ARUBA - Robyn Gardner, 35, Maryland woman missing in Aruba, 2 Aug 2011 - #11

[Blueskies]

Blueskies,

I am not sure of the point you are trying to make;

Timeline:

6:15 -timestamp on video-GG seen at RumReef (arrives)
to 6:20 -he asks witnesses to call police

That IS 5 minutes--

Where are you getting the 21 minute arrival and 13 minutes of him not being seen, but supposedly being there?

Check Neesaki post #692 , pg 28 , on Thread 10. We have already discussed this discrepancy. If you are ASSUMING there are other tapes---We can't help you with that, we can only go by what info we have confirmed. :waitasec:

It's not confirmed and I could be very wrong. I always thought that GG was first seen on video arriving at 6:02..Type in 6:02 Gary Giordano and google it..Again it could be bad reporting but where the hell did 6:02 come from? His arrival time is not 6:15 that's the time he was first seen tapping on shutters..

There is still the matter of Amigoe's article about him arriving and leaving after 10 minutes that still bothers me because I think it's good info. I can only speculate but I wonder if he arrived at 6:02,left and came back 10 minutes later? That would be in line with him being seen on video at 6:15

 

[neesaki]

You know if there was not a time stamp from the video on Aug 1st I would think it was a mistake. He said himself he got that advice 48 hours after arriving on the island. And the same dress thing is bothersome cause you also see her wearing that dress days earler at Moomba's. He doesnt have to lie,all he has to do is just not bring up the fact they were there the day before and thats what happened.

Yes of course he would want to leave that out of his story as it raises a ton of questions and perhaps its a major clue if there is foul play involved. Same goes with how his shoes and socks got wet and why he told two stories about that..It would be smart to leave out they were drinking heavy the entire trip and moments before this supposed snorkeling as well. Might is well leave out that is not how he picked Aruba and the fact that he asked other women to go to Aruba BEFORE Robyn. I've seen every interview he has done and every time he makes it seem it was his first time ever at baby beach.MO

One thing is for sure is that he definetly thought Robyn was promiscuous..Probably one of the few truths from GG as well as the abuse she endured from other BF'S..IMO

This is just one more thing about GG that I find offensive... he states in this interview with Geraldo that Robyn is promiscuous. Really? HaHaHa! And what is GG, much more I'd say than just promiscuous ! Not only is he a scary creep, he is a total bigot ! :furious:

 

[Tugela]

Yes a waitress at the bar said she looked doozy or woozy and perhaps that was after she was caught on camera upon arrival walking to the bathroom. Perhaps it was the mysterious drink concoctions GG made in the car?

She looked fine walking to the car as well.

 

[Tugela]

It's not confirmed and I could be very wrong. I always thought that GG was first seen on video arriving at 6:02..Type in 6:02 Gary Giordano and google it..Again it could be bad reporting but where the hell did 6:02 come from? His arrival time is not 6:15 that's the time he was first seen tapping on shutters..

There is still the matter of Amigoe's article about him arriving and leaving after 10 minutes that still bothers me because I think it's good info. I can only speculate but I wonder if he arrived at 6:02,left and came back 10 minutes later? That would be in line with him being seen on video at 6:15

The time difference is probably betwee him arriving and knocking on windows until the time 911 (or whatever) got the call. In between that time GG would have had to find someone, explain what was going on, then looking for a phone,then call in. 20 minutes is not an unreasonable time for all of that to take.

I don't see how the delay could form the basis for a charge.

 

[Dushi]

6:15pm (time seen on video) - GG knocking on several back doors.

6:16pm – (video) GG walking up the stairs.

6:16pm – (video) GG walking along the bar.

6:17pm - (video) GG walking the bar area; then walking around to the back (no footage).

6:20pm - GG reportedly headed to the back kitchen of the bar and told someone to call police. Three witnesses, two women and a man, told police that Giordano approached them on Aug. 2, saying, "Can you help me? We were snorkeling and my girlfriend is missing," she told police. One woman told police that while Giordano's sneakers were wet, his shorts were not. When Giordano reported Gardner missing, he seemed extremely drunk, a local fisherman, Sergio Silva, told ABC News, although Giordano told police that the two never purchased alcohol at the restaurant.

6:23pm - 911 received notification of a possible drowning of a woman. The traveling companion of this woman, a man G.V.G. stated that they were going snorkeling behind Nanki Country Club.

At 6:23 pm on the day of her disappearance, police were called, and 20 minutes later began to search the area. Then, Giordano left the search to return to his hotel and take a nap, according to police. Disclaimer: This claim, at 6.40 GG went for a nap, not true, there are various pics of GG helping the police in the dark, pics where it is completely dark, it takes till 7:30 for it to get dark, so GG was not taking a nap at 6:40, he still was working with the police at least at 7:30.

