1 Characterizing JV's actions as some sort of "sting" operation is pure fiction, an attempt to confuse and deceive.
In sworn legal documents, per an FBI agent, JV was the one who initiated what occurred. He "contacted [X] via email, using the email address [X]. During a series of emails that followed, van der Sloot offered to take [X] to the location of Natalee Holloway's body, advise [X] as to the circumstances of her death, and identify those involved in her death and disappearance in return for a payment of $250,000." The document goes on to describe how JV negotiated a contract to ensure payment, received money as specified (some cash, some by bank wire), and then failed to do what he said. The charge of extortion is based on the premise that what he was committing to do was in essence forcing the payment, with no intention to actually provide what he promised.
2 The claim is being made that there's no evidence that JV is a murderer. That claim is nonsense. Even JV himself has said otherwise!
From the case documents: "Van der Sloot went on to admit that he had been with Natalee on the night of May 29/30,2005, and that he had thrown her to the ground after she had attempted to stop him from leaving her. Van der Sloot claimed that when she fell down, she hit her head on a rock and died as a result of the impact. Van
der Sloot told [x] that he hid Natalee's body and then returned
home and told his father what had happened."
Beyond that, he also admitted he murdered a young woman in Peru. There is NO DOUBT this scumbucket is a murderer.
Nor should we imagine JV will come to court complaining about any of the things being said about him. There is no malfeasance for speaking the truth about a person, so if he opens that door to make such words an issue, he will only make it worse for himself.
3 The fact that he is going to be held accountable for his evil is a good thing.
4 Extradition is part of the justice system almost everywhere. There is nothing odd or unfair about a creep being taken from one place to another to go on trial. He was indicted and the US courts have waited for 13 years, and finally he is being turned over to face trial. What would be unfair would be for him to escape trial, should the witnesses grow old and die beforehand.
drive.google.com
In sworn legal documents, per an FBI agent, JV was the one who initiated what occurred. He "contacted [X] via email, using the email address [X]. During a series of emails that followed, van der Sloot offered to take [X] to the location of Natalee Holloway's body, advise [X] as to the circumstances of her death, and identify those involved in her death and disappearance in return for a payment of $250,000." The document goes on to describe how JV negotiated a contract to ensure payment, received money as specified (some cash, some by bank wire), and then failed to do what he said. The charge of extortion is based on the premise that what he was committing to do was in essence forcing the payment, with no intention to actually provide what he promised.
2 The claim is being made that there's no evidence that JV is a murderer. That claim is nonsense. Even JV himself has said otherwise!
From the case documents: "Van der Sloot went on to admit that he had been with Natalee on the night of May 29/30,2005, and that he had thrown her to the ground after she had attempted to stop him from leaving her. Van der Sloot claimed that when she fell down, she hit her head on a rock and died as a result of the impact. Van
der Sloot told [x] that he hid Natalee's body and then returned
home and told his father what had happened."
Beyond that, he also admitted he murdered a young woman in Peru. There is NO DOUBT this scumbucket is a murderer.
Nor should we imagine JV will come to court complaining about any of the things being said about him. There is no malfeasance for speaking the truth about a person, so if he opens that door to make such words an issue, he will only make it worse for himself.
3 The fact that he is going to be held accountable for his evil is a good thing.
4 Extradition is part of the justice system almost everywhere. There is nothing odd or unfair about a creep being taken from one place to another to go on trial. He was indicted and the US courts have waited for 13 years, and finally he is being turned over to face trial. What would be unfair would be for him to escape trial, should the witnesses grow old and die beforehand.
Joran van der Sloot Affidavit.pdf

Last edited: