April 27, 2006


Joe T's legal motion

By Meri, Aruban Boycott Blogger

First, there are RULES that one MUST follow when submitting ANY document before the Court. That extends from typos to length and actual wording of said documents.

I once submitted an Order To Show Cause on behalf of a client in a Divorce Petition and a Paralegal had hit the wrong key on her keyboard on ONE letter in ONE word and the entire motion was returned to our office and we had to scramble to re-do it in time for the scheduled Hearing. ONE word...actually, ONE letter was wrong and the Judge rejected the entire OSC.

I saw more than one error in Joe T's filing.

Joe T. claims that he found "Jane Doe" who gave an affidavit to one of the Aruban lawyers representing the Holloway/Twitty's regarding Joran's previous conduct and that he has her statement denying that Joran did any of the things that she claimed to said lawyer. So, who has the problem? The problem rests with the person giving the affidavit. Which lawyer did she lie to?

Of course, this is not helpful to the Holloway/Twitty family as the witness will have zero credibility for giving two different and opposite statements but is this the same "Jane Doe" that is named in John Kelly's original filing?

That is yet to be determined. I haven't heard John's response to Joe's claims. The original attorney would also be in peril of losing her license to practice if SHE did anything to falsify the original statement so we haven't heard from her as of yet either and I am wondering why she would risk her ability to practice law for people she doesn't know well and who she was paid to represent.

Most lawyers keep their motions brief because Judges are notorious for getting pissy when they are made to read book-sized motions so Joe risked angering the Judge by submitting a document that is so long. (Hello!? No kidding!)

I have to admit that I have NEVER, EVER seen a Motion that was one hundred plus pages long (neither have I) but I suppose that anything is possible. If Joe T's motion is an extension of how much he talks then I am not terribly surprised at it's length.

I want the civil case to go forward here in the USA but I question the jurisdictional validity of the suit and don't have a lot of hope. I DO have a lot of faith in the ability of John Kelly and know of his reputation. He is one of the best civil lawyers this country has to offer and he doesn't do frivolous lawsuits. He doesn't have to.

If the case is moved to Aruba then I can't see how a fair hearing would ever take place after watching the actions of the Judges deciding cases on that Island. It seems as if there are unseen influences afoot and although I can't prove this; I don't believe that Beth or Dave would get a fair and unbiased opinion or ruling. Maybe in Holland...but not on Aruba.

The truth is out there and there are people who know what it is. One of the commenter's on another article here may have put their finger on it.....maybe $250,000.00 isn't enough. (I thought Joe Mammana offered $1 million?) Or, the truth is only known by the people who are actually involved in Natalee's disappearance and no amount of money will make them talk. Maybe they are afraid of being harmed, or of going to jail or simply not important enough to overcome the influence of those attempting to keep the truth from coming out.

As the days pass and the anniversary of Natalee's disappearance grows closer I feel the truth slipping farther and farther away. The Prosecutor is leaving her post at the end of the year, the police working the case are NOT fresh and new as has been portrayed by the Aruban spinners (they have all been involved since day one), and any evidence that may have once existed is long gone or destroyed.

Amy Bradley comes to mind and I fear that Beth and Dave will be sitting here eight years from now asking the same questions. Chandra Levy comes to mind....her parents are also celebrating an anniversary...five years, and no one has been charged with her murder. At least in Chandra's case they found her and her family could lay her to rest.

Some cases never get solved and remain cold until by some quirk of fate (or new scientific discovery) the police re-open them and find the perpetrators based on new evidence. I hope that if Natalee's disappearance can't be solved now that someday it will be.

I suspect that it will happen in one of two ways....someone will talk or someone will re-offend. What a shame if we have to wait for the latter to occur. A shame for Beth and Dave and a shame for the next victim.

One thing is absolute fact, there are people who have invested their entire being in helping to find Natalee and that will not go away. She will never be forgotten or merely become a footnote in the annals of unsolved crimes on that corrupt Island or elsewhere.

Many of us have given our word to Beth and Dave and to Natalee that we won't give up and that means that her case will never be cold.


Anonymous said...

Rule 16. Motions in General.
(a) Form of Motion Papers. The movant shall specify in the notice of motion, order to show cause,
and in a concluding section of a memorandum of law, the exact relief sought. Counsel must attach
copies of all pleadings and other documents as required by the CPLR and as necessary for an informed decision on the motion (especially on motions pursuant to CPLR 3211 and 3212). Counsel should use tabs when submitting papers containing exhibits. Copies must be legible. If a document to be annexed to an affidavit or affirmation is voluminous and only discrete portions are relevant to the motion, counsel shall attach excerpts and submit the full exhibit separately. Documents in a foreign language shall be properly translated. CPLR 2101(b). Whenever reliance is placed upon a decision or other authority not readily available to the court, a copy of the case or of pertinent portions of the authority shall be submitted with the motion papers.

Joe Tacopina's Exhibit R does not contain a sample translation of the Dutch documents included in
the exhibit, and Joe T does not get an estimate of how much US dollars it would cost to get that
sample piece of Dutch documents translated. This unprofessinal preparation of his legal work has
demonstrated Joe T to be utterly unqualified for this civil lawsuit defense for Joran and Paul van der Sloot. Joe T is making empty and untrue claims in his last filing. And he is endangering the legal wellness of the Sloot family representation. The court has to dismiss Joe Tacopina now thereof preventing further legal damages to the Sloot family, and install
immediately a sound minded court appointed attorney for Joran and Paulus.

Danny said...

I think Tacopina's motion is terrific. It's well done. He destroys the veracity of Beth, Dave, JQK and several others. His cutting put downs and sarcasm are a little much for me. He blatntly calls Beth a liar and several times Plaintiffs are trying to pull the wool over the courts eyes. Stuff like that. My prediction - Tacopina wins hands down and the suit is totally dismissed. Then, unfortunately, the Holloway may never get answers. If this suit is dismissed Tacopina won't countersue anybody for anything, IMHO. From all I've read about Tacopina, Id expect nothing less. This dude hangs with scalia!

doug3 said...

I'm in it for the long haul

Anonymous said...

if hse's dead it's only $250,000, maybe not enough for high-rolling arubans. someone might be afraid that they cannot really start a new life with that, and it seems that paulus is well-conected enough to scare everyone!

Anonymous said...

danny, I don't care who Tacopina hangs with. He can call Beth anything he pleases, but his client(pussy Joran) is still a sociopath. Sociopaths can't be rehabilitated. papa Paulass pussy is also a liar. Hell, it looks like all the men are pussies in Aruba. The women are ****.

Doug, I'm also in it for the long haul.
I will never abandon Natalee or her family. They will learn the truth one way or the other.
Bank on it Aruba!

Anonymous said...

How long was JQK's original complaint?

Sue said...

to come forward to collect a reward requires the person telling what they know and becoming a suspect under aruban law ...there system is so screwy why would you talk if you will be arrested and then be labled a suspect