her if she wanted to have sex, she was fine with it, I didn't have a condom with me though in my wallet. I won't have sex with a girl without a condom. Again, you just don't believe it?
TWITTY: No, I don't and I believe the statements that he gave to the Police and I believe the statements from the witnesses that were there on the island the very first night that we met Joran when he was admitting the sexual assaults he committed against Natalee while she's coming in and out of consciousness, Dan. I believe those witnesses. They heard Joran say that and there are statements from Joran that he has given to the Police where he has admitted this.
ABRAMS: Would you have wanted to be there for the interview? And I don't mean to just be an observer. I mean to give him a piece of your mind?
TWITTY: You know, no, not at this point, Dan. Not at this point. What I would really like to do though is you know have some, you know, more interviews from Joran, you know place him under oath. Just really continue to try to get to the bottom of this.
ABRAMS: All right. Beth, this has again you know got to be another difficult day for you to have just seen this extended interview with the man who you're convinced is responsible for your daughter's disappearance, and I thank you for taking the time and as always, our thoughts are with you. Thanks a lot.
TWITTY: Thanks, Dan.

…

ABRAMS: Coming up, more of what Joran van der Sloot had to say.

(NEWS BREAK)

ABRAMS: We're back. He says he has nothing to do with her disappearance. He says she was the one coming on to him. He says she's the one who wanted to spend her last night in Aruba on the beach with him. We're talking about Joran van der Sloot.
Quote—“She said she didn't want to go back to her hotel and she wanted me to stay there with her because it was her last night and she didn't want to go back to Alabama. She was having too much fun in Aruba.”
Joran van der Sloot is talking. Natalee Holloway's family does not like what they're hearing, not surprisingly. We just heard from Beth Holloway-Twitty.
Joining me now MSNBC analyst, former Connecticut prosecutor Susan Filan, criminal defense attorney Michelle Suskauer and MSNBC analyst and former F.B.I. Investigator Clint van Zandt. All right, Clint, you've now heard the whole interview.
experienced F.B.I. criminal profiler CLINT VAN ZANDT, FORMER F.B.I. PROFILER: Sure.
ABRAMS: Joran van der Sloot for about an hour talking about all the details...
VAN ZANDT: Yes.
ABRAMS: ... of what happened, when it happened, how it happened.
You're the F.B.I. guy. What do you make of it?
VAN ZANDT: Well, you know, number one, your show has been following this from the beginning, and in day one, I didn't like the guy's interview, I didn't like what he had to say, I didn't believe him. The international Investigators that I know that are involved in it didn't believe him.
They felt he was a predator from day one, based upon their investigation, based upon their statements and information they had gathered. I've seen nothing to suggest anything other than that initial believed investigative characterization of this young man and those who are with him, Dan.
ABRAMS: Michelle?
MICHELLE SUSKAUER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: No, I don't think—
I'm not surprised by anything that he said because he went into self-preservation mode, but even if you believe half of what he said, it's not completely unbelievable. That he's saying is there is a girl who—and we talked about it yesterday—very little chaperoning, probably having fun, drunk, and coming on to a guy.
That's not very hard to believe. So you know, I don't think that
probably half of what he said is probably not unbelievable and so—I mean
· and I don't think he had anything to lose really by coming on and talking about that, because he's been made out to be a monster and he's been demonized. So...
ABRAMS: Here's...
SUSKAUER: ... I think he did OK.
ABRAMS: Here's Joran van der Sloot talking about one of Natalee's friends, telling her as they're leaving the bar to get out of the car that Joran van der Sloot was in with two of his friends.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER SLOOT: (INAUDIBLE) get out of the car now.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And how did you take that?
VAN DER SLOOT: Oh I took that—in fact we were standing still and Deepak told her if you want, go ahead and get out of the car and she was like no I want to stay with you guys.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: You know Susan, regardless of whether substantively what he says is consistent or makes sense, his demeanor seemed to be what you'd want it to be if you were his attorney, if you were going to make a statement.
SUSAN FILAN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: If you want him to be without affect, without emotion, to come off like a cold, lying monster, sure. He did great.
ABRAMS: How would you have said—I mean in terms of his demeanor—
I mean look, if he had started crying, everyone would have said oh crocodile tears. I mean am I right in saying no matter how he came across, assuming the same substance of what he said, you wouldn't have been happy with it?
FILAN: Not necessarily, Dan. I mean I can't tell you...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
FILAN: ... that I would have been happy with this guy period...
SUSKAUER: Oh come on.
FILAN: ... but look, the bottom line is and you said it yourself, Dan, perfectly. The devil is in the details and there are just too many things in his statement that don't ring true. For example, she picks him out. She initiates the contact with him.
She says do a Jello shot or a jelly shot off my stomach. She's lying on top of him when they're making out on the beach. He's the one that says he won't have intercourse with her.
SUSKAUER: Why is that unbelievable?
FILAN: He leaves his shoes behind.
(CROSSTALK)
FILAN: How do you leave your shoes behind? Shoes are something that are expensive...
(CROSSTALK)
FILAN: ... you're not going to easily just leave your shoes behind.
It's baloney and it stinks.
ABRAMS: Here's—Joran says here's why—Joran says he lied. I lied because yes, I was scared. I had a girlfriend at the time. I didn't want my dad to think bad of me. I didn't want my friends to think bad of me. Go ahead, Clint. You wanted to jump in?
VAN ZANDT: Yes, Dan. He—you know how could he have done this? He could have done it. He could have sat there and said you know, I'm very sorry. I don't know what happened to her, but I'm sorry. I can fully understand her parents being upset. I was the last one with him.
I obviously lied because I was afraid. I made some major, major mistakes. I'm sorry for the parents. I'm sorry for their loss and right now I want them to understand, please know I had nothing to do with the loss of your daughter. That's what I would have liked to have seen him say, Dan, not victimizing her further which is what he did.
SUSKAUER: I don't think the prosecutor and the former F.B.I. agent are going to be happy with anything or anyway that this guy...
VAN ZANDT: I just told you what I would be happy with.
(CROSSTALK)
VAN ZANDT: I just told you what I would have liked for him to say.
SUSKAUER: Oh come on...
VAN ZANDT: How is that wrong? I said, had he come off, had he been somewhat contrite, had he said I'm sorry this happened. I don't know what happened.
(CROSSTALK)
VAN ZANDT: I understand the mother being upset, then yes, I would have said, you know, I still don't believe you, but at least you're...
SUSKAUER: OK, this is a guy...
VAN ZANDT: ... coming off like a human being...
(CROSSTALK)
VAN ZANDT: ... not like a roboton (ph).
SUSKAUER: OK, but this is—first of all, we don't know what his personality is like. He was also locked up for something that he believes that he didn't do...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: All right, he says he didn't do...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: OK. Go ahead, Michelle. Yes.
SUSKAUER: OK. I'm just saying he's 18 years old. OK, so obviously he hasn't been—I mean this is his personality. Obviously it's not the greatest personality in the world, but...
ABRAMS: Michelle, let me ask you...
SUSKAUER: ... it's the way that he came off.
ABRAMS: Put your defense attorney hat on, keep it on. You're representing Joran. In retrospect, are you sorry he did this interview?
SUSKAUER: Yes.
ABRAMS: You are.
SUSKAUER: I am.
ABRAMS: Why?
SUSKAUER: Well, because he's still under investigation. He's now served with a civil suit, which by the way, I'd love to talk about the fact that how coincidental this is that he's doing this interview, he's being served on the plane and suddenly a book is coming out like a month or two later. Kind of strange. But yes, I mean...
ABRAMS: What book?
SUSKAUER: He doesn't come across as this lovable guy. You have to know about that, and so no...
ABRAMS: Well...
SUSKAUER: ... but he did it so it's out there.
ABRAMS: I guess you're talking about Dave Holloway's book.
VAN ZANDT: Yes.
SUSKAUER: Yes.
ABRAMS: Let me—here's what Joran says about his mistake. I think what I did wrong is leaving her there at the beach. I should have brought her back to her hotel or I should have made sure I left her with someone, one of her friends, but I just should have gotten her back to where she should have been. Susan?
FILAN: Absolutely. To say that she is the one that wanted to be left alone in the middle of the night in a compromised state after having been drinking, on a beach is absolutely absurd and absolutely preposterous and for him to have imperiled her safety and left her alone on the beach like that is absolutely wrong, which is why I think it is a big fat lie.
And Michelle, to say that I wouldn't be happy with anything he said.
That's just patently false, but where is the protestation of innocence? Where is the indignation? Where is the outrage? You as a defense attorney have surely come across people who are innocent and falsely accused and you can hear the passion.
You can feel the vim and the vigor in their speech, the tears in their eyes. It's the worst thing that's ever happened to them and the more they talk, the less they're believed. It's almost like they're in a hamster wily (ph). They've got sticky glue on them and they can't get out from under it. This kid is just too cold.
(CROSSTALK)
FILAN: He does not add up.
SUSKAUER: Susan, you really can't generalize and say that everybody is going to react in a situation the exact same way. He's just—he obviously does not express himself well, and just because that's just the way he is doesn't mean that patently he's guilty...
FILAN: That tells me you haven't had too many innocent...
SUSKAUER: ... because he's not crying on television.
FILAN: ... clients that you've had to defend.
ABRAMS: All right.
SUSKAUER: I'm sorry. I couldn't hear that.
ABRAMS: I wanted to play this piece of sound again where he says again and again I didn't do it. I didn't do it. Anyway...
VAN ZANDT: Yes.
ABRAMS: ... because he was asked. You know Chris Cuomo did a good job with this interview and asked him the questions and Joran...
VAN ZANDT: Yes.
ABRAMS: ... said again and again he didn't do it. All right. Susan Filan, Michelle Suskauer, and Clint van Zandt, thanks a lot. Appreciate it.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-24 CNNHN reported:

(QUOTE)

NANCY GRACE, HOST: What a week in America`s courtrooms. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GRACE: Chief suspect, Aruban judge`s son, Joran van der Sloot speaks out telling yet
another version of the night the 18-year-old Alabama beauty vanished off the island of
Aruba.

JORAN VAN DER SLOOT , LAST SEEN WITH NATALEE HOLLOWAY: If I could have
the moment back, I would have made sure she got back to her hotel safely, but I can`t
change that now.

BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, MOTHER OF NATALEE HOLLOWAY: You know, why
would Joran have fabricated stories so early when we appeared on the island?

(END VIDEOTAPE SEGMENT OF HOLLOWAY-RELATED)

(END QUOTE)



2-25-06

On 2-25 DAVE HOLLOWAY stated to FOX News that one of the many statements that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT made in the 2-23 ABC interview that jumped out at DAVE was Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT claims when he left NATALEE alone on the “Marriott Hotel”/fishermen's huts beach on 5-30 Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT claims he forgot and left his expensive tennis shoes behind on the beach. “You just don’t leave your shoes on the beach all of a sudden unless you are in a panic or something is terribly wrong.” DAVE HOLLOWAY stated another thing that struck him about the ABC interview is that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT continually degrades NATALEE and everyone around her. DAVE HOLLOWAY stated "the fact he has changed his story about he walked home, now Satish took him home and I think he is going to try bring the fact the that Deepak may have been on his computer but Deepak returned back to the beach, and I think that what you are going to see as time goes on he is going to lay all the blame on Deepak.”

On 2-25 BETH HOLLOWAY-TWITTY stated to FOX News “I think that, now, everyone has been able to witness and experience since day one what has been coming from Joran van der Sloot. It is just incredible the litany lies that he continually gives and you know it just seems as if eventually that he will be trapped in one of them.” BETH also denied that neither her nor her family was related to ADOLPH HITLER, in any way.

On 2-25 Riehl wrote, “From the picture at right taken from the casino video we see Natalee did have a cell phone. It's been reported that a call from Natalee's cell phone may have come in to the cell phone of William Morris, a friend. I do wonder if he had called her earlier in the night, perhaps being concerned for her as she had left with the three boys.”

On 2-25 the “New York Daily News" reported:

(QUOTE)

Natalee film has mystery of its own

Who is Larry Garrison?

To hear him tell it, he's the guy who owns the Natalee Holloway story.

He co-authored a forthcoming book with the missing girl's father, David Holloway, and he's developing a feature film and wants to cast "Veronica Mars" star Michael Muhney as Dutch teen Joran van der Sloot, the prime suspect in the May 2005 disappearance.
Garrison told me yesterday that he's a trusted adviser of not only the Holloways but also the van der Sloot's, even though the Holloways are suing Joran van der Sloot. And, Garrison claimed it was he who chose ABC News "Primetime" correspondent Chris Cuomo over CBS News' "48 Hours" for Joran's exclusive interview last night.

Yesterday, Garrison repeatedly denied that he was paid by ABC News. "I received absolutely no payment from ABC or anyone else," he assured me. "I went with a better organization and they're having sour grapes over that," Garrison said, blaming my questions on folks at CBS. "There are good people and bad people, and ABC are the good people. Somebody is trying to sabotage your column and it's sad."

But I hear that Joran van der Sloot refuses to deal with Garrison, picked ABC on his own, and suspects Garrison of tipping off the Holloways to his arrival at JFK last week - which resulted in celebrity P.I. Bo Dietl serving van der Sloot with the lawsuit.

Garrison - who calls himself a journalist, actor, producer, motivational speaker and White House media consultant - rejects the allegations.

But, contrary to his firm denials, I hear ABC News is paying him $12,000 for his research help, including F.B.I. reports and other hard-to-get documents. Why the lie? "I don't usually disclose my finances," he explained, "but I do not work for nothing."

(END QUOTE)



2-26-06

On 2-26 JEROME KATZ, attorney for the HOLLOWAY’s working with JOHN Q. KELLY, stated to FOX News “we were receiving chatter for a number of days before we filed this lawsuit and the information we were getting was becoming increasingly clear that they (the Murder Suspects VAN DER SLOOT’s) would be coming over her for the interview, and the information we were getting considerable information not just in the public domain but information that isn’t yet in the public domain that we’ve been able to obtain that gives us more than a good faith basis to justify this lawsuit. We have a high degree of confidence in the quality of this litigation.” KATZ stated he has seen the ABC interview and by his count Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT has now told, at least, 4 different versions of what happened the night of May 29th and the morning of May 30th. KATZ stated Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT ’s “versions are, obviously, strikingly different from one another, and they are strikingly different from the versions that are being given now by Deepak and his brother Satish Kalpoe who were in the car with Joran that night with Natalee” and “their versions keep changing.” KATZ stated that his firm does not sign its name to a complaint like this unless they feel they do have a good faith basis and we have conducted an investigation and we feel very confident to those allegations. KATZ said that when this case moves forward that there are facts not only in the public domain, but facts “that we’ve gathered that let us conduct some discovery and we think that between the facts that are in public domain and the facts that we have, and the facts that we are going to get at discovery, and with a little bit of logic and common sense, we will, over time, dismantle the story that is being told by Joran van der Sloot.”

On 2-26 PAT BROWN, a criminal profiler, stated to FOX News that Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT keeps changing that story and “he keeps putting his foot in his mouth,” and he is “very arrogant” and “his parents are very arrogant as well that they think he can pull the wool over everybody’s eyes and he should know when to stop and some defense lawyer should tell him shut up because you are just making things worse for himself , but I’m glad he is.” Prime Murder Suspect JORAN VAN DER SLOOT seems to be very narcissist talking about himself all the time and blaming everybody else, saying that if he saw Natalee and she were to walk in alive today he said he’d hate her, saying bad things about Beth Holloway, and in general, he’s acting like he is the victim. “This is what people with psychopathic behaviors do--they blame everybody else--It’s their fault and it’s never mine. And he is trying to present himself that he is a wonderful young man and, yet, at the same time he can’t seem to understand that his is presenting himself in worse light--absolutely the worse light--and no one is going to like him any better for it and, so, he is just making matters worse for himself.”