 

[Sapphire]

These MSM articles make it appear Giordano was first seen on video at 6:02 PM. If so, this video has not been released to my knowledge. :waitasec:




<snip>

Investigators, including experts from the FBI, are studying surveillance footage that purportedly shows Giordano behaving strangely on the day when Gardner was reported missing, repeatedly moving his car, appearing in footage wearing different toupees and popping up on camera at 6:02 p.m., shortly after he says Gardner went missing, according to ABC News.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/17/robyn-gardner-insurance_n_929194.html



<snip>

At approximately 6:02 p.m., after Gardner went missing, the law enforcement source said that Giordano is also seen in surveillance video, tapping on closed shutters of the bar -- seemingly making his presence known. At approximately 6:20 p.m. he headed to the back kitchen of the bar and told someone to call police.

http://abcnews.go.com/International...g-woman/story?id=14350220&page=2#.T3muJ_BunTo

 

[Dushi]

These MSM articles make it appear Giordano was first seen on video at 6:02 PM. If so, this video has not been released to my knowledge. :waitasec:




<snip>

Investigators, including experts from the FBI, are studying surveillance footage that purportedly shows Giordano behaving strangely on the day when Gardner was reported missing, repeatedly moving his car, appearing in footage wearing different toupees and popping up on camera at 6:02 p.m., shortly after he says Gardner went missing, according to ABC News.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/17/robyn-gardner-insurance_n_929194.html



<snip>

At approximately 6:02 p.m., after Gardner went missing, the law enforcement source said that Giordano is also seen in surveillance video, tapping on closed shutters of the bar -- seemingly making his presence known. At approximately 6:20 p.m. he headed to the back kitchen of the bar and told someone to call police.

http://abcnews.go.com/International...g-woman/story?id=14350220&page=2#.T3muJ_BunTo

That fact has been disputed and put to rest


There is a lot of misinformation you will find on this island which is why the reporting has to be very careful. There were reports that Giordano would wear different toupees to try to confuse the security cameras that maybe watching him at any different time. Authorities have laughed that off and said that`s just not the case. He has one toupee and he wasn`t doing anything like that.http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...2/ijvm.01.html

 

[Sapphire]

That fact has been disputed and put to rest


There is a lot of misinformation you will find on this island which is why the reporting has to be very careful. There were reports that Giordano would wear different toupees to try to confuse the security cameras that maybe watching him at any different time. Authorities have laughed that off and said that`s just not the case. He has one toupee and he wasn`t doing anything like that.http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...2/ijvm.01.html

Yes, this information has been disputed. According to ABC News, this information came from a police source.

Shackled: Giordano was not wearing one of his toupees. Police had said they had struggled to trace the suspect's movements on the island because he kept changing hair pieces.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ardner-did-NOT-snorkelling.html#ixzz1qtU3dGJx

 

[Dushi]

Yes, this information has been disputed. According to ABC News, this information came from a police source.

Shackled: Giordano was not wearing one of his toupees. Police had said they had struggled to trace the suspect's movements on the island because he kept changing hair pieces.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ardner-did-NOT-snorkelling.html#ixzz1qtU3dGJx

So according to CNN, authorities say that isn't true
And according to the Daily mail, police say it is true

Thats typical of most reporting in this case, IMO

 

[Sapphire]

So according to CNN, authorities say that isn't true
And according to the Daily mail, police say it is true

Thats typical of most reporting in this case, IMO

Unfortunately, typical, yes.

What's worse was if the false information was provided by police sources.

:maddening:

 

[Blueskies]

So according to CNN, authorities say that isn't true
And according to the Daily mail, police say it is true

Thats typical of most reporting in this case, IMO

It depends on who is the source. Daily Mail is complete rubbish and should not be counted as real reporting..Most if not all of their information came from the NE..Now ABC is entirely another matter,usually credible and in this case I think they had good sources with incorrect info..IMO

 

[Dushi]

It depends on who is the source. Daily Mail is complete rubbish and should not be counted as real reporting..Most if not all of their information came from the NE..Now ABC is entirely another matter,usually credible and in this case I think they had good sources with incorrect info..IMO

If you read back in some of the very early threads, you can see how information was reported than was not quite accurate.

Often , even when corrected at a later date, it goes unnoticed

And some of the reports from papers like NE are appalling

Often, the headlines do not even match the body of the story

I guess its the headlines that attract people who then buy the paper

Its all about business

 

[neesaki]

So to go along with GG's story, Robyn drowned as a result of him taking her snorkeling while she was under the influence of vodka and sleeping pills (according to him). Would this not be considered at least involuntary manslaughter or criminally negligent manslaughter?

http://criminal.lawyers.com/v2/Crim...hter-A-Lesser-Crime-than-Murder.html?refurl=1

I haven't found much on the specifics of Aruban law in this regard.

http://www.curacao-law.com/2007/11/26/aruba-criminal-law/

 

[neesaki]

And then there's this from the Natalee Holloway case:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,313168,00.html

VAN SUSTEREN: In your press release, it says "voluntary manslaughter." What is voluntary manslaughter?


MOS: Voluntary manslaughter under Aruban law is the situation that you kill a person with intent, and the question is if it is premeditated intent, which should be murder -- we scratch (ph) through the murder suspicion because we don't have any evidence of that, there is premeditation on the killing of this girl.


But if you, for example, take an axe with the intention to just hit a person to make him suffer and have pain, but you hit the axe on the head with force, then you should take into account that this person can be killed within that action. That's a risk you take. And that was what we mean with voluntary manslaughter.


VAN SUSTEREN: Meaning that you took an action that a reasonable person would -- could assume would cause death.


MOS: Exactly.


VAN SUSTEREN: It's not just sort of where you back out of a driveway and you run over somebody.


(CROSSTALK)


MOS: That would be involuntary manslaughter, and that's not what we intend (ph) for.

 

[neesaki]

Eerily similar to GG's excuses of: strong currents; he was wearing contacts and got water in his eyes; he signaled her.

And also had life insurance policy as a motive.



BBM:

Death of Tina Watson
Watson claimed the currents were stronger than they expected and that he responded to a signal from her to return to the dive rope where he noted a look of worry on her face before she accidentally knocked his mask loose. When he recovered his sight, she was sinking too quickly for him to retrieve her and he surfaced to get help. He also stated that an ear problem prevented him from diving deeper to help her and that there was nothing in his training as a rescue diver "about how to get somebody" in trouble to the surface.

Death of Tina Watson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Blueskies]

So to go along with GG's story, Robyn drowned as a result of him taking her snorkeling while she was under the influence of vodka and sleeping pills (according to him). Would this not be considered at least involuntary manslaughter or criminally negligent manslaughter?

http://criminal.lawyers.com/v2/Crim...hter-A-Lesser-Crime-than-Murder.html?refurl=1

I haven't found much on the specifics of Aruban law in this regard.

http://www.curacao-law.com/2007/11/26/aruba-criminal-law/

That may have been his initial story and then he changed it to not drinking and taking pills at all so he couldn't be liable for anything.

Reminds me of Natalee's case where in the beginning they all claimed she was drunk/was on drugs and they had sex with her. Of course after they lawyered up she wasn't drunk and it was Natalee hitting on them.

 

[neesaki]

That may have been his initial story and then he changed it to not drinking and taking pills at all so he couldn't be liable for anything.

Reminds me of Natalee's case where in the beginning they all claimed she was drunk/was on drugs and they had sex with her. Of course after they lawyered up she wasn't drunk and it was Natalee hitting on them.

True that GG changed his story, but as much as he wants to I don't really see how he can legitimately deny the vodka and sleeping pills. Not and get away with it anyway. This is one of the few issues that was witnessed, and reportedly not by one but several.

I just don't know if Aruba is really interested in prosecuting him even if they could. Maybe they're hoping it will die down and simply go away so they can just be one happy island. Besides, costs money to prosecute a case, why spend it on that, right? Plus GG's not an Aruban, but an American citizen. Perhaps they think they've done their part in giving him four months of jail time.

MSM has gone completely quiet concerning this case since GG's television interviews ended. It's as though they're avoiding it, kinda strange. But Robyn's family or friends haven't done anything really to keep it out there either, nothing even close to NH's case. Really sad that between them and ALE it's becoming another cold case. :coldcase:.

 

[Tugela]

So to go along with GG's story, Robyn drowned as a result of him taking her snorkeling while she was under the influence of vodka and sleeping pills (according to him). Would this not be considered at least involuntary manslaughter or criminally negligent manslaughter?

http://criminal.lawyers.com/v2/Crim...hter-A-Lesser-Crime-than-Murder.html?refurl=1

I haven't found much on the specifics of Aruban law in this regard.

http://www.curacao-law.com/2007/11/26/aruba-criminal-law/

No, to be charged with that you would have to have a duty of care. RG was a responsible adult, so it would not be GG's duty to decide what she should or shouldn't do. To proceed with a charge like that he pretty much would have had to physically force her into the water while intoxicated, and there is no evidence of anything like that.

Negligent manslaughter is usually applied in situations where someone has a statutory responsibility (such as driving or being a caregiver) or a professional responsibility (such as being a tour guide or facility operator). They also need to have acted in a negligent manner where they reasonably should have been able to foresee harm resulting.

 

[Tugela]

True that GG changed his story, but as much as he wants to I don't really see how he can legitimately deny the vodka and sleeping pills. Not and get away with it anyway. This is one of the few issues that was witnessed, and reportedly not by one but several.

I don't believe it was witnessed by anyone.

 

[Tugela]

MSM has gone completely quiet concerning this case since GG's television interviews ended. It's as though they're avoiding it, kinda strange. But Robyn's family or friends haven't done anything really to keep it out there either, nothing even close to NH's case. Really sad that between them and ALE it's becoming another cold case. :coldcase:.

I don't think we have heard anything at all from her family. Part of that is probably because they know her better than any of us, and perhaps the possibility that she went swimming and got swept out to sea doesn't seem outlandish to them.