alrick888
30-11-2007, 06:29 PM
18 Questions about Natalee's disappearance
It is on Saturday the 28th of May, 2005, that the 18-year old American student Natalee Holloway disappears on Aruba, without leaving any trace. 17-year old Joran van der Sloot and his friends Deepak (21) and Sarish K. (18) are the main suspects. A couple of questions...
1. DID JORAN VAN DER SLOOT KILL NATALEE?
No. Unless the opposite happens to be true... It is not very likely for a 17-year old guy not to confess if he has been interrogated by qualified detectives for several weeks. Only professional criminals and mindless psychopaths are able to keep their mouths shut under such circumstances. On top of that, there are three suspects: if all three of them know what has happened, then there is only a small chance that all three of them can resist to give in to the interrogations.
2. WHY HAVE THEY BEEN IN CUSTODY FOR SUCH A LONG TIME?
If they had been in the Netherlands they probably would have been set free after 30 days, if it had not been such a prominent case. Yet on Aruba people deal with all the American media interest. To satisfy the American tourists, everything was set up to keep the suspects in custody for as long as possible.
3. NO BODY, NO PROOF?"No body, no proof" is a fable that comes from those good old detective stories. In reality though, it is possible to get a suspect convicted for murder, without a body, when there are enough 'officially permitted and convincing' proofs; although that is a very complex procedure. In the Netherlands there are several examples of cases in which this occurred.
4. WHAT ARE THE EVIDENCES?
The only strong points seem to be the contrary testimonies of Joran: at first he stated that they had dropped Natalee in the middle of the night at the hotel she was staying. But when the security cameras proved that they had never done that, he said that he had left her behind on the beach. Such an obvious lie raises many questions.
5. WHY DID JORAN LIE?
If his second statement is true, he will never have realized how crucial this was. It is not very gentlemanly to have a girl go home all by herself. In a certain way this claims for his innocence: if he really killed Natalee, he would have thought of a better excuse and he would have realized that there were security cameras at the hotel.
6. BUT WASN'T THERE BLOOD ON THE BACKSEAT OF THE CAR?
In the first reports on the missing they were talking about blood traces on the backseat of the car in which Joran, Natalee and the Surinam brothers Satish and Deepak K. had been driving that particular night. It was a romantic thought: Natalee's first time, on the backseat of the car.
7. WHOSE BLOOD WAS IT?
Most likely, it wasn't Natalee's. The DNA profile has been compared to that of Natalee's family's. If there had been a match there is no doubt that it would have been announced a long time ago. And then the three suspects would already be in prison.
8. WHOSE CAR WERE THEY DRIVING?
The initiative for the tour at night came from Joran, but he did not have his driver's license yet. The most logical answer is that 21-year old Deepak was driving. Maybe in his dad's car, or his own car, it is not quite sure.
9. DON'T THINK IN BLACK & WHITE?
"Don't think in white, don't think in black, don't think black and white, just think in the color of your heart", is what the Dutch singer Frank Boeijen sang after the racial murder of Kevin Duinmeijer. According to Natalee's mom it is unthinkable that her dutiful, God loving, blond-haired white daughter would voluntarily get in to a car with two black guys. However, it did happen. An explanation for that: Natalee was a little drunk, and agreed to everything Joran did. American girls are not used to alcohol: until they are 21 years old it is illegal for them to drink alcohol (of course they still drink alcohol secretly).
10. IS JORAN A HOTHEADED PERSON?
Joran's parents cannot imagine their dear son having committed some awful crime. His father Paul is for 100% sure that his son is innocent, his mother Anita is for 200% sure. But is Joran indeed as nice and friendly as is friends and family are saying? After all the publicity about Joran, at least two girls went to the police on Aruba to tell them about bad experiences they had with him. According to them Joran had gotten very angry whenever they did not want to have sex with him after they had been making out. But none of the girls officially reported this.
11. WAS JORAN UNDER TREATMENT BY A PSYCHIATRIST?
Crime-reporter John van den Heuvel wrote in the Dutch newspaper "De Telegraaf" that Joran was a quick-tempered person, he was hard to handle at home, there were serious problems with his behavior and that he was being treated by a psychiatrist. "De Telegraaf" is the only source for this story: all the rest of the media, even the American media, refers to this source when they are talking about this. John van de Heuvel is not giving any specific information about the person he heard this from, but he guarantees that his source is trustworthy, and is standing "close to the investigation". Former policeman Van den Heuvel spends a lot of his time on the Antilles and has various contacts there, which gives us reason to accept what he says as true.
12. WHY DIDN'T NEWS-REPORTER TWAN HUYS ASK ANYTHING CONCERNING THIS IN HIS EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH JORAN'S PARENTS?
Joran's family only agreed with the interview after a long time of negotiation. It makes sense that father Paul only wanted to talk to the interviewer under certain conditions: he must have told him what to talk and what not to talk about.
13. WHAT ELSE DID TWAN HUYS NOT ASK ABOUT?
Or actually: what else was not broadcasted? In his second testimony Joran says that he left Natalee on the beach by herself, in the middle of the night, and that he went home by himself. That is not very gentle: if you come together, you leave together... But the most important question is: why? Did Natalee want to enjoy the Caribbean air a little longer? We would have liked to hear that from Joran's dad.
14. WHY ACTUALLY WAS PAUL VAN DER SLOOT BEING ARRESTED?
Officially because people believed he wanted to disturb the search for Natalee. Hysterical family members of Natalee assumed that he had been giving his son instructions for when he was being interrogated. Even though the only thing he had told Joran was that it would be wiser for him just to talk to policemen, and not to pay any attention to other people's questions.
15. HOW CAN SOMEONE DISAPPEAR FROM A SMALL ISLAND LIKE ARUBA, WITHOUT LEAVING A TRACE?
The land, the sea and the air. It is true, Aruba is not very big, but still there are a lot of rugged and abandoned places where you can get rid of a dead body. However, that is not very logical: considering the immense searches she probably would have been found already. Since the air is not an option at night, we're left with only one possibility: the sea.
16. HOW COME NATALEE'S BODY HAS NOT WASHED TO SHORE YET?
Islands have a beach side and a cliff side. If Natalee was left on the beach, as Joran says, and she went to go swim for example, she could have drowned. Or her dead body could have been thrown into the water on the beach side; but in both situations her body would have surfaced. However, near the lighthouse, the spot where many couples spend romantic nights together, are a lot of cliffs and the water is extremely dangerous. A body would disappear immediately.
17. DID THE SHARKS GET HER?
There is only a very slight chance of Natalee being eaten by sharks. Worldwide, you can count the number of people that annually gets killed by a shark on the fingers of one hand. Most types of sharks are not dangerous for human beings. Typically, the few sharks that do attack humans are found farther off the coast. .
18. WHAT IS THE MOST LOGICAL SCENARIO?
Joran told Natalee that he wanted to go home, since he had to get up early the next morning. Natalee did not want to go with him yet, so they left her at the beach. She wanted to go swim for a little while. She either went swimming when she was still drunk and drowned. Or, whenever she was walking back to the hotel, she fell into the hands of an unknown suspect, who raped her, killed her, and got rid of her body.
source: http://misdaadjournalist.web-log.nl/misdaadjournalist/2006/02/18_questions_ab.html
It is on Saturday the 28th of May, 2005, that the 18-year old American student Natalee Holloway disappears on Aruba, without leaving any trace. 17-year old Joran van der Sloot and his friends Deepak (21) and Sarish K. (18) are the main suspects. A couple of questions...
1. DID JORAN VAN DER SLOOT KILL NATALEE?
No. Unless the opposite happens to be true... It is not very likely for a 17-year old guy not to confess if he has been interrogated by qualified detectives for several weeks. Only professional criminals and mindless psychopaths are able to keep their mouths shut under such circumstances. On top of that, there are three suspects: if all three of them know what has happened, then there is only a small chance that all three of them can resist to give in to the interrogations.
2. WHY HAVE THEY BEEN IN CUSTODY FOR SUCH A LONG TIME?
If they had been in the Netherlands they probably would have been set free after 30 days, if it had not been such a prominent case. Yet on Aruba people deal with all the American media interest. To satisfy the American tourists, everything was set up to keep the suspects in custody for as long as possible.
3. NO BODY, NO PROOF?"No body, no proof" is a fable that comes from those good old detective stories. In reality though, it is possible to get a suspect convicted for murder, without a body, when there are enough 'officially permitted and convincing' proofs; although that is a very complex procedure. In the Netherlands there are several examples of cases in which this occurred.
4. WHAT ARE THE EVIDENCES?
The only strong points seem to be the contrary testimonies of Joran: at first he stated that they had dropped Natalee in the middle of the night at the hotel she was staying. But when the security cameras proved that they had never done that, he said that he had left her behind on the beach. Such an obvious lie raises many questions.
5. WHY DID JORAN LIE?
If his second statement is true, he will never have realized how crucial this was. It is not very gentlemanly to have a girl go home all by herself. In a certain way this claims for his innocence: if he really killed Natalee, he would have thought of a better excuse and he would have realized that there were security cameras at the hotel.
6. BUT WASN'T THERE BLOOD ON THE BACKSEAT OF THE CAR?
In the first reports on the missing they were talking about blood traces on the backseat of the car in which Joran, Natalee and the Surinam brothers Satish and Deepak K. had been driving that particular night. It was a romantic thought: Natalee's first time, on the backseat of the car.
7. WHOSE BLOOD WAS IT?
Most likely, it wasn't Natalee's. The DNA profile has been compared to that of Natalee's family's. If there had been a match there is no doubt that it would have been announced a long time ago. And then the three suspects would already be in prison.
