Beth Twitty and her aruban attorney, Helen Lejeux were on with Greta Van Sustern this evening. Beth stated that she would be returning to Aruba shortly, though no date was given. Helen Lejeux stated the prosecutors office is telling her that they are continuing the investigation and working hard. That includes reviewing all documents and basically looking at everything new under conditions of less pressure as there isn't currently the level of press attention as before.
When questioned as to her thoughts if the investigation needed more time, Beth responded typically, saying she didn't know, but couldn't understand why the three boys haven't been arrested as a result of Deepak's confession and Joran's statements.
The ever objective journalist, Greta interjected she was unpersuaded any progress was being made. Apparently ALE are still waiting for the tapes from Skeeters. Greta inquired of Lejeux if Natalee could be declared dead so that Beth could file a civil suit against the boys. Lejeux stated that there is a method to have Natalee declared legally dead without a body, however, the prosecutors have not shown her all or any evidence and are telling her that they do not as yet have any proof of the boy's guilt.
Beth expressed concern as to whether ALE had records of statements from the first night in Aruba, particularly as regards specific statements of Joran Van Der Sloot. This, Beth said, should include a statement from a DEA agent present - Erik something, perhaps? I missed the name.
I do have at least something to add here as regards those statements, though I am sure it is hearsay. If you go back and see this post, it is the story of that first night as it was relayed to me in early June. I was contacted by an individual associated with the Alabama side of this equation to set the record straight as regards certain aspects of the trip and the early investigation.
Among other topics, we specifically but very imprecisely discussed Joran Van Der Sloot's statements that evening as relayed from an individual there. During that conversation it was clear to me that Joran made statements indicating some type of sexual activity between he and Natalee. I know that because the individual stated that Joran talked about certain aspects of his time that my source preferred not to go into as there was no need and they were not the type of issue which needed to be discussed in public.
I agreed. However, it is important that I also state for the record that I absolutely believe that while those statements of Joran's may have been of a sexual nature, never was I given any indication, or reason to believe that they suggested any illegal activity. In fact, the statement have been termed "unbelievable" to me precisely because they were alleged to address some form of consensual sex.
In additional conversations with another individual in a position to know, I was also told that Joran claimed, in effect, that Natalee wanted to partake in whatever sexual activity might have been said to have taken place with Joran.
On Fox tonight it appeared as though statements from Americans present that night have been put into the form of affidavits and are being provided to ALE. If those statements claim some form of rape, or sexual assault, it will certainly be news to me and also a big surprise as a result of multiple previous discussions on this very topic with highly credible sources back in June and July.
To be a bit more specific as it now seems this topic is in the news:
The police set about questioning the two boys. They are said to have claimed at that time that the now missing Natalee Holloway did indeed leave Carlos And Charlies with them and the entire group went to the lighthouse area together prior to dropping Natalee back at her hotel. The boys also made additional claims consistent with other earlier reports.
With Natalee's Mother said to have remained in the car, possibly out of the emotion involved in meeting two of the now three boys alleged to have been the last to see her daughter alive, others in the group including the Stepfather were present as the questioning continued for approximately an hour. Certain aspects of the discussion, some said to have involved Joran Van der Sloot's Father, led to the discussion becoming heated and police officers requested that the group disperse. More than one individual among the group of Americans present at the Joran home that night report a belief that the boys were lying and did indeed do something to harm Natalee Holloway.
The first bold section above is the full extent to which I felt it necessary to address the sexual nature of that night's discussion. When I said it was consistent with earlier reports, I believe those reports claimed some type of consensual sexual activity with Natalee. The second part in bold dealt with information I was given as regards an altercation which started between Jug Twitty and Paulus Van Der Sloot when Jug is said to have made a comment as to Paulus being an unfit parent as a result of allowing his son to be out late at night and at a casino. It was only much later that Joran claimed to have sneaked out of the house.
Again, you can read the post mentioned above here.


Thanks Dan! Good job as always!
Bigfish
Posted by: Bigfish | Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 11:01 PM
Nice writeup.
Posted by: Fish&Chips | Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 11:06 PM
Very interesting. Its clear to me that the Alabama gang made up their mind that night and they have steered, no hijacked, the investigative path in that direction ever since.
Posted by: HenriLaFleur | Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 11:29 PM
dan that report of yours is what got me hooked on the case. thanks for the amplification re joran's statements.
Posted by: iquitos | Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 11:40 PM
more on that night from birmingham news: http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1119172919287360.xml&coll=2
Posted by: iquitos | Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 11:49 PM
So it seems to be clear that Joran stated there was sex that first night and he now denied any sex on A Current Affair.
Posted by: DarcyD | Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 11:52 PM
I have to say taht was like starting over for me. I felt all of those initial feelings, you know it can get crazy in here and easy to forget what is fact and what is not. It was nice to read some of the initial reporting. Isn't that really where the focus should stay. It gets cutthroat in here and minds are hijacked by the dozen I swear! And Dan you sounded alot nicer back then. Chill don't let it change you.
Posted by: RJ | Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 11:52 PM
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
I would hope that most, if not all my readers would agree that our best thoughts, feelings and prayers should be supportive of and with Natalee, her family and community just now - and it serves no good purpose to turn our frustrations into unfounded accusations and anger directed at what, by and large, are all just innocent victims of a terrible ordeal.
May God help likely the most innocent and victimized of all - Natalee Holloway.
dan, ireally like how you concluded your article on 14 june. i hope people can still feel compassion for all involved
Posted by: chip | Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 11:57 PM
So it seems to be clear that Joran stated there was sex that first night and he now denied any sex on A Current Affair."
I wouldn't say that is an accurate statement. True, he did not go into detail and even tried to avoid the question on CA. But I honestly think the facts may all hang together - emphasis may. There is sex and there is sex - how you parse that statement can result in very different statements at different times.
If we were to phrase it - has Joran changed his statement as regards what activities took place with NH that night, that MIGHT be consistent. I'm not sure - but it is possible.
Posted by: Dan | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:19 AM
Is it safe in here?
Posted by: Gina | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:27 AM
I was reading on the other threads the interpetations and vjerin (not sure spelled right) would be something like make love and seks wouldmean sex.
Posted by: Gina | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:29 AM
Lejeux stated that there is a method to have Natalee declared legally dead without a body, however, the prosecutors have not shown her all or any evidence and are telling her that they do not as yet have any proof of the boy's guilt.
****
Dan, Helen L. stated that Natalee could be declared legally dead without a body, IN FIVE YEARS.
Good report.
Posted by: sensible | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:33 AM
Dan, I'm proud of you. This entry was not hypocritical at all. I actually got reminded of things that happened early on in this case when I read that. You're doing much better tonight! I know I'm not on your list of regular a**kissers, but I agree this time.
Posted by: Dummyhunter | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:33 AM
They can only keep the boys as suspects for two years so if Natalee cannot be declared dead til after 5 years then the boys will be off the hook it woudl seem because of the 2 year verses 5 year time spam. This is so screwed up. I t makes me sick. They basically will get away with murder and hiding and disposing of the body.
I hope they all burn in hell. All that were involved. !!!!
Posted by: ! | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:41 AM
It's about time that the statements of the people who were with the HT's the first night were taken. Four months later ? What the hell kind of an investigation was taking place there ? There was a DEA agent there with them. Hope one of the statements was his.
You know, even after all this time, there has been no one answer as to how Joran got home.
Paulus came to pick him up, he walked home or Deepak came to pick him up.
Posted by: Kat_Gram | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:51 AM
They basically will get away with murder and hiding and disposing of the body.
I hope they all burn in hell. All that were involved. !!!!
Posted by: ! | Oct 14, 2005 12:41:09 AM
So like you were there and saw them do this? What an idiot!
Posted by: sowrong | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 01:27 AM
They basically will get away with murder and hiding and disposing of the body.
I hope they all burn in hell. All that were involved. !!!!
Posted by: ! | Oct 14, 2005 12:41:09 AM
So like you were there and saw them do this? What an idiot!
Posted by: sowrong | Oct 14, 2005 1:27:06 AM
Back to no facts wanted....just lynch them. How DO they function in life with such closed mind?
Posted by: nursemind | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 01:47 AM
I don't think ALE have those statements from that first night, including the DEA agent's, but they're finally on their way now after they were taken again and processed 'legally' here in the states. That's what I got from BH's attorney tonight and all of this has been talked about for a very long time. So has JVDS's confession of sex while she was "waking up and falling asleep" to some of the ones present that first night.
Some other stuff came out more recently like JVDS's description of NH's underwear, him asking Jug to wait in the car while he told the others about his 'romp' with his step-daughter, and ALE handing Beth an "altered" statement to sign while she sat eating in a local restaurant.
Whenever they spill something new many think "more lies" but others remember they always said there were things they knew but couldn't talk about. And they didn't until the 'suspects' were set free and it became clear that justice for Natalee was never a part of ALE's plan.
Posted by: kin | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 02:13 AM
Reporter: Did anything else happened that night?
Joran van der Sloot: No. Well, yes, I kissed with her. but., neither did Deepak or Satish ever had sex with her and no one ever said otherwise. I saw a tape from Deepak on TV saying something, which makes absolutely no sense. I think that tape was edited. I think people cut and pasted these pieces. I am sure about that, cause it didn▓t even sound like Deepak▓s voice. But, not me, not Deepak or Satish had sex with her and that is in all the documents. And none of us had ever said anything like that. and yeah I just think it is sad how Natalee▓s mom comes forward and starts saying things against us that don▓t make sense and are not true.
http://scrux.com/natalee/joranunedited.htm
Posted by: George | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 03:43 AM
Dan, I have to agree with another of the posters. You seem very stressed. A different person then you were when I first started reading your blog about 6 months ago.
Don't listen to what the gang bangers have to say. Be yourself and you will be fine.
Posted by: grandmatini | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 07:06 AM
I feel bad that her statement was wrong, but I don't understand why anyone would sign anything that is not in their native language. Also, I don't understand why this statement from the mother is so important. She wasn't on the island. Unless, she spoke to her daughter, then that would be a horse of another color.
Also, could someone clarify something for me please. What language was the suspect speaking that evening. There has been a lot of conjecture, little fact. That would enable us to judge the value of the witness statements.
Posted by: b | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 07:42 AM
The sex element is as clear as mud. Even Clinton couldn't figure out what it meant. Did Joran say they had sexual intercourse? That would probably be understood in any language.
And even if they did have intercourse, which I think Joran is denying, who cares? I sure don't. If two teens had sex, it's not my concern.
Unless or not consensual due to the condition of Natalee and a crime occurred, it's personal behavior between two teens. It's bad news for Ms Twitty, because she believes that Natalee was unlikely to have sex with anyone and was a confirmed virgin. But her belief does not mean sex for Natalee was a rape.
If anyone needs to explain the alleged sex it's Deepak.
Posted by: berry | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 08:07 AM
Beth's statement is irrelevant as she was sitting in the van the whole time.Anything she says is heresay with a spin.
Posted by: bizman12 | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 08:08 AM
Regarding the statement Ms Twitty signed and didn't understand. As vigilant as she is and as careful as she is, to the extent she kept a journal of events, and as hawkish as she is about other people's written statements, how come she has this problem?
Why would anyone sign a document they don't understand?
Posted by: berry | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 08:11 AM
Natalee is the only person that can say it was consensual sex. She is missing and that statement cannot be confirmed. Joran saying that it was is consensual can not be believed. He is an admitted liar.
Posted by: Skye | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 08:16 AM
"The sex element is as clear as mud. Even Clinton couldn't figure out what it meant. "
Thats funny. But it's true.
It's also a she said he said. With the part of the she said played by Beth instead of the victim who is of course missing.
I wouldn't believe anything that came out of the mouth of the vigilante mob that appeared that night at the home of Joran.
"Certain aspects of the discussion, some said to have involved Joran Van der Sloot's Father, led to the discussion becoming heated and police officers requested that the group disperse."
That is not the way to get to the truth taking the law into your own hands before you even know the truth. Thet acted like a bumch of immature, adolecent hotheads, bullies. Oh yeah that will get you the truth, not, and it didn't if anything it hurt the entire case!
Posted by: Brooke | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 08:47 AM
Thet = They
bumch = bunch
Forgot to check before I posted.
Posted by: Brooke | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 08:51 AM
Beth Twitty's strong impression that Natalee was at Joran's house has proven to be correct after all. While in police custody, the boys admitted to taking her there for sex but not getting out of the car, according to Dompig. If they admitted to that much, what really happened? I'm reminded of Clinton and smoking pot--he puffed but never inhaled.
Joran and Deepak did admit to sex with Natalee that first night although initially Joran didn't recognise her picture--or so he says. Now Joran told CA that he didn't have sex--and he knows what sex means in all it's varieties--don't kid yourself, Dan.
Joran is a proven liar who continues to lie and withhold information about a missing girl who he was last seen with. He and his buddies are heartless sociopaths.
Posted by: cadali | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 09:04 AM
Exclusive footage of how the DNA got on Natalee's toothbrush is posted over at the Political Teen under the Fox News heading with Greta and Beth Twitty.It appears that a poster named Fabian has uncovered a most disturbing video of some of Natalee's activities while in Aruba.
This case gets stranger and stranger as everyday asses.WOW,is all I can say.
Posted by: bizman | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 09:33 AM
passes
Posted by: bizman | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 09:33 AM
Moron!
I love how you try to twist words. Your sources are on the level of puke. My sources, sources, source knows more than these people you claim are in the know, yet nothing you ever report is ever substantiated. It's all bunk and crap if you ask me.
Dompig made it clear in case you didn't read the full Abrams transcript that these three boys along with Paulus Van der Sloot were responsible for the disappearance of Natalee. He wasn't talking about anybody else like the security guards. Stop trying to sensationalize quotes.
You suck!
Posted by: Dan's a Moron | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 09:41 AM
And, SM blows your piece of crap blog to pieces.
SM is equivalent to USC as the crap hole is equivalent to Temple in Division I football. It looks better, it actually presents facts and not false assumptions based on very very loose sources. Your series isn't based on any facts but rather you own bias towards the case which is flat out wrong.
Posted by: Dan's a Moron | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 09:45 AM
Greta inquired of Lejeux if Natalee could be declared dead so that Beth could file a civil suit against the boys. Lejeux stated that there is a method to have Natalee declared legally dead without a body, however, the prosecutors have not shown her all or any evidence and are telling her that they do not as yet have any proof of the boy's guilt.
---
Lejeux can't fight it's way out of a legal paper bag, or so she appears. There are ways to get a person declared as good as dead for all legal purposes. It can take a lot of time though.
I don't see how a civil suit can be filed 1 2 3 and what that will accomplish. A lot of money will be wasted on lawyers, and awarded damages, if any, will be next to nothing.
When Natalee is declared dead for legal purposes her parents or legal guardians can represent her and might be able to collect damages in the name of Natalee in a criminal trial through something that is called 'voegen'in Dutch. What it means that you are added as a party(as Natalee and/or as parents of) in the criminal trial of the crown against the suspects. Awarded damages are mostly real costs, eg funeral costs in case of a murder. Emotional damages do not award you a lot of money in Dutch courts, maybe a few 1000 Euros.
Posted by: dugo | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 09:58 AM
vrijen=to make love. this is anything from necking to intercourse so we need to know exactly what joran said to know if he lied about sex. there is a more specific word for the actual act, which is "neuken". he apparently said vrijen and thre are many definitions of that: safe vrijen, vrijen zonder nueken, etc.
Posted by: iquitos | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 10:13 AM
So does sexual activity mean fooling around because I know the term hooking up can apply to kissing and maybe groping not necessarily sex as in intercourse? Hasn't it always been said that the 2 were fooling around in the backseat? Also, is it Joran's responsibility to make Natalee's decisions for her if he is drunk on whether or not to get in the car? How can you blame Joran for Natalee getting drunk and making a mistake by taking a ride?
Posted by: 26ANDCOUNTING | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 10:36 AM
Joran said as quoted above none of them had sex with Natalee and your article is in direct contradiction to that. Sure, they all cuddled with Natalee, didn't they? Just all a big language snafu?? So where is she and why did they lie? No one told you that. Why are ALL your sources anonymous? Because you make them up? Why won't they give their names if they exist at all? Who are you quoting that was present? I will phone them and verify that you actually discussed this with them. I don't believe you have any sources for this and if you do, please name them. Why always with the anonymous if they really told you this for they would back you up if they did.
Dompig says there are NO OTHER SUSPECTS and that ALL INVESTIGATIONS lead BACK to THESE THREE.
And no one on the ground told you anything at all let alone that Natalee had consensual sex with all three of them. I sent this to Dave so he knows what a good reporter you truly are. Remember he said this week that he was in the room with Beth and heard the SAME THING on the translations. All this proves once again is that Joran lied.
But earlier you admitted that you, too, used to lie to girls to try to have sex with them and see nothing whatsoever wrong with that so guess your morals are on par with these three. That's illegal in most civilized places but that would not include New Jersey I guess. Must be your upbringing there that makes you think this is normal behavior and causes you to support Mafia Island?? Just wondering . . .