2-27-06

On 2-27 DAVE HOLLOWAY stated to FOX News

(QUOTE)

MACCALLUM: You know, I know that you sat probably, I guess, in your living room at home, and you watched this interview. What went through your body and your mind as you listened to him recount what happened that evening in his own words?
HOLLOWAY: Well, I was just watching to see if he was telling any truthful matter. I mean, he's giving Pinocchio a good run for his money right now. You know, he gave the Police not one, but two lies, and they fell for both of them. And then over the course of about three months, he continued to lie, one after the other. And in fact, he had three different stories on how he got home that night.
MACCALLUM: When you listen to some of the details, you know, some pretty graphic details about what was going on in that bar — he claims he was doing jelly shots, which I guess you sort of drink off somebody's stomach as they lay on the bar, all sorts of things about your daughter and what was going on there. What I'm curious about is did any of those connect with what her friends told you, who were also there in the bar with her that night?
HOLLOWAY: I think they, all the kids were there for, of course, their high school graduation, and they were all having a good time. And you know, I understand that some of that is true.
MACCALLUM: But the thing that strikes me is no matter how crazy, you know, high school kids can get, if somebody murdered someone else, that's really the bottom line, and nobody asks for that to happen to them, no matter how, you know, it seems like, in many cases, he keeps pointing out that she was the aggressor. That she wanted to dance with him. That she wanted to go out with him. How does all that settle with you, when you look at the fact that she's been missing for so long, Dave?
HOLLOWAY: Well, if you look at everything he said, it's always he's the victim, rather than, you know, Natalee. And it just goes on and on and on that he tries to minimize, you know, the victim and make himself look as if he's the victim.
MACCALLUM: One thing that jumped out at me, he said that as they were pulling away in the car, that there was a boy who was looking out for Natalee, and that he shouted out to her, Natalee, get out of the car now. Do you know who that boy is, and do you know that happened?
HOLLOWAY: You know, I don't know who the boy is, and I don't know that did happen, to tell you the truth about it, Martha. I heard that Joran did state that, and along with Deepak and Satish.
MACCALLUM: Another striking thing is that he says that while he was talking to Natalee in the back seat of the car, she referred to her mother as "Hitler's sister." And he says, Oh, you know, I thought she was joking, but she said she was serious. And he also said that another friend of hers corroborated that. What do you think about that?
HOLLOWAY: Well, you know, they all got their story together in the first nine days. Beth was there within one day of Natalee becoming missing and she got on to them pretty hefty. And I don't know whether that's something that they're attacking Beth with now or what. So I couldn't answer that question.
MACCALLUM: All right, Dave, stand by, if you would. We're going to have more of this with you in a minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MACCALLUM: Natalee Holloway's parents are suing Joran van der Sloot for sexually assaulting their daughter. But what is next if the civil suit fails? We're back with Natalee Holloway's father, Dave. And Dave, I want to get back to some of what Joran had to say before we get to the questions about the civil suit. He seems to want to make the strong point that he felt that Natalee was OK, that she was walking, that she was talking to him. When asked if she seemed drunk, he said, No, not really. You know, she seemed like she was OK. Given that he told the story originally that she was so drunk that she needed to be helped into the hotel, which story do you think is more truthful, knowing your daughter?
HOLLOWAY: Well, I read his deposition on one of the first statements and he indicated that she was falling asleep, waking back up, you know, right after she left the nightclub at Carlos and Charlie's. Then when they traveled about four or five miles to the beach, all of a sudden, she was, you know, walking and coherent and all this kind of stuff. So common sense will tell you that if you're falling asleep and waking back up, you're not in a condition to walk along the beach.
MACCALLUM: The other point I just wanted to sort of bring into that is that several times, he stresses that he thinks that Natalee didn't want to go home, that she didn't want to go back to Alabama, that she said she wanted to stay in Aruba. And he seems to be trying to make the point that maybe she left on her own accord. What do you think about that?
HOLLOWAY: Well, it would be hard to swim 2,000 miles back to Alabama or even get off the island, so I don't buy that one bit. Natalee's not that type of person. All she wanted to do is go visit the island for four or five days, come back. She already had her plans set. Natalee was on time, had her future planned. And that was not one of the options.
MACCALLUM: What do you make, in your own mind, of why Joran is talking now?
HOLLOWAY: You know, he's talked to the Police three months and, you know, the Police officer and a spokesperson for Aruba has gone through the investigative material, and they've essentially said that he is guilty, but they've just got to prove it. And they can't prove it. So now he's trying to put that same scam or sham or whatever on the American people.
MACCALLUM: But Dave, you know, he's out of the country. He's in college. He's sort of getting on with his life. So what would be his motivation to come back to New York, and then he's, you know, served with this subpoena for this civil suit, and to sit down and talk about it, when it looks like, if he didn't, he could just sort of move on?
HOLLOWAY: Well, that's a very good question. I haven't quite understood that myself, either. So I don't know. That's something someone will have to ask him.
MACCALLUM: When you watched him talking, was there ever a moment that it crossed your mind that maybe he didn't do it?
HOLLOWAY: Well, I don't know. I know all three of them are involved in some way or the other. And you know, they're just keeping their mouth shut. They've just told too many lies and the lies continue on into the next day, as well. So you know, something's there. They know something. And it's just a matter of, you know, finding out what happened. I think now, he's trying to point the attention to Deepak.
MACCALLUM: I want to get back to that in a second, but I do want to ask you one quick question about the civil suit. How is that going? What satisfaction are you looking for in the civil suit, at this point?
HOLLOWAY: Well, we have a couple of issues, obviously, the jurisdiction and the forum issues. I'm not going to get my h/pes up high until that's officially concluded. They've got probably 20 to 30 days on which they were served in which to answer the lawsuit. So you know, that's something that probably John Kelly, the attorney, could answer a lot better than I could.
MACCALLUM: Just very quickly, about 10 seconds, Dave, why do you think he's pointing the finger at Deepak again?
HOLLOWAY: Well, you know, he had these three stories where he walked home and then Deepak picked him up, and now he's saying Satish picked him up, so that blows the alibi for Deepak. Deepak said he was home on the computer, but I think Joran's now trying to say that maybe Deepak got off the computer while Satish was taking him home, and Deepak came to the beach and took over.
MACCALLUM: A lot of stories about that night, still trying to figure out exactly what happened, Dave, and I know you are. Thank you very much. Good to talk to you.
HOLLOWAY: Thank you.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-27 “Find Law Legal News and Commentary” reported:

(QUOTE)

The Case of Missing Alabama Teen Natalee Holloway:
Why, Despite the Civil Suit Against Joran van der Sloot, It Will Likely Remain Unsolved

By JONNA SPILBOR

I have a hunch Natalee Holloway is dead.

Why? Simply because it is my personal belief that girls with pompoms and college scholarships don't just disappear into thin air.

The world knows Natalee Holloway as the pretty Alabama teen who took a class trip to the island of Aruba from which she never returned. Natalee went missing on May 30th 2005 -- ironically, the very day the class was scheduled to return to the States.

To date, a massive, months-long search involving authorities from three countries (ours, theirs and the Netherlands), as well as a host of privately-run investigative agencies, has uncovered no trace of the girl.

Poof.

And while the case strangely lacks any evidence of, well, anything - no body, no eyewitnesses to foul play, no incriminating DNA - it is not without its suspects. Three men are believed to have been the last to see Natalee alive -- brothers Deepak and Satish Kalpoe, and their buddy Joran van der Sloot - and all three admitted lying to authorities during the early stages of the investigation. Yet, all three still maintain their innocence.

I guess you could say the Aruban authorities, together with Natalee's loved ones, too, have a hunch.

They may not know how, why or what happened to Natalee Holloway, but to them, one thing is certain: Joran van der Sloot does know.

But van der Sloot's position can be summed in two words. Prove it.

Problem is, they can't. Not now, and maybe, not ever.

Understandably frustrated, the Holloway family recently filed a civil suit against Joran and his father, Paulus van der Sloot here in New York. In this column, I will discuss the merits of the suit, and also discuss the effect the suit - as well as Joran's own televised words - will likely have on the criminal investigation.

The Televised Interview, and the Service of the Complaint

In recent weeks, with no suspects in custody, no charges filed, and no new leads, it would appear to most that the investigation into the disappearance of Natalee Holloway had all but iced over.

But on February 16th, that seemed to change.

In a rather brazen and certainly unexpected move, Joran and his father traveled separately and quietly to the United States so that Joran could give a televised interview to the ABC News show "Primetime."

Little did they know that attorneys for the Holloway family were coordinating a rather unusual welcome.

Upon reaching America, Joran and his father were served with a civil summons and complaint. In the complaint, the Holloway family alleges that, while Natalee was visiting Aruba, Joran van der Sloot sexually assaulted her, falsely imprisoned her, and maliciously interfered with Natalee's custodial relations with her parents.

They also allege that Paulus caused "injury to a minor child" by allowing his 17-year-old son Joran to harm Natalee. (They claim that under Alabama law - the law they say applies - that Natalee, though 18, was still a minor at the relevant time.)

The lawsuit requests, among other sums, punitive damages.

But in reality, the Holloways probably will never get a dime.

The Problem with the Suit: No Apparent Basis for Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Anybody who follows high-profile criminal trials knows it's not unusual to see civil suits become the companions to criminal cases - whether the defendant is first found guilty in a criminal court of law, or not.

Indeed, O.J. Simpson and Robert Blake lost wrongful death lawsuits that had been brought against them following their criminal acquittals. Kobe Bryant reportedly settled a civil suit by his accuser, even after charges that he raped a Colorado hotel worker were dropped.

So, what makes the lawsuit against Joran and Paulus van der Sloot so unusual? It appears that the court in which it was filed, New York State court, lacks subject matter jurisdiction -- the authority to decide cases of this type.

Neither Natalee nor her parents, nor the van der Sloot's, reside in New York. And none of the conduct alleged occurred in New York. Finally, according to the plaintiffs themselves, the law of Alabama - where the Holloways reside - is applicable.

In sum, there seems to be no answer to why a New York court should, or could, hear this suit. Moreover, even if the Holloways were to file a suit in a court that did have jurisdiction, they are very unlikely to get an answer to what happened to their daughter. Neither defendant could be compelled to testify in this civil suit, for that would likely violate their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

What Is the Best Strategy for the Defendants in the Civil Suit?

Even though the New York court could dismiss the case on its own for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, it might not do so - simply because the issue hasn't been brought to its attention, and courts' dockets are full. If it doesn't, what are defendants' options?
They could move to dismiss the case. But it might be better for them simply to do nothing.

That way, the New York State court would likely grant plaintiffs a judgment by default. (A default judgment occurs when the defendant fails even to enter an appearance in the suit by filing a pleading to that effect, and thus loses his right to defend.)

If a default judgment were, indeed, entered, then the van der Sloot's would, in theory. be legally obligated to pay plaintiffs whatever amount of damages the court (if it continued to overlook the jurisdictional defect) might award.

But only in theory: as with many civil judgments, the legal obligation to pay may not be worth the paper it's printed on.

In this case, it may be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to collect a judgment against a foreign national. Indeed, judgments taken by default in the state of New York are nearly impossible to collect, even against other New York residents. The Holloways could hire an Aruban attorney to try to collect, but it might still be very difficult.

