GUILTY Peru - Stephany Flores, 21, murdered in Lima hotel room, 30 May 2010 #24

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
otto--

not really sure of your point with that post about the two lawyers...

i linked an article a few pages back (please go read it for clarity) where jvds' lawyer stated jvds had been threatened with solitary if he (jvds) didn't attend the meeting with beth (by prison officials?). his lawyer didn't necessarily have to be there or know about it then... jvds told him later?? IDK.

k-- good night.

A few pages back ... in the case of Joran van der Sloot, could be seven years.

The videos show that Joran is required to attend the meeting. I don't think it matters how he was threatened, but my impression was that he initially resisted the meeting (most likely after learning that the guests were Peter and Beth). I understood that he was required to attend and that he was free to terminate the meeting at 3 minutes (something like that).

I don't know why Joran would claim that he didn't require his lawyer to be there. He stated during the meeting that Beth needed to contact his lawyer to meet with him. That doesn't sound logical.

Still ... this has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence in the upcoming murder trial. At the most, the defense might raise the point that for the five years preceiding the murder he was hounded by a family that believed he was guilty of a previous murder ... and that is demonstrated by Beth's unscheduled visit to the prison.
 
otto--

you are making this way more complicated than it is. i merely suggested that j told his lawyer afterthefact about being threatened... his lawyer didn't have to be at the meeting to know what happened prior to the meeting or at the meeting as j would've told him what happened the next time they spoke (or, as per usual, j could've lied about what happened to get him to attend the meeting)--- the point being joran might have lied again about being forced to go to the meeting as per the wiki article that was mentioned - which i proved was erroneus by posting the article i posted. please find my original post and read it-- thanks.


jvds wouldn't have been hounded for 5 years if he didn't cause natalee's disappearance/murder and then lie about it and taunt beth for those 5 years!


ok-- i'm officially sick of jvds... again :rollercoaster:
 
Why wouldn't he? It's much more comfortable in Aruba than Peru. He really thought he was clever in committing a murder in Peru and assuming that he could avoid expulsion to Peru by fleeing to Chile. He fully expected that he could be sent back to Aruba where he would deal with the money investigation and the murder allegations. He made a bolt for the airport after he first left the hotel, but saw police officers with guns, thought they had discovered the body and fled via taxi.

I'm going on memory about him making a request, but I think he did. He's sneaky ... the below video stills were taken faking knocking on the door and being locked out

Joranbreadsm.jpg


as he was leaving the hotel room, after changing, getting coffee and something to eat.

I do know ALL about those first days otto, I was here since day one, and frantically translating the best I could, because the board went so fast!!
All the news were in Spanish, so you can imagine the chaos of people questioning what the reporters were saying in the video news. Some people were using Google translate for the written news, but some of the translations didn't come out right, so had to help out there as well.
I translated that scene with the 2 coffees, had to repeat it many times, because the thread went so fast, so yep, I do know about all those details, even now the news in English are not always a reflection of what the original articles are, but at this point it's not too important if it's not too accurate.

I am aware of all the SF's case, the part I was missing was B's visit, like I said a few times already....so I'm a bit confused right now that you mention the start of the case, his escape to Chile, etc, in connection to his request for transfer to Aruba.

I thought you were talking about AFTER B's visited him in prison. That is the time period I'm researching at the moment, September 2011 I think.
Did he request the transfer AFTER her visit?
 
otto--

you are making this way more complicated than it is. i merely suggested that j told his lawyer afterthefact about being threatened... his lawyer didn't have to be at the meeting to know what happened prior to the meeting or at the meeting as j would've told him what happened the next time they spoke (or, as per usual, j could've lied about what happened to get him to attend the meeting)--- the point being joran might have lied again about being forced to go to the meeting as per the wiki article that was mentioned - which i proved was erroneus by posting the article i posted. please find my original post and read it-- thanks.


jvds wouldn't have been hounded for 5 years if he didn't cause natalee's disappearance/murder and then lie about it and taunt beth for those 5 years!


ok-- i'm officially sick of jvds... again :rollercoaster:

Sure, but he resisted meeting with Beth and because he was a prisoner he was oblgated to meet with her. As a prisoner, he resisted the meeting (that much is clear in the video tape) but really had no say in the meeting. After arriving at the meeting, where he was not a willing party, he was clear in presenting Beth with contact information for his lawyer. It was all videotaped.

At this time, Natalee is still missing and now Robyn Gardner too. I suppose GG figured out what Joran did to make Natalee disappear, because he did it with another woman. Stephanie is murdered and the known murderer is Joran van der Sloot. He has done everything he can to wiggle out of the charges even though she was found in a hotel room with his name on it. I suppose he found a way to wiggle out of the situation on the night that Natalee disappeared. Maybe Joran's father knew ... and it killed him.
 