8. WHOSE CAR WERE THEY DRIVING?
The initiative for the tour at night came from Joran, but he did not have his driver's license yet. The most logical answer is that 21-year old Deepak was driving. Maybe in his dad's car, or his own car, it is not quite sure.
9. DON'T THINK IN BLACK & WHITE?
"Don't think in white, don't think in black, don't think black and white, just think in the color of your heart", is what the Dutch singer Frank Boeijen sang after the racial murder of Kevin Duinmeijer. According to Natalee's mom it is unthinkable that her dutiful, God loving, blond-haired white daughter would voluntarily get in to a car with two black guys. However, it did happen. An explanation for that: Natalee was a little drunk, and agreed to everything Joran did. American girls are not used to alcohol: until they are 21 years old it is illegal for them to drink alcohol (of course they still drink alcohol secretly).
10. IS JORAN A HOTHEADED PERSON?
Joran's parents cannot imagine their dear son having committed some awful crime. His father Paul is for 100% sure that his son is innocent, his mother Anita is for 200% sure. But is Joran indeed as nice and friendly as is friends and family are saying? After all the publicity about Joran, at least two girls went to the police on Aruba to tell them about bad experiences they had with him. According to them Joran had gotten very angry whenever they did not want to have sex with him after they had been making out. But none of the girls officially reported this.
11. WAS JORAN UNDER TREATMENT BY A PSYCHIATRIST?
Crime-reporter John van den Heuvel wrote in the Dutch newspaper "De Telegraaf" that Joran was a quick-tempered person, he was hard to handle at home, there were serious problems with his behavior and that he was being treated by a psychiatrist. "De Telegraaf" is the only source for this story: all the rest of the media, even the American media, refers to this source when they are talking about this. John van de Heuvel is not giving any specific information about the person he heard this from, but he guarantees that his source is trustworthy, and is standing "close to the investigation". Former policeman Van den Heuvel spends a lot of his time on the Antilles and has various contacts there, which gives us reason to accept what he says as true.
12. WHY DIDN'T NEWS-REPORTER TWAN HUYS ASK ANYTHING CONCERNING THIS IN HIS EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH JORAN'S PARENTS?
Joran's family only agreed with the interview after a long time of negotiation. It makes sense that father Paul only wanted to talk to the interviewer under certain conditions: he must have told him what to talk and what not to talk about.
13. WHAT ELSE DID TWAN HUYS NOT ASK ABOUT?
Or actually: what else was not broadcasted? In his second testimony Joran says that he left Natalee on the beach by herself, in the middle of the night, and that he went home by himself. That is not very gentle: if you come together, you leave together... But the most important question is: why? Did Natalee want to enjoy the Caribbean air a little longer? We would have liked to hear that from Joran's dad.
14. WHY ACTUALLY WAS PAUL VAN DER SLOOT BEING ARRESTED?
Officially because people believed he wanted to disturb the search for Natalee. Hysterical family members of Natalee assumed that he had been giving his son instructions for when he was being interrogated. Even though the only thing he had told Joran was that it would be wiser for him just to talk to policemen, and not to pay any attention to other people's questions.
15. HOW CAN SOMEONE DISAPPEAR FROM A SMALL ISLAND LIKE ARUBA, WITHOUT LEAVING A TRACE?
The land, the sea and the air. It is true, Aruba is not very big, but still there are a lot of rugged and abandoned places where you can get rid of a dead body. However, that is not very logical: considering the immense searches she probably would have been found already. Since the air is not an option at night, we're left with only one possibility: the sea.
16. HOW COME NATALEE'S BODY HAS NOT WASHED TO SHORE YET?
Islands have a beach side and a cliff side. If Natalee was left on the beach, as Joran says, and she went to go swim for example, she could have drowned. Or her dead body could have been thrown into the water on the beach side; but in both situations her body would have surfaced. However, near the lighthouse, the spot where many couples spend romantic nights together, are a lot of cliffs and the water is extremely dangerous. A body would disappear immediately.
17. DID THE SHARKS GET HER?
There is only a very slight chance of Natalee being eaten by sharks. Worldwide, you can count the number of people that annually gets killed by a shark on the fingers of one hand. Most types of sharks are not dangerous for human beings. Typically, the few sharks that do attack humans are found farther off the coast. .
18. WHAT IS THE MOST LOGICAL SCENARIO?
Joran told Natalee that he wanted to go home, since he had to get up early the next morning. Natalee did not want to go with him yet, so they left her at the beach. She wanted to go swim for a little while. She either went swimming when she was still drunk and drowned. Or, whenever she was walking back to the hotel, she fell into the hands of an unknown suspect, who raped her, killed her, and got rid of her body.
source: http://misdaadjournalist.web-log.nl/misdaadjournalist/2006/02/18_questions_ab.html