And a default judgment has advantages: It could bar the Holloways from suing the van der Sloot's in the future - even if one day evidence linking Joran to the disappearance of Natalee Holloway is discovered.

Double jeopardy works in the criminal arena by barring a person from being tried for the same crime twice, and civil law has a similar provision: The doctrine of "res judicata" - which literally translated means "the thing has been decided" - prevents a plaintiff from re-suing a defendant for the same wrongs once a decision in a civil matter has been rendered. Here, a new wrong will exist only if Natalee were to be proven to be dead: In that event, a wrongful death claim could be brought in a separate, future suit.

Joran van der Sloot's Television Interview: A Serious Mistake

In my line of work as a defense lawyer, the only thing more comforting than listening to a client professing his "innocence" in front of a camera, tape recorder, or bullhorn, is the prospect of his plunging a hot poker into my eye.

Even a truly innocent client can make statements that make him seem guilty. And a client who probably is guilty, on the existing evidence, can unwittingly, in his interview, offer the prosecution proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

So it was foolish for Joran van der Sloot simply to talk to reporter Chris Cuomo. And the details of what he said got him in even deeper trouble: For instance, he claimed Natalee was willing to have sex with him, but he was the one who said no -- because he "didn't have a condom in his wallet." Few seventeen-year-old boys would skip a trip to the convenience store in such a situation.

Why did Joran talk - when it was so risky to do so? I think there are two possibilities.
One is that he's guilty, but confident that Natalee's body will never be found - because he hid it well, and because despite many searches, it hasn't been found so far.
The other is that Joran is just as innocent as he professes - and that he did indeed leave Natalee alone on the beach where she, perhaps, fell prey to a stranger's opportunistic rape, a crime that ended in murder. Perhaps the real culprit was someone with a boat; perhaps Natalee's body was cast into the sea, much too far out to wash up on the shore.

Nine months, one civil suit and a TV tell-all later, and the only thing certain about the true fate of Natalee Holloway, is that it remains very much a mystery. For the sake of her parents, one hopes this crime will be solved - but realistically, they cannot expect their civil suit to do anything to expedite matters.

What Do You Think? Message Boards

Jonna M. Spilbor is an attorney and legal analyst on "Kendall's Court," airing Sundays on Fox News Channel's Weekend Live with Brian Wilson. She is also a frequent guest commentator on Court TV and other television news networks, where she has covered many of the nation's high-profile criminal trials. In the courtroom, she has handled hundreds of cases as a criminal defense attorney, and also served in the San Diego City Attorney's Office, Criminal Division, and the Office of the United States Attorney in the Drug Task Force and Appellate units. In 1998, she earned certification as a Court Appointed Special Advocate with the San Diego Juvenile Court. She is a graduate of Thomas Jefferson School of Law, where she was a member of the Law Review.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-27 MSNBC reported:

(QUOTE)

RITA COSBY, HOST: And incredible underwater port protection. Did you know that the
same technology in that search for Natalee Holloway is now keeping our ports safe?
We‘re going to take you below the surface.

…

And late-breaking developments in the fight over controlling American ports. Why is the
Coast Guard worried about security? And how is the same technology used in the search
for Natalee Holloway now being used to protect American ports? That‘s coming up, and
that‘s not all. Take a look.

…

We‘re joined now by Chris Gibson and his videoray robot, which is used to patrol our
ports.
You know, this robot, I‘m surprised, Chris. I look at it. It‘s pretty small. How does it work?
CHRIS GIBSON, VIDEORAY ROBOT OPERATOR: Actually, it‘s eight pounds, Rita. It‘s
very easy to maneuver and very easy to deploy. It‘s called a remotely operated robot or
vehicle, as it‘s called in our industry, and it‘s used to protect our ports and underwater
waterways.
COSBY: You know, we‘re looking at some pictures of it underwater in action. How long
does it take to sort of survey—what is it, boats, is it ports, is it a combination of things?
GIBSON: Well, it‘s actually a combination of things. Usually, in a port environment, the
water is very contaminated and the operators are going to use it to sweep a pier to make
sure that there‘s no foreign objects, make sure that there‘s nothing that‘s not supposed to
be there. And it‘s going to be used to inspect the bottom of ship holes, not only the
bottom of the ship hole, but also, you know, bow thrusters. We‘ll actually go into the
bowel thrusters and check the running gear, as well.
COSBY: And what is it looking for? Is it looking for, you know, chemicals? Is it looking for
an explosive device? What type of things can it detect?
GIBSON: Well, it can detect almost anything. Now, depending on the water clarity—the
unit that I have here actually has a sonar on it. And because of the water clarity in the
ports, and usually because of contaminated water, you can‘t see very far. You can barely
see your hand in front of your face.
So you use the sonar to acoustically give us a graphical representation of the water that‘s
around us, and can detects mines on the ship hole, and it can detect contraband on the
bottom of the ships, as well as inside the ballast tanks inside ships.
COSBY: And what kind of track record—what has it discovered? Has it found anything in
all of its searches that it‘s been used for?
GIBSON: It‘s found quite a bit of stuff. Most of the stuff I‘m not privy to talk about because
it‘s been classified by the people that use the videoray.
COSBY: You know, and there was a classified Navy exercise, which you can sort of talk in
broad terms. It kept, what, SEALs from infiltrating a target, right? Explain sort of how it has
been able to be very helpful.
GIBSON: Well, basically, our military does exercises all the time. One of the exercises that
it performed—while I can‘t go into details about it, like you said, because it‘s classified—Navy
SEALs were given an objective to infiltrate a port. And videoray, as well as other underwater
technologies, were used to thwart that exercise. And the SEALs were not able to accomplish
their objective because of the videoray and other underwater technology.
COSBY: You know, and this device, I understand, has also been used in the search for
Natalee Holloway. Explain that, which is pretty incredible, for secures ports to Natalee
Holloway.
GIBSON: It‘s actually used for quite a bit of things. It was used in Aruba. We were asked
to come down by Texas EquuSearch to investigate some underwater targets that they
had identified as possible places that they wanted to clear. And videoray was actually
able to go in and perform sweeps—it actually performed a sweep along in a cave area,
as well as a bridge area.
COSBY: Incredible stuff, Chris. Thank you very much for bringing this to us. And
amazing to see this technology in action there. We appreciate you bringing videoray with
you for tonight. Thank you very much.
GIBSON: Thank you.

