GUILTY Peru - Stephany Flores, 21, murdered in Lima hotel room, 30 May 2010 #23

[FLNY]

I'm guessing the interview will include a segment with Joran's lawyer. He's a former police officer, and claimed in a recent article that prisoners are manipulated in order to extract a confession. That happens everywhere, so I don't see that as a big problem. The lawyer considers the confession to be an obstacle, but believes he may be able to have the sentence reduced to as low a 5 years. If the trial is delayed by 3 years, there's a possibility that Joran will have to be released - although I'm not clear on that.

Otto, I'd be interested in seeing that article with the interview of Joran's lawyer. I haven't come across it anywhere on the net. I assume it was his lawyer in Peru, not the Netherlands, right? Was it a written article or do you have a link? TIA!

 

[nums24]

Dutch paper: Van der Sloot admits extortionBy the CNN Wire StaffSeptember 6, 2010 -- Updated 2040 GMT (0440 HKT)

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/0....extortion/?hpt=T2#fbid=RraGDqDPznb&wom=false

 

[nums24]

"It doesn't matter if he is innocent or guilty," says van der Sloot lawyer

http://www.cbs42.com/content/localn...nt-or-guilty-says/bxV0HdOlq0ewQDKwS_1HrQ.cspx

 

[nums24]

Also Monday, a Peruvian court voted 2-1 to reject van der Sloot's contention that he is being held unlawfully, but the court requires three votes to secure a decision. Alteza said that a fourth jurist will hear the case and cast a vote at a public hearing next week. If that judge votes in favor of van der Sloot, a fifth judge will hear the case to break the tie.

Alteza said that van der Sloot's constitutional rights have been violated and he "could be released because of the mistakes made by the police during the investigation."

"It doesn't matter if he is innocent or guilty," he said.


http://edition.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/0....extortion/?hpt=T2#fbid=RraGDqDPznb&wom=false

 

[otto]

Otto, I'd be interested in seeing that article with the interview of Joran's lawyer. I haven't come across it anywhere on the net. I assume it was his lawyer in Peru, not the Netherlands, right? Was it a written article or do you have a link? TIA!

It was a Dutch article ... I'll look for it. Maybe Rotterdam read it and can post a summary or link.

 

[georger]

I wouldn't be surprised if Joran developed a skewed perception of law, justice, and prosecution ... not by design, but simply because he didn't take the time to fully appreciate his father's career. I suspect he understands crime and punishment as a series of legal maneuvers, where innocence and guilt are dependent on the best legal argument rather than right and wrong.

His last 5 years have been a continuum of toying with investigators. He admits guilt - and then plays with their heads using legal mumbo jumbo, claiming he was high on pot, or seeking revenge because he perceives that someone made his life difficult.

He probably thought the murder of Stephany, exactly 5 years to the day after the disappearance of Natalee, as some sort of coup de grâce where he would finally put it all behind him ... most likely with that cocky assumption that he was above the law, could sneak out of the country, and be protected by international extradition laws. I think he fully expected that Stephany would not be noticed missing for some time, that parking her vehicle in the slums would lead to a local suspect, that he could travel to Chile, and that he could return to Aruba free and clear. I don't think he expected for a moment that he was be expelled to Peru, instead expecting that he'd be extradited to Aruba or the Netherlands, and become untouchable. If Stephany had not come from a prominent family, Joran's assumptions would most likely have been correct. If Joran had not been spooked by the police at the airport in Lima, he would have been free and clear.

The hardest part for me is separating what is personal from what is is familial
and/or cultural, in Joran. In either case, I see Joran as a typical predator
and predation requires a territory, usually a protected territory where
the acts of predation can occur without too much interference. When
the predator is thwarted they usually cry out: "my rights have been violated"!
What else can a predator do except protest then chose to fight, or not.

Joran clearly blames Stephany on the Holloway mess and the Holloways.
Joran's mother says the same, for "her sporter". Predator and Moma Predator?
And ... Hollow is to blame because of some former violation of Joran's right's
and priveleges nobody has bothered to explain yet? The Dutch are rather schizoid
this way: They like anarchy but they also want order? That is a playfield few would
chose to exist on, or tolerate for very long. But it is a prescription for Colonial Rule!

Stephany's first mistake was going to Joran's room, at all. That speaks
of Stephany's ambivalence. At some point Stephany's family is going to
express its outrage - that is inevitable. I hope Joran and his supporters
are prepared for this, because Joran's legal problems are the least of his problems.
Blood is thicker than water and that Law predates all law.
That is a Law Joran understands. That is a universal even in Joran's
world. Life is finite and the wheel turns. Joran knows this ...

 

[otto]

The hardest part for me is separating what is personal from what is is familial
and/or cultural, in Joran. In either case, I see Joran as a typical predator
and predation requires a territory, usually a protected territory where
the acts of predation can occur without too much interference. When
the predator is thwarted they usually cry out: "my rights have been violated"!
What else can a predator do except protest then chose to fight, or not.

Joran clearly blames Stephany on the Holloway mess and the Holloways.
Joran's mother says the same, for "her sporter". Predator and Moma Predator?
And ... Hollow is to blame because of some former violation of Joran's right's
and priveleges nobody has bothered to explain yet? The Dutch are rather schizoid
this way: They like anarchy but they also want order? That is a playfield few would
chose to exist on, or tolerate for very long. But it is a prescription for Colonial Rule!

Stephany's first mistake was going to Joran's room, at all. That speaks
of Stephany's ambivalence. At some point Stephany's family is going to
express its outrage - that is inevitable. I hope Joran and his supporters
are prepared for this, because Joran's legal problems are the least of his problems.
Blood is thicker than water and that Law predates all law.
That is a Law Joran understands. That is a universal even in Joran's
world. Life is finite and the wheel turns. Joran knows this ...

I don't like reading that anyone believes that Dutch people like anarchy or that they are schizoid. I think there has been a serious misunderstanding of the Dutch history and culture.

Joran is responsble for his actions, not his parents, siblings, grandparents, teachers, friends, or ancestry. Joran was raised by Dutch parents in Aruba. He left the Netherlands at the age of 2. His familial influence would be Dutch, cultural would be Aruban.

Joran blamed Stephany for murdering her. In his confession, he stated that she intruded in his private things (his computer), and after hitting her once with his elbow, he decided to murder her. His mother said that the events of the 5 years prior to Joran's arrest were difficult for Joran and may have had an impact on his life path. I think that's a given. It doesn't mean that Joran's parents or mother blame Natalee for Joran's actions.

 

[LadyL]

yeah my Dutch father-in-law would disagree with those statements about the Dutch

murderers exist everywhere - in different cultures and countries

I'm a bit offended at the generalizations

 

[asiabrasil]

Also Monday, a Peruvian court voted 2-1 to reject van der Sloot's contention that he is being held unlawfully, but the court requires three votes to secure a decision. Alteza said that a fourth jurist will hear the case and cast a vote at a public hearing next week. If that judge votes in favor of van der Sloot, a fifth judge will hear the case to break the tie.

Alteza said that van der Sloot's constitutional rights have been violated and he "could be released because of the mistakes made by the police during the investigation."

"It doesn't matter if he is innocent or guilty," he said.


http://edition.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/0....extortion/?hpt=T2#fbid=RraGDqDPznb&wom=false

I'm a bit surprised one of the 3 judges sided with JVDS. There must be some merit to the accusations. Hopefully the 4th. judge will straighten everything out next week......:waitasec:

 

[panthera]

I'm a bit surprised one of the 3 judges sided with JVDS. There must be some merit to the accusations. Hopefully the 4th. judge will straighten everything out next week......:waitasec:

Or it could be a liberal or defense-prone judge. I agree, hopefully there will finally be a resolution by the fourth judge. MOO

 

[jilly]

I'm a bit surprised one of the 3 judges sided with JVDS. There must be some merit to the accusations. Hopefully the 4th. judge will straighten everything out next week......:waitasec:

That's what I'm hoping. Strange system.

 

[FLNY]

I'm a bit surprised one of the 3 judges sided with JVDS. There must be some merit to the accusations. Hopefully the 4th. judge will straighten everything out next week......:waitasec:

I agree, Asiabrasil. I've been worried why this decision was taking so long and now I'm even more worried at what's prevented a unanimous vote.

Let's hope the Peruvian LE didn't mess something up at the beginning. I can only pray that Joran doesn't manage to slip thru the cracks again!! :banghead:

 

[annalia]

The way I understand it even if they throw out the confession that doesn't mean he will be set free like in Aruba. They have enough evidence on him without it.

 

[georger]

Joran blamed Stephany for murdering her. In his confession, he stated that she intruded in his private things (his computer), and after hitting her once with his elbow, he decided to murder her. His mother said that the events of the 5 years prior to Joran's arrest were difficult for Joran and may have had an impact on his life path. I think that's a given. It doesn't mean that Joran's parents or mother blame Natalee for Joran's actions.[/quote]

No man is an island entire of itself but a piece of the continent and a part of the maine, ...

Without reciprocity there are no laws possible, in physics or in human affairs. And the human species has refined social interconnectedness
to a fine essential fact of existence, for survival.

I suppose we could go back and blame Hydrogen for it all.:waitasec:

 

[georger]

That's what I'm hoping. Strange system.

Not really imho. It's their system and they have every legal right to it.
It is part of what being sovereign means in the global system of sovereign
communities & nations. When you step onto another person's sovereign soil you are agreeing to that, or you should not go there to begin with!
Peru did not invite Joran to come with diplomatic immunity.

Look at this now from Stephany's family's perspective! They must be
beside themselves. God grant them the grace & strength to survive this! My heart
bleeds for them.

 

[FLNY]

Joran's Dutch attorney thinks his TV interview was a big mistake!!