The only meaning Joran would have gotten from it was the ruse that he and the Deepak brothers were involved ... I suspect. The code was that Joran showed up at the meeting to collect the $25k sweepstakes (something like that) eating a 3 Muskateers bar so Beth thougt it was significant, and wrapped some other bar in a xerox copy of the wrapper. I think the meaning was lost on one level, but not on another. It could be interpretted as an allusion to Joran and the Deepak brothers lying to police about the events of the night ... 3 Muskateers.

In one of the videos I watched yesterday, the camera zooms in onto a plate containing a 3-musketeers wrapper....the actor who is playing J. is seen eating that 3 musketeers chocolate bar, there is a lot of focus on that chocolate, and immediately remembered she was talking about that to him in her visit, and seemed like it was a code of some sorts.

I have no idea about who those brothers are, nor that lottery contest/sweepstakes, and I guess that must be something else, because the video I saw was just J. with the lawyer, my guess is the 'connection' is with that scene I am describing.
 
hazel, i will answer you here :)

my response in bold
hope you got the answers you were looking for.

I answered 2 of your 3 questions, and you said you're not concerned, also that it's not important to you, so if you are not concerned, and it's not important to you, I guess you are happy :)

I said IDK to the last question, so that is my answer IDK.....I added a logical thought, but my answer is still IDK,

That's the best I can do for you redheadedgal to help you with your query, and hope it's all good.

Just as an aside, the articles I based my opinions on are ONLY the local papers....some of the English versions are not 100% accurate. In some instances the problem is in the translation, which is understandable, in other instances I truly don't know where they got the info from, JMHO.
 
Joran's story seems to be that Stephany was still alive when he returned with the coffee, but that is impossible given the timeline. She was probably murdered closer to 6 or 6:15 AM?? It was a brutal, violent murder. He claims that his anger was triggered by her curiosity, starting by hitting her in the head with his elbow. He claims that he then proceeded to beat her. While on the floor, he did something with her clothing ... like remove her pants?? There was no sexual assault. Then we see him sneaking out of the hotel room, checking the hallway for witnesses, but apparently unconcerned about the camera in the hallway above the light. He tried to pin the murder on two police men that supposed harassed them on the way home and then supposedly entered the room, but the camera footage proved that no one else had entered the room.
Otto, if you look many pages back you will find a video of his confession, it is in Spanish but I did a transcription of part of it, is long, and I think I used blue font, and is posted in more than one long post.

Also, long ago, I posted full transcription (sorry in that case I wrote it in Spanish, but someone used Google translate afterwards), about all the important details.
With that you can practically have ALL the most accurate details you will find in an English site.
Hope it helps, because I see you got a few facts not quite accurate. For example, it started by him claiming that she hit him first in the head, to which he reacted by hitting her in the nose (not the head) with his elbow....she started to bleed profusely, when asked if there was blood, he answers....
the coffee story is all explained in there as well, in his confession, it is all so well documented with videos at the casino, the hotel, and other witnesses that will come out during trial, just wait and see.

the other document I translated relates to what was found in his computer, the forensic analysis...
 
hope you got the answers you were looking for... I answered 2 of your 3 questions...I said IDK to the last question...That's the best I can do for you redheadedgal to help you with your query, and hope it's all good.

Just as an aside, the articles I based my opinions on are ONLY the local papers....some of the English versions are not 100% accurate. In some instances the problem is in the translation, which is understandable, in other instances I truly don't know where they got the info from, JMHO.


yes-- all good. the other two questions were both rhetorical so yes-- i have all the answers i need. thanks :)

if you think or know that any english translation is wrong, please link the original dutch report and i'll get a translated version. likewise, if you think or know an article has bad info (like that wiki page), again let us know as we can look for other sources to corroborate or negate. i would presume that any english MSM site would attempt to translate thoroughly and correctly for them self though... and those are the only links i link. TIA :)
 
otto--

you are making this way more complicated than it is. i merely suggested that j told his lawyer afterthefact about being threatened... his lawyer didn't have to be at the meeting to know what happened prior to the meeting or at the meeting as j would've told him what happened the next time they spoke (or, as per usual, j could've lied about what happened to get him to attend the meeting)--- the point being joran might have lied again about being forced to go to the meeting as per the wiki article that was mentioned - which i proved was erroneus by posting the article i posted. please find my original post and read it-- thanks.


jvds wouldn't have been hounded for 5 years if he didn't cause natalee's disappearance/murder and then lie about it and taunt beth for those 5 years!

ok-- i'm officially sick of jvds... again :rollercoaster:

my bolding

And that is the bottom line. I even object to the use of the word hounding, that implies that he's the victim being harrassed unfairly. I don't know if that was the intent or not but he could have ended it all at any point. We can all sit back and speculate whether or not he would ever tell the truth but that's not the point and that's certainly no reason that he should ever get away with NH disappearance and maybe her murder. I doubt any parent would have said after just five years, oh well he'll never tell me the truth so I'll just move on and forget about my child. It would never happen with me. Maybe not even after 10, 20 years would a parent just give up and move on.

