The Wood Letter Redux

First off, as Mr. Wood is, last I heard, an employee of Jossy Mansur, it is difficult to understand the context or standing he offers in writing such a letter. As the family does employ legal counsel, I would think it might have been better had the letter been generated by same. At the very least an attorney might have spelled Joran and Janssen correctly, errors hard to overlook in what one would think is intended to be a serious and important document given it's being carbon copied to the US Secretary of State and Aruban PM.

Additionally, it would seem to me that two letters would actually be more correct, one to the Justice Department, perhaps in Holland, and another as regards complaints about the Aruban PD to Prime Minister Oduber. Personally, I think I would have gone over the head of Justice Minister Rudy Croes to Holland at this point if I felt I had a valid complaint.There are legitimate means of appeal in instances like this case and I doubt if a simple blanket letter of complaint to the Prime Minister CC'd to the world follows any official channel.

Generally, when working with any government, going around or out of formal channels doesn't prove to be the surest or most appropriate approach - even considering how frustrating and even disappointing such formal channels may prove to be to navigate.

Ultimately I would expect the Dutch and Aruban Governments would need such a formal and proper complaint to act. It's known that the family employs legal counsel in Aruba. That counsel either sought to distance herself from this letter, or aided in it's construction in a manner to water it down from what could be judged to be an official complaint, or perhaps libelous statements. Unfortunately, in that context, it's difficult to view the letter as anything other than more media worthy, than actionable.

There are also several reasons which make the issuance of the letter questionable, or poor strategy, at best - assuming it is meant to drive some official action.

In the next to last paragraph, first page - issue is taken with an alleged statement of investigator Dennis Jacobs. Taken at it's face, it could lead one to conclude the investigator was soliciting a bribe. Yet, immediately following that remark it is implied that the investigator thought there was little reason to be concerned for Natalee's whereabouts. That would make the first statement a jest.

Unfortunately, both statements would then fall very much in line with the slow and poor start the investigation suffered, which has been well-documented and acknowledged by the Prime Minister. Consequently, appealing to him on this matter now as if it were something new, and using a seemingly incriminating, though likely more an un-serious quote to inflame the complaint accomplishes nothing officially. It only serves to inflame some followers of the case, antagonize Aruban authorities and provide the media with a new quote.

In fact, the quote has already been used by Dan Abrams. What remains unclear is how that helps unravel the mystery surrounding Natalee Holloway in any meaningful way as the on going media circus has produced no significant results so far.

Picking up on the June 1 interaction, the first paragraph of page two appears to indicate that there was no interest in the three boys beyond their original questioning and that they weren't followed up on as possible suspects for several days. Yet, looking back at my archives I posted the following link and quote on June 4th: A deputy police chief on the Dutch Caribbean island is calling the men their "most important lead." He describes them as "persons of interest." An official close to the investigation says the men told police they had taken the teen to a beach, then to her hotel.

Consequently, contemporaneous reports from the time, always considered more reliable than recollection, dispute at least one of the letter's first claims. Additionally, the letter questions statements taken by Jacobs as incomplete for not following up with obvious questions. An offered example is the alleged statement by Joran vd Sloot: I think Deepak killed Natalee and buried her body. However, we already know these statements are questionable, at best, their origin and history being totally unknown - not to mention that from all reports they are unsigned. Also, Dutch Law would seem to prohibit the family from legally having access to the genuine article at all.

The letter also questions statements taken by Jacobs for their appearing to have been altered, citing that they were translated from English to Dutch by Jacobs - going on to express disbelief that translation alone could result in the issue. What isn't clear is how Beth then later obtained the statement in Dutch, or who translated it back into English. At the very least, those are relevant points and it is unclear how anyone in Beth's position could justify blaming one translator over the other. Consequently, the complaint lacks enough detail to render it effective or convincing without significant additional disclosure of detail from the originator.

In the last paragraph of page two, the letter makes a confounding complaint against Jacobs referencing a discussion between Dave Holloway and Paulus Van Der Sloot and a subsequent interview between Dave Holloway and Jacobs. It states a write up of the latter discussion was only two pages long and did not focus on the intended line of questioning - apparently that referring to the discussion between Dave Holloway and Paulus Van Der Sloot. It's unclear who was to have determined the line of questioning here, Dave Holloway, or the investigator?  It even suggests the entire purpose of the interview with Dave and Jacobs was to "record" what Dave and Paulus discussed.

Perhaps they did have an extended discussion, but it could never be more than talk, or background, as it would be nothing more than hearsay. Paulus could just as well have approached Jacobs and claimed that Dave stated he killed Natalee in said conversation and such a statement would also likely be ignored, not to mention inadmissible except as possible testimony at trial. I can't think of a single instance in the US where an investigator would be expected to enlist a victim's parent to go and take statements from a possible suspect and enter them into the formal record.

And, yet, again, what are the sources for these statements? Perhaps ALE provided them to the family, I don't know. But, if not, than they are, unfortunately, and yet again, dubious, at best. It also needs to be pointed out that a statement such as what the family expected to see may well exist and whomever provided that one statement to Beth simply didn't provide the other statement, or portion.

Rather than continue - to be fair, some of the questions - particularly as regards evidence, possibly a belt and also a bone, might be more compelling. Though I would point out that an inspection of the image with the belt does not make it look particularly old, as the letter suggests - and it appears to have a unique squared punch pattern which might have aided in the identification and been a better feature for comparison - the feature wasn't included in the letter.

As regards the request for removal of Prosecutor Karin Janssen, the letter, which misspells her name, offers nothing more as a reason than that she must be held responsible for the lack of prosecutorial success.  It would be wonderful to believe that the world contained no cold-case files, or that whenever a family is hurting terribly and frustrated, they have a right to demand wholesale changes in an investigation. I doubt either of those things are true for any justice department or ministry anywhere in the world.

As regards Deputy Chief of Police Dompig, the letter alleges statements by him which significantly impugn Twitty lawyer Helen Lejuez. It will be interesting to see if she takes action and files a formal complaint. I certainly would.

The over arching problem with the letter is that it clearly continues to ignore the admittedly frustrating and secretive nature of the Dutch justice system, and a lack of actionable evidence in the case against the three boys. It strongly suggests that nothing short of their prosecution and conviction will be satisfactory. Indeed, as has been claimed, the family delivered the suspects on a silver platter to Aruban ALE. What they have yet to produce along with those suspects is the evidence required for their prosecution.

Investigations do not identify suspects beyond a reasonable doubt first, refuse to look at any alternatives, while going to any length to create the illusion of evidence against said suspects. At least, honest ones don't. I've no idea why the family of Natalee Holloway refuses to entertain some alternate theory for her disappearance, as opposed to the three former suspects. That fixation sometimes looks as troubling to me as do the admitted missteps of the Aruban authorities.

Comments

[007]

HOW SUCH A DUMB PERSON COULD HAVE SUCH AN INTELLIGENT DAUGHTER ...???

I HAVE TOLD BETH 100 TIMES, ARUBAS JUSTICE SYSTEM IS NOT INDEPENDANT IN ARUBA, SAME AS OUR DEFENCE SYSTEM, ITS DIRECTED FROM CURACAO AND HOLLAND DIRECTS ALL,....

SO BETH IF YOU HAVE ANY OPEN QUESTION START BUYING SOME TICKETS TO CURACAO FIRST,,,, NOT SATISFIED, TICKETS TO AMSTERDAM, SCHIPHOL, TAKE THE TRAIN TO THE HAGUE.........

JAMES.....TIRED OF THIS WOMAN, DONT UNDERSTAND A THING ...!!!