"The Dutch lawyer for Joran van der Sloot a mystery why circus Joran's yet again gave a performance.

'No, it is generally not useful for defendants to seek publicity,' says Bert de Rooij in the Volkskrant.

Although he says is currently engaging in spiritual matters , the interview creates an image of a narcissistic young man horny on publicity.

de Rooij says, 'Such publicity is not in the interest of Joran.' He wants the Peruvian lawyer for Van der Sloot [to] not [be] the driving wheels . 'Perhaps he has something up where it just fits perfectly.' "

http://translate.google.com/transla...indt-interview-met-Joran-onbegrijpelijk.dhtml


So, it appears that the Peruvian lawyer, not deRooij, is calling all the shots!!

MOO

 

[FLNY]

"Declarations of Joran Van der Sloot have no legal value, say
Julio Rodríguez, a criminal lawyer in [Peru].

Counsel explained that the statement by the 23 years cannot be taken into account, since at the time of the interview was not available respective guarantees, ie should have been present his lawyer and a representative of the Ministry Public to ensure that the accused did not speak under pressure.

'Definitely the version given in the media cannot be taken into account. He has sold a book in the previous case, expressed in relation to what Van der Sloot was to be linked to the disappearance of American Natalee Holloway. In this sense, it ruled that his recent statements are part of a "personal stake." ' "

http://translate.googleusercontent....&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhj8Une6kCRkA5uyQmkpU7Cs66ZArA

Darn!! I thought that his admitting to the extortion would stick!! MOO

 

[FLNY]

OK...Will somebody help me with this? To me, it sounds as though the 3 judges' ruling was 2-to-1 IN FAVOR OF JORAN?? How could that be?? Maybe I'm getting lost in translation or just don't understand the way the legal terms are being explained. HELP!! :blushing::waitasec::blushing:

"Judges Rita Zapata Arturo Meza Walde and Carbajal [original Spanish text: 'Rita Meza Walde y Arturo Zapata Carbajal'] of the Third Board Pernales with Prison Inmates in the Court of Lima were in favor of the irrelevance of constitutional requirement, while Malzon Urbina La Torre voted to confirm the decision of first instance declared the constitutional complaint as unfounded.

Judges Meza Carbajal Walde and Zapata [original Spanish text: 'Meza Walde y Zapata Carbajal'] were in favor of impropriety because the defense of citizens appeared before the Dutchman Provincial Prosecutor of Lima 48 criminal charges on the facts that includes the habeas corpus, which is in progress and pending resolution.

In the first instance ruling, the judge of Criminal Court of Lima 20, Wilder declared unfounded habeas corpus filed by Van der Sloot."

http://translate.googleusercontent....&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhhhCbegmcwcGLuhaOvBjFVq2MDWTA

 

[annalia]

"Declarations of Joran Van der Sloot have no legal value, say
Julio Rodríguez, a criminal lawyer in [Peru].

Counsel explained that the statement by the 23 years cannot be taken into account, since at the time of the interview was not available respective guarantees, ie should have been present his lawyer and a representative of the Ministry Public to ensure that the accused did not speak under pressure.

'Definitely the version given in the media cannot be taken into account. He has sold a book in the previous case, expressed in relation to what Van der Sloot was to be linked to the disappearance of American Natalee Holloway. In this sense, it ruled that his recent statements are part of a "personal stake." ' "

http://translate.googleusercontent....&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhj8Une6kCRkA5uyQmkpU7Cs66ZArA

Darn!! I thought that his admitting to the extortion would stick!! MOO

Who is to say that this attorney is correct though? I'm pretty sure that if it ever came to trial in the US, whatever he said about his involvement can be brought in. He did the media interview willingly and unlike all the times he told stories about what he did with Natalee and took it all back, there is corroborating evidence. But just like Stephany's murder it looks like the FBI has the evidence they need without his confessing, what an idiot to send all of those emails and think he would get away with it.

 

[FLNY]

From this CNN recap of the TV interview, it just seems like the same old 'good guy' stuff from Joran...

* "For everything that's happened since 2005, all the things said in the media and everything, I feel guilty for, yeah,"

* van der Sloot said he feels guilty about his father's fatal heart attack, for not listening to his mother and for telling lies, as well as his past behavior

* "I was doing a lot of things that I shouldn't have been doing, and mostly only going out all the night and sleeping all the day," he said, describing himself as "impulsive."

* He said, he has "misused the situation for my own advantage." He said he feels bad about that and would take it back if he had the opportunity.

* van der Sloot would not answer questions about the Flores case, saying it is "not in my best interest to talk about it at all."

* Asked if he will ever disclose what happened, he said, "When I speak to the judge, and the time is right, I'm going to tell the whole truth, absolutely."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/09/07/peru.vandersloot/index.html#fbid=IKA4GaNTjtI&wom=false

He's seen the light, he's seen the light!! NOT!!

MOO