Whether or not a victim's mother may or may not have made some mistakes really pales in comparison to the loss of her child. The trip to Peru doesn't take anything away from her if keeping the whole picture of what she and NH's father, brother, other family and friends had to endure in the proper perspective. Anyone who has actually followed everything that went on can see the whole picture. I don't think BH is worried in the least if some may criticize her for it, number 1, that too pales in comparison to her child and number 2, she has the support of many many people all over who do know what she went through and the Peru trip isn't going to change it, it was a small blip from the very large picture. I know I wouldn't care.

And I've never heard anyone tell a parent that after just five years they should give up and just move on when it's still far from being too late to get answers, most especially when the one responsible is still out there, still taunting her, still lying. Some may believe that BH isn't unique but her child sure was, her child deserved to live, her child deserved to fulfill her dreams just like anyone elses child. My child is unique, all of our children are unique.

I'm also not going to forget that right before BH went to Peru, Joran had done that interview from prison where he told more lies, attempting to make himself the victim yet again, possibly made more money from those lies too. The taunting didn't end even after he was arrested. Maybe had he not taunted her yet again she would never have gone, who knows. Maybe the only way BH could get to Peru was through PDV, maybe PDV was using her.

I'm also not going to forget that the Flores family has been highly supportive of BH and NH. They may not have agreed with parts of this trip but they've spoken in support of her even after that. That focus shouldn't be lost either. Mr Flores himself has said, I'm paraphrasing, that Stephany's death and JVDS conviction is justice for NH too.

JMHO
 
http://pulitzerandthompson.com/joran-van-der-sloot-trial-to-begin-on-january-6-2012/

Joran van der Sloot trial to begin on January 6, 2012

The long awaited murder trial of Joran van der Sloot is finally upon us. On Friday, January 6, the young Dutchman will stand judgment before a three judge panel in a special courtroom within the walls of Lima’s Lurigancho Prison.

During the trial, expected to begin at 10:00 am local time, Van der Sloot faces charges of murder and theft stemming from the May, 2010 homicide of Peruvian business student in Room 309 of Lima’s Hotel Tac.

Lisa Pulitzer and Cole Thompson, co-authors of "Portrait of a Monster: Joran van der Sloot, a Murder in Peru, and the Natalee Holloway Mystery" spent years investigating van der Sloot and are experts in both the Flores murder and the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. The authors also continue to be in direct contact with the Peruvian police in charge of the investigation and the Flores family.
 
I don't know if this has already been posted, if so, my apology for posting it again.

Thought this info about his ehhh...............'guardian angel' and his :giggle: ALLEGED 'subscription' medicine stupor, interesting.............:waitasec:

Seems Joran can't stop his :liar: ways......he probably didn't want his guardian angel to visit because she's raising heck about his ehhh...............over-perscribed medication, but wants her to keep paying his attorney bills and $$ to buy his ehhh..............medication. :rolleyes:

JMHO
fran


http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...oot-prison-drugging-him-claims-guardian-angel

Joran Van Der Sloot's ‘Guardian Angel’ Going Broke, Claims Prison Is Drugging Him
 
Kelly was not happy with Beth that he was excluded from information about her meeting with Joran. He advised against it, pointing out the possible legal ramificaions.

Twitty's lawyer, John Q. Kelly, confirmed to ABC News hat Twitty had made the trip to the notorious Castro Castro prison on Wednesday with Dutch television reporter Peter R. de Vries. Kelly didn't learn of her plans until the day before, when Twitty had already been in Peru for two days.

"There wasn't much I could say," Kelly said. "She was there."

...

"I wanted to get back at Natalee's family. Her parents have been making my life tough for five years," the newspaper quoted him as saying from prison in Peru. "When they offered to pay for the girl's location, I thought: 'Why not'?"

...

van Der Sloot blamed himself for landing in a rat-filled Peruvian prison cell, but he suggested that the FBI lured him to Peru in a botched sting operation.

...

When asked by a reporter about the murder of Flores, van der Sloot replied, "I have been framed. What happened exactly, I will explain later."


http://abcnews.go.com/US/natalee-holloways-mother-sneaks-prison-joran-van-der/story?id=11662712

Joran's lawyer couldn't attend the meeting with Beth because he only learned about it after it was underway.

my bolding

Is there another link to where JK said he advised BH against doing it and pointed out the possible legal ramifications? In the article quoted and linked he doesn't say that. Did he say it in a different interview? I tried doing a search but couldn't find another intervew.

