No Arrest for Joran?

The Associated Press is reporting today that:

A statement issued by Aruban prosecutors said an island judge ruled the information Van der Sloot provided in the taped conversations was insufficient to reopen a judicial inquiry and also too feeble to merit another arrest and pretrial detention.

I find this unbelievable, but not surprising. I knew if we didn’t see Joran arrested before the airing of the show in the Netherlands, something was up. Are the Dutch laws this liberal? Or is there some corruption in this case that is thicker than mud? I suspect it is the later, but that is purely a guess.

I’ve watched a promo piece of a show that will air here tonight in the U.S. on ABC showing Joran’s confession. You can watch it here (and read more here).

I find what I see in the promo piece vile. When I watch it, my stomach churns, I feel like I am going to get sick, and I want to turn away.

Read more I believe Joran here in respect to what happened when he was with Natalee–that she convulsed. He is animated, and expressive which is completely different than how he acted during his interview with Chris Cuomo back in February of 2006.

The way Joran emulates Natalee’s convulsing body to show what happened to Natalee is beyond eerie. People who lie don’t have a visual frame of reference as Joran does here so hence they typically don’t do this. It’s hair-raising!

Joran smirks when he says her body will never be found. He is smug about it. He talks about Natalee like she was an object, not a human being, and he shows he is proud of getting away with it for so long. It’s bone chilling.

The fact that Joran didn’t even consider calling for help is suggestive to me (pure speculation) that he probably was involved in this to a deeper extent than he is willing to admit to. You have to wonder if he gave Natalee a date rape drug, and that drug caused her to go into convulsions. One of the side effects of Rohypnol is convulsions, heart-arrest, etc.

Joran says, “I thought I’d have sex with her … but suddenly she started to tremble,” he said (source).

This disturbs me deeply, too. He didn’t say we were kissing and hugging, we were intimate, we were involved, we were about to engage in intercourse. No. It wasn’t a “we” thing that was going on here.

It was an “I thought I’d have sex with her” which is very suggestive this was not a two-way mutual decision.

Furthermore, if it were a two-way mutual relationship, I would suspect before Natalee started to convulse, she wouldn’t have been feeling good. She wouldn’t have felt like having sex.

I feel like I am going to throw up. I find the video very disturbing, and just thinking about it all gets my heart to race. I need to get away for a few minutes.

For the Beth Twitty, and Natalee’s father Dave, I am so sorry that you have been through so much. My heart goes out to you both. May justice prevail in this case somehow, someway. Soon.

* * *

Disclaimer: Do know that I am depending on translation here, and if the translations are not correct, my opinions may change dramatically.

My original opinion on Joran Van der Sloot, February 24, 2006.

To see more on what I think of Joran Van der Sloot, click on the label below of his name.

48 Hours: Jenny Eisenman

Last night, 48 Hours profiled the case of Jenny Eisenman. Jenny was a wife, a mother, a second grade teacher, and a woman who admitted to shooting her husband dead. Jenny, however, claims she acted in self-defense and that her husband abused her.

Is Jenny being honest when she claims she acted in self-defense, or is she being deceptive?

A jury decided that Jenny Eisenman was not acting in self-defense, and sentenced her to 23 years in prison. Yet 48 Hours brought back some of the jurors and discussed case facts that were withheld from them during trial.

Read more In trial, photos of bruises on Jenny’s legs taken after the murder were withheld from jury as was testimony from a friend of Drew who said Drew admitted to him that he got “physical” (at one point) with Jenny.

Juror Ann Robey says if she had known then what she knows now, it could have changed everything because she could not have voted to convict. “What I now know? I don’t think so. It probably would’ve been hung,” she says.

It could have been a hung jury. “I would have really held my ground,” Robey says.

Clearly, this is a case where people fall on both sides of the pendulum. Some believe Jenny, others don’t.

When I watched the 48 Hours interview, I saw a mountain of clues that led me to doubt Jenny’s story, over and over again. Do I think she and Drew fought at times? Yes. Do I think things got physical between them at times? I do, but I don’t believe Drew was the monster Jenny wants us to believe he was. And I don’t believe the night that Drew was murdered that he came at her like she tells us he did.

Jenny told police that on the night of murder in the interrogation video “He came at me, then he just kinda he fell back, then he kinda got up like to come at me again.” She says this as she talks of shooting him.

This sentence was a huge red flag for me.

First, when someone is threatening me and violating me, they don’t “kinda” do anything. They are coming at me, attacking me, scaring me…not kinda getting up to come at me again! They either did or they didn’t. They didn’t kinda do it.

People who are deceptive, I have noticed, try to make strong sentences, but inadvertently, most likely subconsciously, use the word “kinda” ( or kind of) in the mix. They want to make a strong statement but kinda weaken it a bit which makes no logical sense.

Another person who used the word kinda is Matthew Gretz. He is facing trial for murdering his spouse. He was trying to play the part of a distressed husband, kinda. You are either distressed or you aren’t. You aren’t kinda distressed.

Think back to something in your life where you felt threatened or violated. Describe the incident. Say it aloud. Did the perpetrator “kinda” scare you, or did he scare you, come at you, threaten you? Or did he kinda threaten you, kinda scare you, kinda come at you? It’s illogical when you look at it for what it is.

Furthermore, Jenny recounted her life much like an actor would who was creating a scene. She would play the parts as she discussed them. She said something to the affect that she and Drew were pretending to live the perfect life, and when she said that, she put on a “pretend” posture as if she were pretending to be happy for that second when she recalled it. Honest people when recalling a story don’t re-enact the facts as they tell them (i.e I was happy at that time so look at me smile now). They usually tell the scenario again with deep emotions, showing their pain, and feelings in the aftermath.

Instead, Jenny seems to have no pain in the aftermath, whatsoever. Rather, she genuinely laughs at points during her interview which is hair raising. Most people after a serious traumatic event, such as murder in self-defense, typically don’t feel like laughing for a while afterwards. This is another red flag.

Look at Jenny on the interrogation video, she is matter-of-fact. She is without emotions as if she is telling someone about a spat between two children, not the self-defense murder of her husband. This was a traumatic event, but she shows not signs of trauma. If your life is threatened, you are traumatized. Period. Why isn’t she?

When the interrogator asks Jenny if Drew was panicked, Jenny says, “I think he was tryin to stay calm.” This is not how someone who experienced this situation would respond. They would give the facts by stating yes or no. The would not speculate what Drew was attempting to do with his emotions. After all, if she wants us to believe her life was on the line, how did she have time to speculate about Drew’s emotions? It’s nonsense and rubbish.

The investigator asks if she had her “eyes open when she was firin?” Jenny says “The first time?… When I shot the wall, I did.” Here she pauses after the asking the question “The first time?”, and thinks about it. Then she answers. This appears to be thinking-on-her-feet speech. She doesn’t seem to be recollecting a memory, or be confused, or have no memory from the trauma.

Jenny’s tone of voice is another red flag for me. I don’t know why, but it is.

Jenny tried to dispose of her husband’s body, bought all the things she needed to conceal the crime, and shows absolutely no real genuine emotions of sorrow or fear when she talks to police. She is quite content to read People magazine, have a soda and a snack. Is this a woman who feared for her life? A woman who is traumatized by a cruel husband?

Her body language shows no signs of stress outside of the fact she is chewing her finger nails which could also be a sign of nerves, fear or even boredom.

Jenny could have experienced shock from a trauma like this, but in the police interrogation I would expect to see signs of that such as confusion or denial, but I don’t. I see none of it.

Justice, in this case, if you want my opinion was served as deserved.

New Witness in Kercher Case

A new Albanian witness has come forward nearly three months from the horrific murder of Meredith Kercher to say that he saw the three suspects (Knox, Sollecito, and Guede) together at the cottage the night before the murder.

The new witness, an Albanian who lives in Perugia, told police that about 8 o’clock on the night before Ms Kercher was killed he parked his car near the cottage, but in doing so scraped the rubbish bins at the gates. He told investigators: “It was dark and pouring with rain, but I stopped the car, put the hazard lights on and got out to see if I had damaged the car. Suddenly two young people came out. It was them, Raffaele and Amanda. They seemed as if they were looking for a quarrel, they were shouting.

“We began arguing and at a certain point Amanda pulled out a knife and started waving it around in an aggressive way. She was shouting and pointing the knife at me.

“I’m quite certain it was her, and the guy with her was Raffaele Sollecito.”

The witness said that he was scared. “I was ready to run back to my car when out of nowhere in the dark another guy turned up, a black man. It was the Ivory Coast guy, Rudy.” He said that he did not know any of the three at the time, “but I recognised them afterwards when I saw their photographs in all the newspapers.” Source: Times Online

It doesn’t look good for the three suspects, nor does it bode well for Knox’s version of events, which from what news reports have said, has changed several times.