Posted by: YouKnowWho! | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 10:55 AM
It's wrong to speculate whether they did it or not. I want justice for Natalee, but I am uninterested in seeing the wrong man/men go to prison.
Law enforcement everywhere will tell you: the most simple explanation is usually the correct one. In any situation, look to the people's actions.
I don't know if Natalee is dead or alive. I don't know if she's a 'bad' girl or just a girl who met the wrong guy. I know that she left with Joran. I know that she hasn't been seen since. I know that Joran and the Kalpoe brothers lied to police and involved others in their lie. I know that they let others sit in jail to keep their lie going.
I need a body and a crime lab to convict. But my common sense is enough to tell me Joran's covering something up. What they've revealed to police in statements is enough to know that she is likely not alive.
I can understand someone really reacting negatively to Beth Twitty's condemnation of others and (I'll admit) semi-sane accusations, but, dude-- her daughter is likely dead, in all probability brutalized or raped before death.
Try to cut her some slack. For God's sake, don't let the admitted last known person to see Natalee (and an admitted liar, to police) come off as some kind of scapegoat.
Joran's involved. Proving it is one thing. But knowing it is common sense.
Posted by: Gary | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 10:56 AM
Quote:
_______________________________________________
It appears that a poster named Fabian has uncovered a most disturbing video of some of Natalee's activities while in Aruba.
_______________________________________________
Has anyone seen this video - who is Fabian? And the million dollar question...What is shown in this video?
- Sol
Posted by: sol rosenberg | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 11:00 AM
Must be your upbringing there that makes you think this is normal behavior and causes you to support Mafia Island?? Just wondering . . .
Posted by: YouKnowWho! | Oct 14, 2005 10:55:39 AM
What is that supposed to mean? You sound like total white trash.. Maybe if you got your head out of your ass you'd know that men lie to have sex with woman. Give me a break if you think they don't I have a bridge to sell you right square in the middle of Mafia Island asshole.
Posted by: 26ANDCOUNTING | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 11:00 AM
- 26AC -
"YouKnowWho" is the well-known troll "seedyrum", who has been banned from this site (among others, I'm sure). It's best not to feed into this individual's warped perspective. JMO
Posted by: thelurkmeister | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 11:10 AM
What the hell is the point whether Natalie got herself drunk or Joran got her drunk she has dissappeared most probably dead. Just because you were drinking and take a ride with someone who was hanging out with you does not mean you should be killed. So please make your point?
Posted by: ev | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 11:26 AM
Geez, Dan, what a group of nasty, hateful people have gathered this AM. If people disagree with you to the extent they must insult and show such animosity, why do they still come here? You are a saint to put up with them. I would not, for sure. Keep up the good work, Dan!
Posted by: Bella | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 11:55 AM
the link the video:
http://www.shooshtime.com/clips/video.php?id=6285
Posted by: bizman | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:02 PM
Model 1873,
Do you have a mouse in your pocket?Who is the WE that you refer to.
Apparently ScubaJap is ScubaJap just like Model 1873 is Model 1873 or are you someone else???
Posted by: bizman | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:09 PM
Excuse me, but did anyone else read those CA transcripts from the link above? http://scrux.com/natalee/joranunedited.htm
Joran is quoted as saying that Natalee told him that her mother was HITLER's sister's daughter?
I'll admit that occasionally I miss a few points, but has this ever come up before??
Is this a joke? I'm a little confused...
Kerri
Posted by: kerrilynn212 | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:15 PM
Yes, Dan, stay strong and remain fearless.
Interesting (maybe) to note that topics like this one and Taylor Behl consistently receive a plethora of posts while other issues, perhaps more current and political in content get just a few. Interesting skew on human nature.
What's the allure here? Are we gapers? Or honestly concerned about justice?
Posted by: Imamama | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:16 PM
Kerri, that was in the National Enquirer.
Posted by: gad | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:21 PM
So, is that NH on that tape or more BS?
Posted by: kin | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:25 PM
Thanks gad. This just gets crazier and crazier!
Posted by: kerrilynn212 | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:28 PM
c'mon bizman...let's get serious here. a porno tape from a porno site?
Posted by: lawbster | Friday, October 14, 2005 at 12:28 PM