February 09, 2006

FINALLY! AN AGREEMENT WITH ARUBA TRUTH!

I have to agree wholeheartedly with Aruba Truth that this interview with the Van der Sloots was a definite ratings booster.


As a avid viewer of Good Morning America, I no longer take what they say seriously and now have lumped them in with the likes of Entertainment Tonight or A Current Affair. The bloodsuckers got their ratings and didn't even have the decency to inform Beth and Dave of the interview in advance. ABC is CLASSLESS, UNPROFESSIONAL, UNETHICAL and definitely AMORAL. I hope you sleep well tonight in your $500 bed sheets.



Aruba Truth

The highly promoted interview with Paulus and Anita van der Sloot brought nothing new to the investigation of their son Joran’s involvement in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. In fact, ABC’s Good Morning America had to agree to enough strigent conditions in the interview that it could only be what it was, a parents’ support of their son.

The family has always contended that Joran’s only flaw was leaving Natalee, alive he said, on the beach that fateful night. So they had an opportunity to repeat that to a national audience, after being promoted in a SuperBowl promotion. ABC never intended to make news with the interview, only to drive an audience to the Good Morning America program at the start of their February rating period.

Also as expected the Holloway Twitty family forcefully denounced the couple for their views and offered again that Paulus himself had a role in the disappearance of their daughter. Attorney John Kelly remarked that Joran is and has always been the key to finding out what happened that evening.

In sum, a ratings grabber used to good advantage by both ABC and the van der Sloots. But, it brought nothing new to the understanding of what happened the night she disappeared.

Investigation Continues

As reported over the last weeks, the investigation continues along the lines projected by the prosecution. The Alabama teens were questioned and the results are now in investigators’ hands. Other witnesses in Aruba have come forward, some have been re-interviewed. A dig by the dunes at the Lighthouse did commence. And files have been reviewed in Holland by Karen Janssen.

Also the prosecutor assigned by Theresa Croes, Attorney General, is completing an independent review of the case to be presented to the prosecutor.

All of this suggests an attention to detail and a firm commitment to compile all evidence and testimony in the hope that a case can be constructed to present to the court.

A “wait and see” mood by the Holloway Twitty family

Unlike other periods in the course of the investigation, the Holloway Twitty family seems prepared to “wait and see” what results from this current phase of the inquiry. There is much less acrimony, no talk of boycotts, and attorney John Kelly admits he is getting the briefings he needs to inform the family.

Only Beth Twitty, herself, seems intent, when at a loss for any new information, to ask viewers to call their representatives to pressure Aruba. She continues to claim that such pressure will somehow acclerate the process. Even her attorney, always calm in the center of this storm, has backed away from such efforts, because he sees that work is being actively pursued to come up with a case.

Still, the level of acrimony and the sense of anger has been diluted by the aggressive pursuit of the case by prosecutors.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Michelle,
Why do you think that ABC should have told beth and dave in advance of this interview? Why did they need to be informed? No one lets the Van Der Sloot family know whenever Beth or Dave go on the air. I truly believe this is why this case seems so bad. Beth does not have to be told everything daily. Some is just classified information that will someday come out in court.
I am not being sarcastic here, just wondering your view on why you think that the family of Natalee should have been informed, when the van der sloots never are i'm sure.
Look forward to your response.

Anonymous said...

(1) OUT OF COMMON COURTESY

(2) How do you know what interview information the Van der Sloots get? Do you have communication with them?

Anonymous said...

I found this on the blog of Gretas at on the record..fox news for today.

Speaking of planes, I missed my first plane out of Boston on Monday. Missing that plane turned out was annoying at first, but it turned out to be a stroke of luck because on the flight I did board, I ran into someone who had some important information for me on the Natalee Holloway case. The person approached me and we talked for a few minutes. We could not talk long because the doors to the plane were closing. We talked later that night by phone and again yesterday by phone for about 45 minutes. The person is reluctant to come forward, so I am working on persuading him/her. I guess the headline is: Stay Tuned. Incidentally, I don't want to overstate this since I am not giving you lots of information. The person has some very important information to the news story, but this information will not solve it.

Anonymous said...

"Still, the level of acrimony and the sense of anger have been diluted by the aggressive pursuit of the case by prosecutors."

Say what? Are you people who said this living on the same planet, called Earth?

Natalee Holloway's disappearance is now in its ninth month. Aruba has provided no answers and shows no likelihood of doing so, or of making any diligent efforts.

I mean, honestly, how many Aruban police does it require to do a whitewash? (Not necessarily of the rocks in the middle of a vacant beach ... those guys might have been from another department.)

The acrimony and sense of anger remain at fever pitch. And they're not in any way diminished by seeing crapola like the van der Sloot interview put on our TV screens.

But I've got a little secret that the Aruban apologists who come here can pass on to their paymasters in the van der Sloot family and the Aruba Tourism Authority ... this case is not going away. Nor are Beth Twitty and family. Nor are we, the Americans who want an answer and will continue to press for one.

We'll still be angry when we get one, but when we do ... then the vdS mafia can start singing their swan song. Of course, swans are things of beauty and the vdS gang is anything but that .... But the phrase "grub song" or "cockroach song" just doesn't cut it.

Anonymous said...

Michelle,
Do you really think that the Van der Sloot family gets calls from Greta, Rita, Nancy, Joe, Fox & Friends, and more every time they want to interview a family member of Natalee's? Of course not. That is common sense, and is easy to assume because of the fact that all these shows take the position that Joran is guilty, and do not ask questions to Beth that would dispute her claims.
Your answer of the first question, being out of courtesy, does not work in real news organizations. They do not have to bounce anything off the family, whether we like it or not, because they are not working on an agenda. We might not like the fact that Joran's parents were on a highly watched show (more viewers easily than Greta or Rita), but we should not say that they should not have a forum to speak in. My wife works for a major local news broadcast (not fair to call it the MSM, since Fox News and Conservative talk shows on the radio dominate now), and they do what GMA did - show a story, and really let you decide. GMA did not present the Van Der Sloot family in a way in which we are supposed to feel sympathy for them, or hate Beth because it the interview. They simply showed the other side of the story.
It is obvious to anyone who watches Beth nightly, that she has a lot of accusations aimed at the father or Joran. What would we be as Americans if we did not let him respond. One sided anything is no good.
I know you don't always agree with me, but you post my comments and will even debate ideas. I respect that about you, even if I don't always agree with you, or your tactics. The Van der Sloots should have been allowed (and were allowed) to express their thoughts without having the other side (Twitty family) have any input.

Anonymous said...

Stickypete, why don't you ask the 3,000 members of the Nat'l Sheriff's Assoc. what the difference is. Obviously you're unaware of the distinction between victim and perpetrator.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous, you obviously are unaware of the concept of free speech and innocence presumed until found guilty in a court of law. Pray to whatever deity to whom you subscribe that you never end up accused of anything in a society that lacks these fundamentals. You sure must like them good old westerns with them there posses stringin up varmints by the neck, eh, cowboy?

Anonymous said...

StickyPete, I agree that the Sloots should be able to talk but not under stipulations.. The only reason they did the interview was they could only be asked certain things..Thats why Greta and them are not talking to them..

When they want to step up and answer the real questions and give truthful answers then it might be different..
If Joran is Not guilty he should take a lie detector test with the FBI.

Anonymous said...

Sue, why in the name of god should he have to submit to a lie detector test administered by a foreign policing agency? That's ridiculous. No American accused of a crime could ever be coerced into one.

Anonymous said...

Fresca said, "Anonymous, you obviously are unaware of the concept of free speech and innocence presumed until found guilty in a court of law. Pray to whatever deity to whom you subscribe that you never end up accused of anything in a society that lacks these fundamentals. You sure must like them good old westerns with them there posses stringin up varmints by the neck, eh, cowboy?"

First, I adore cowboys, so thank you, although I'm a girl and without a horse.

The presumption of innocence is a legal standard established for trials in the U.S. to meet the requirements of the due process clause in the constitution because the burden of proof is on the prosecution. It has no force or effect on the thoughts and expressions of a private person. Jurors are required to observe the presumtion for purposes of trial, and that's it.

Free speech, which is guaranteed in our First Amendment, protects individuals against governmental restrictions on political speech, religious speech and expression, and all personal expression. This is a private website, so the concept of "free speech" doesn't enter into the picture anyway. The government is not involved. You are always responsible for what you say, and you should be prepared for opinions dissenting from your own. Just because you can say what you like doesn't mean you get to say it unfettered from dissent or ridicule.

So, you are the one who has no understanding of the protections our systems of justice affords us or WHEN they apply. You need to turn off your reruns of Scooby Doo so you can study and develop some critical thinking skills. Rid your mind of all the moral equivalency garbage they've been feeding you in the public school indoctrination swamps and the leftwing blogs. Yes, Fresca, there IS a difference between right and wrong, and wrong is always wrong, and right is always right. DO NOT tell us that we may not or should not judge a matter as right or wrong, but should quietly accept rather than vociferously and actively object to what the government of a third world banana republic shithole says we must accept because of their corruption and incompetence.

Got that? Good.

Anonymous said...

Well if he claims to NOT have any information, What does he have to hide from.. If he didnt committ
a crime, why not step forward.. if he doesnt he has something to hide.. People who are innocent dont run from polygraphs

Anonymous said...

Glock, you try awful hard to sound smart but still end up sounding like a school yard bully blowing smoke out his ass. The concept is that given no crime has been proven against these people, no fault should be placed on those who would ask that they tell their story.

Nice touch on the 'banana republic shitholes'. That made you feel tough I bet... How many unsolved murders in the US last year sunshine?

Quit the bullying behavior, it demonstrates your inadequacies as a man in real life to act tough on the internet.

Got it? Good.

Anonymous said...

They destroyed all the bodies, they don't have to solve any murders. They said they are crime free society.

Anonymous said...

No one has EVER said Aruba is crime free (at least anyone who knows what they are talking about). They are LOW crime. Especially compared to our major tourist destinations here in the states, and in Mexico, Jamaica, San Juan, Nassau, and many thousands more.