(END QUOTE)



2-28-06

On 2-28 the “International Safe Travels Foundation” # HYPERLINK "http://www.internationalsafetravelsfoundation.org/MS/MS10/vB_PAGE/20060518135823/student_program_press_release.doc"reported:

(QUOTE)

SAFE TRAVELS STUDENT CAMPAIGN KICKS OFF FROM MOUNTAIN BROOK HIGH SCHOOL

BIRMINGHAM, Al. – February 28, 2006 – The nationwide student safety awareness campaign created by Beth Holloway Twitty known as SAFE TRAVELS was launched today from the high school of missing Mountain Brook teen Natalee Holloway.

Twitty presented her SAFE TRAVELS safety awareness message to a packed auditorium of about 650 students and parents. The SAFE TRAVELS message focuses on encouraging high school and college students to take measures to ensure that they leave and return home safely when taking trips.

“Young adults just need to prepare by looking into their destination and gathering important information before they leave home,” Twitty said. “They need to activate the international calling plan on their cell phones. They need to create a full circle safety plan and spend as much time planning how they will end their evenings as they do figuring out what to wear and who they’re going with.”

Twitty has established a nonprofit foundation called the International SAFE TRAVELS Foundation to educate and inform the public about planning and traveling more safely when they travel internationally. “Anyone who is planning a trip should go to http://www.safetravelsfoundation.org for unique and specific destination information as well as for valuable safety suggestions,” Twitty said. “The website is under construction, but soon the incredible mapping technology we’re working on will allow website visitors to gather essential trip-planning information.”

Twitty has already scheduled SAFE TRAVELS presentations in other states including Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Arkansas, Colorado and Georgia. She plans to visit students in all fifty states to deliver her SAFE TRAVELS message.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-28 FOX News GRETA VAN SUSTEREN reported in her "Gretawire" blog:

(QUOTE)

Joran Goes 'On the Record'

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

By Greta van Susteren

We just got back from a very quick trip to Aruba. We got word late last week (Friday?) that Joran van der Sloot would sit down for an interview with us in Aruba. The one agreement: that we wouldn't edit it. That seemed fair to me. Frankly, I hate to have controversial interviews edited, since despite our best efforts, everyone — viewers and guests — yell "foul." An unedited interview allows me to simply say, "Here it is. You be the judge." Joran also did not want to do the interview in the United States, so we agreed on Aruba.

I am not sure when the interview will air. I suspect either beginning tonight or tomorrow. I say "beginning" because it is quite long — more than one hour, maybe as long as two — and thus we can't do it in one night and we can't edit it. If I were to describe the interview, I would say it is like a deposition — although it was not intended to be any particular style. The only difference is that neither of us had notes, I simply asked questions and he answered. Naturally I formed an opinion (I am human, not a machine), but will hold it pending your viewing of the interview. I don't want you to be influenced by my view. I want you to form your own opinion after you see the interview.

Needless to say, our presence in Aruba was no secret. We spend so much time there that we are recognized (and of course our equipment is also a big hint.) Prior to the interview, people came up to me in the hotel to tip me off that they had seen Joran in the hotel and that I should try and get an interview with him. I merely said, "Great idea!"

The interview got off to a slow start. Joran agreed to do it at 10 a.m., but his parents showed up with one of his former teachers and they were much opposed to it. They spent more than an hour meeting with him privately to convince him not to do it. I was not completely worried that the interview would be aborted, since Joran was extremely determined to do it. We let them talk of course and then, after a long talk, Joran said he was ready. I did speak to his parents and assured them that I had no tricks. I was just going to ask questions — what happened? And what happened next? And then? And next? — and let Joran talk. I told them that my questions were straightforward and that if he got "hurt" in the interview, it would be his doing and not mine since I had not tricks up my sleeve. I just wanted to ask him questions about that night and other related issues.

As the interview was to begin, Joran said he did not want his parents in the room. He did want his teacher. I said fine. I just wanted to ask questions and did not care who was or was not in the room. The teacher said just as we entered the room for the interview and before we started that there would be no "re-enactment" questions. I thought he meant that we would not go out on the Marriott Beach and walk through the night and where Joran was. I had not intended to do that. I just wanted to ask questions and was curious as to the answers.

As we sat down seconds later, I re-thought more about what he said and realized that he meant I could not ask about the night Natalee vanished. That was odd and of course something I could not agree to, as my purpose of doing the interview was to ask about that night. We had not traveled to Aruba to discuss anything but that night. I turned to the teacher from my chair and told him I had to ask Joran about that night, that was why I was there and Joran agreed to that. I don't know if I got a response, but the interview began and Joran answered questions about that night. Joran was at all times willing to answer the questions. I am anxious to hear your reaction to the interview.

After the interview we began our race to the airport. As usual, we had little time to get there and had to go through customs, etc. We decided to detour, risk missing our flights (we did) and see if the Kalpoe brothers would talk to us. Since Joran was so willing to talk, we figured that maybe the Kalpoe brothers would. We were not sure if we could remember how to find their home, but we got lucky and found it. We drove up and saw two cars — including Deepak's which has now been returned by the Police to him. We knocked. There was no answer, so we took some pictures of the car and left.

As we drove off, we spotted the front door opening. I jumped out of the car, went to the door and got it slammed in my face. Then more than one person started screaming at me through the glass pane next to the door. I am not stupid. I got the message that I was not welcome and backed off. I am not sure who was screaming at me, but I think it was the Kalpoe brothers' mother and stepfather... and maybe the grandmother. I have met them before, but it was dark inside their house and they were so mad that I did not linger.

We went to the airport, booked another flight and got back to D.C. after 11 p.m. I missed Monday's show, but we had planned on a guest host before I left and I had not planned on hosting. As an aside, John Walsh and Congressman Burton were on my connecting flight out of North Carolina. When you fly into D.C., it is routine to run into people who you recognize.

Tomorrow: your e-mails and pictures from Aruba. I don't have time to post today — I am behind schedule, having been on the road in New Orleans and then Aruba. And, on Wednesday I am due in New York City!




On 2-28 TV ratings wrote “ABC News’ “Primetime,” featuring an exclusive interview with Joran van der Sloot – the prime suspect in the Natalee Holloway disappearance in Aruba -- qualified as the No. 1 newsmagazine of the week in Total Viewers, Adults 25-54 and Adults 18-49. In key adult demos (AD25-54/AD18-49), it was the top-rated newsmagazine on any network in 6 weeks – since 1/8/06” and “Capitalizing on its strong lead-in, ABC News’ “Primetime” took second place during the 10 o’clock hour, drawing an average audience of 12.5 million viewers and a 4.4/11 in Adults 18-49. The ABC newsmagazine featured Chris Cuomo’s exclusive interview with Joran van der Sloot – the prime suspect in the Natalee Holloway disappearance – as he offered his side of what happened the night she went missing. “Primetime” drew its largest audience since April 2003 and garnered its top ratings across the adult demographics (AD18-34 – 3.7/10, AD18-49 – 4.4/11 & AD25-54 – 5.2/12) since November 2003 – since 4/24/03 & 11/13/03. In Adults 18-49 and Adults 25-54, “Primetime” delivered the highest-rated newsmagazine telecast on any network since January 8, 2006.”

On 2-28 the “Joran van der Sloot Blog” reported:

(QUOTE)

Hitting the airwaves once again, Joran van der Sloot appeared on an Aruban talk show this morning taking calls and answering burning questions from the people of Aruba. In the interview, Joran denied having a poolside summit with his father to concoct a story and said the infamous quote "No Body, No Case" was never uttered. Joran says he is no longer friends with the Kalpoe brothers. He stands by his claim that Satish picked him up from the beach and said he did not take part in the orchestration that led two minority security guards to be falsely imprisoned.

Joran argued that he himself is a victim in this case and admitted the interrogation tactics were brutal but did not succumb to the pressure. When asked about Natalee's fate, Joran said he believes she is not alive. Joran lashed out at what he thought were biased reporters - Nancy Grace and Greta van Sustren. He talked about his interview with Greta and said he felt pressured by her to point the finger at the Kalpoe brothers. He also asked her not to edit the interview because he was unhappy with what ABC chose to air. Confirming what The Joran van der Sloot Blog had posted earlier, Joran said Larry King has asked him to appear on his show this week. Joran apologized to the people of Aruba for the pain he caused and said he leaves for Netherlands on Friday heading back to School. When asked about the lost shoes? He said whoever finds his Size 14 K-Swiss shoes to contact ALE. (MF)

Update: Following the advice of his legal counsel, Joran van der Sloot will not be doing Larry King Live or any other interviews at this time.

(END QUOTE)



On 2-28 the “Scared Monkeys blog" reported:

(QUOTE)

Dompig Says No To Texas EquuSearch’s Plan to Search Dunes

Accordin' to sources Texas EquuSearch has been trying to get permission to search
the area of the sand dunes prior to any costly deep water search. Tim Miller and Texas EquuSearch a long with Tim Whittaker have already been given Aruba’s blessing to conduct a search of the water. However, one would assume that searches would be done of the sand dunes first where there was supposed information from a credible witness.

A search of the water is much more costly and common sense would say that since there was a lead to search the dunes, they should be done first. Originally the F.B.I. was going to help search them with radar equipment and cadaver dogs. However, that ended when Aruba would not divulged where the tip came from.

According to sources, Tim Miller has offered to search the dunes bringing in their own highly sophisticated ground penetration units at no cost to the Aruban people or government. Aruba has cited in the past that much of its budget has gone toward the Natalee Holloway investigation.

The Arubaans assured us the case is going forward with 14 Investigators presently assigned. They also advised us that 40 percent of their annual law enforcement budget has been spent on this case.

There was a supposed credible witness with a tip to search the sand dunes, TES is offering to get the job done immediately and either find Natalee or rule out the area and do the search of the water if still necessary. All at no cost to Aruba. Sources say, their offer denied.

Why? With the Aruban PR nightmare that is the Natalee Holloway investigation, who turns down free help and the appearance of the US and Aruba working together for a common goal? Especially when there is a credible lead.

(END QUOTE)