RICHARD RESPONDS--FREE SPEECH OR HATCHET JOB?

*You GO Richard!--Michelle

Sent to LA Times writer, Carol J. Williams

By Richard, Aruban Boycott Member


I have followed the Natalee Holloway case closely since it began. While free speech is to be encouraged, the tone of your article, which appeared online this morning, is so one-sided that I am forced to believe that your intention was to denigrate Natalee's family.


You say the Holloway Twittys have cast Aruba's "police force as inept bunglers." Well, let's see ... within 48 hours of Natalee's disappearance, Beth Twitty had arrived on the island, reviewed the videotapes at the Holiday Inn where Natalee had stayed, proved conclusively that the lies of the three suspects about returning her to the hotel were just that -- lies -- and had shown those same tapes to Aruban police.


Who had Aruba seen fit to arrest? The three people last seen with Natalee? No, two security guards who had never been seen in Natalee's company and who were singled out by the suspects themselves.


What was Aruba's reaction to Beth Twitty's proof? To do nothing for another week. Sterling proof of the quality of law enforcement on Aruba, wouldn't you say?


(Incidentally, your comment that "investigators no longer seem to be focusing on the three named suspects" has neither attribution nor logic: a court for the Netherlands Antilles recently ruled that the three remain suspects. The court also struck down damages that Paulus van der Sloot had claimed, saying that witnesses had placed him in Natalee's company on two occasions on the night that she disappeared.)


You speak about "the ill fate presumed to have befallen Natalee Holloway" and sneer at the "vigilante justice seekers." Obviously it's ridiculous to think that, simply because an honors high-school student with a full scholarship to medical school has been missing for two years, foul play could be responsible. Equally ridiculous is the idea that anyone seeking justice -- which the family has interpreted as simply wanting answers to their daughter's fate -- could be motivated by such things as belief that an American missing abroad is a matter of some importance. Why see a potential threat to other tourists? Why not do what Dennis Jacobs said to Dave Holloway (after asking how much money he had ... a normal response from a dedicated law enforcement officer, I'm certain): go to the bar and have a beer?


You seem to accept as fact Aruba's assertion that the damage from the economic boycott has ended. Were you interested, I could direct you to article showing that the decline is both more severe than Aruba has acknowledged (assuming that you trust Aruba's figures to begin with) and is continuing.


My understanding is that the Aruban government gave civil servants an afternoon, not a day, to join the search. And according to an AP article, participation was far less than Aruba put it.


The attorney for the Kalpoes, one of whom said on the Dr. Phil show that Natalee was a "slut" and dressed "like a slut," laments that his clients have had "this sword over their heads for two years now." The Holloway Twitty family has had a different sword over their heads for two years ... the agony of wondering what befell their daughter. I know which plight is more deserving of sympathy, in my eyes.


Perhaps you would care to detail the scores of lies that we have gotten from the three suspects. Given that Joran van der Sloot has given at least four explanations of how he got home from the beach where he said he took Natalee (though he also said he took her to his house), some people might think his actions merit suspicion. And given his father's now-famous phrase, "No body, no crime," those suspicions might be extended.


Your nearly page-long coverage of the "compassion for a desperate mother" that Julia Renfro is alleged to have felt omits a few facts. Such as Joran van der Sloot's statement that he had sex with Natalee while she was drifting in and out of consciousness. Some people might define that as rape.


And Renfro's speculations about what Natalee might have done conveniently try to take the focus off the three suspects ... whom former Chief of Police Gerald Dompig has said are "guilty as hell." A drunken Natalee, left on the beach, is going to swin to one of the nearby boats? No writer for a sixth-grade newspaper would let such an absurd claim go unquestioned.


I am not going to discuss my ideas of what happened to Natalee Holloway. But I might suggest that you balance your pro-Aruban account with a little background.


Such as: the FBI agents sent to Aruba were outraged that they were being slighted, not allowed to do anything useful, and were kept out of the picture.

Such as: far from being sympathetic, the Aruban government lied about the support it was giving the family (Dave Holloway is on record as denying the free rooms and other benefits).

Such as: a water search was on the verge of being launched, and all that Aruba had to do was contact the FBI. It refused to do so.

Such as: the Aruban government's sympathy did not extend to Beth Twitty, whom it told would have to apologize for her statements or it would stop its investigation.

Such as: Arubans demonstrated in the street against Beth Twitty. (Did your self-commiserating Arubans, sad at the impact of this tragedy on their businesses, see fit to mention this?)

Such as: an unqualified, specific promise from Steve Cohen, one of the many functionaries who tried to represent the Aruban government, that the three suspects would be re-questioned. It never happened.


I could cite dozens more issues. But why bother? I do not speak for the Holloway Twitty family. But your totally one-sided article leaves me doubting that they would speak to you.


I appreciate your attention and assistance on this matter.