JK says in the article you linked and quoted.

"There wasn't much I could say," Kelly said. "She was there."

He declined to comment on exactly what the two talked about, but said she was planning to fill him in when she returned home, not wanting to share too many of the details over a cell phone

"I think the main thing was to let him know she's still around," Kelly said. "I think the message was that she is still looking for answers.

"But," he added, "she didn't expect to get them from him at this time."
 
I don't know if this has already been posted, if so, my apology for posting it again.

Thought this info about his ehhh...............'guardian angel' and his :giggle: ALLEGED 'subscription' medicine stupor, interesting.............:waitasec:

Seems Joran can't stop his :liar: ways......he probably didn't want his guardian angel to visit because she's raising heck about his ehhh...............over-perscribed medication, but wants her to keep paying his attorney bills and $$ to buy his ehhh..............medication. :rolleyes:

JMHO
fran


http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...oot-prison-drugging-him-claims-guardian-angel

Joran Van Der Sloot's ‘Guardian Angel’ Going Broke, Claims Prison Is Drugging Him

LOL, that's probably exactly what it is, that way he gets to keep both, her money and his drugs.

It gets even worse with his Guardian Angel's latest.

http://www.countercurrents.org/hamer030112.htm

http://www.cbs42.com/content/localn...jures-up-crime-of/Zggq3_cyUUyHZMejefM6tg.cspx
 
my bolding

Is there another link to where JK said he advised BH against doing it and pointed out the possible legal ramifications? In the article quoted and linked he doesn't say that. Did he say it in a different interview? I tried doing a search but couldn't find another intervew.

JK says in the article you linked and quoted.

I'm still looking for the quote from John Kelly, but I did find this one:

"Michael Griffith, an international criminal attorney, said on "The Early Show on Saturday Morning" that Twitty did a very inappropriate thing.

"She used very bad judgment," Griffith said, adding that her visit could hurt her case against van der Sloot. "She's a complainant in a case in Alabama for extortion, where van der Sloot (allegedly) took money from her. Since she's a possible witness, this could be construed as possible witness tampering. I don't know what he said to her, but even if he was inclined to speak to her, by bringing ... the reporter who had already once tricked van der Sloot into giving a confession, I'm sure he would have shut up seeing him there with Mrs. Twitty."

Griffith added it's unlikely Twitty will face charges for her contact with van der Sloot, but it could "certainly" hurt her case in the U.S. for extortion."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/18/earlyshow/saturday/main6878945.shtml?tag=exclsv
 
Yes Michael Griffith was on tv with the TH's quite a bit, liked to talk about all the different ways JVDS is going to die in prison. He has opinions, like everyone else that goes on these shows, I'm sure if someone had the desire to do so, they could find others on these shows with a different opinion. I was only interested in BH's attorney.

Michael Griffith also has his own shall we say, wild ideas, so it's debatable how credible he may be.

"In this particular case with van der Sloot, if the Arubans won't do anything with this guy, the U.S. could conceivably -- once he is released in Peru -- extradite him back to the states and prosecute him for Holloway's murder," says Michael Griffith, senior partner at the International Legal Defense Counsel.

According to Griffith, the passive personality principle of international law allows a country to prosecute someone who has killed or injured an American citizen in a foreign country. In essence, jurisdiction is based on the nationality of the victim and not the location of the crime. However, if convicted in the U.S. for Holloway's murder, he could face life in prison -- something that Griffith said gives U.S. officials the edge right now.

"The Holloways need to at least find their daughter," Griffith said. "They don't want to wait 10 years till he gets parole and is extradited. The Peruvian authorities have no jurisdiction for the murder of Holloway, but we do because he allegedly killed an American citizen.

"Make the deal right now," Griffith continued. "Tell him, 'We have enough on you circumstantially already, but by the time you get out we'll have a lot more, and you'll never see the light of day again. If you know where the body is, tell us now, and we won't extradite you on a murder charge.'"

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/06/14/expert-us-could-charge-van-der-sloot-with-holloways-murder/
 
Wow, it get's worse every time I read something about this Dr. She's certifiably bat crap cray... crazy. IMO, of course. :D

Someone really needs to step in and get her in some kind of treatment before JVDS sucks her dry and really sends her to the point of no return.
Is she still practicing?

JMHO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
146
Guests online
1,391
Total visitors
1,537

Forum statistics

Threads
605,803
Messages
18,192,721
Members
233,557
Latest member
Diamondgirl#7
Back
Top