Read moreI originally wrote about Amanda Knox back on November 9th, eight days after the murder. When I did, someone rightly pointed out that Knox’s statements could have been translated from English to Italian to English again, and with that, I couldn’t depend on the actual verbiage to guide me in spotting deception. They were correct.

But even if there was a translation, one event that Knox described that night, of being in the kitchen and hearing Kercher scream from behind closed doors, and covering her ears because of it (if that is the end message before and after translation), makes absolutely no sense. It defies logic and honesty.

When we are startled by a loud noise, a scream, our natural instinct when we are in our own home (or in a place where we feel safe) is to go running toward the noise, to ask if everyone is okay, to see what happened.

We only cover our ears when we know what is going on, and we can’t stop it, nor can we bear to hear it anymore. When we are startled, no one goes, “Oh my” and covers their ears in ignorance…not knowing the cause or reasoning. It’s unheard of…

It makes you wonder if, at one point, Knox was in the kitchen, and Kercher was crying out, and Knox heard it, knew Kercher was dying, and just covered her ears so she didn’t have to endure it. Reports say they believe Kercher died slowly by bleeding to death. Then again, the whole story could be completely made up. I’m just speculating because sometimes in lies there are pieces of the truth.

The only thing we can say with some certainty from this statement by Knox about covering her ears in ignorance, if that is the gist of what she is saying, is that Knox is not telling the truth. It doesn’t tell us anything more than that.

This new Albanian witness only seems to support that Knox hasn’t been honest and forthright, again.

A Look Back at 2007

As we march onward into the new year, I took some time today to reflect on the year that has past. Perhaps you, too, might enjoy looking back at the biggest stories of this past year.

Happy New Year!

Howard K. Stern, Larry Birkhead and Anna Nicole Smith

Mary Winkler

The McCanns, and Madeleine

Bobby Cutts, Jr. and Jessie Davis

Matthew Gretz/Kira Simonian

Senator Larry Craig

Drew Peterson

Amanda Knox

* Each link points to the first post that I wrote. To read all the posts that I wrote on the topic, click on the appropriate labels at the bottom of each post.

Amanda Knox

You’ve probably heard the story that is breaking out of Italy this week. A British Exchange student, Meredith Kercher, 20, was found murdered in her bedroom, and one of the accused is American-born, University of Washington student, Amanda Knox, also 20. Both girls shared a house with other students while living abroad.

Reports are saying “Extreme Sex Game killed Meredith.”

Steve Huff over at True Crime Weblog details the story here, if you want to get into all the details.

Several papers have printed a statement made by Knox to police, and if this statement is true, I find it quite interesting and telling that perhaps Ms. Knox is not being forthright with us.

Read more Knox says:

“Patrick and Meredith were in Meredith’s room while I stayed in the kitchen. I can’t remember how long they were together in the room, but I can only say that at a certain point I heard Meredith screaming and I was scared so I covered my ears. After that, I don’t remember everything, my head is very confused.” (source)

Furthermore, there is this report:

Ms Knox made her “confession” to police when she was taken in for questioning at dawn yesterday. She had claimed earlier to have left the cottage at 5pm on Thursday and returned only the next morning when Ms Kercher’s body was discovered. She now admits that she was at the house. She said that on the evening of November 1 she had met Mr Lumumba, who owned the Le Chic pub where she sometimes worked, at about 9pm after they had exchanged texts. She told police they had gone to the cottage. “I don’t remember if my friend Meredith was already there or whether she came later. What I can say is that [Meredith and Patrick] went off together.” (source)

It has been pointed out to me that Knox’s statement may have been translated from English to Italian to English again. If this is the case, I withdraw any and all conclusions, as it is ESSENTIAL for me to have Knox’s words VERBATIM to make a determination (see comment section below).

If these are Knox’s words verbatim, the four-sentence statement (above) gives us many red flags that are hard to ignore.

  1. The choice of words “while I stayed in the kitchen” is indicative that Knox was somehow doing something with Patrick and Meredith…yet in the report above, she does not say she is. This is contradictory. “To stay” is indicative of “staying behind” as if to break away from the group.
  2. The words “I can only say” and “at a certain point” are unique as well. When we recollect a story, we don’t talk like this. When we are controlling facts and being deceptive, however, we do. We only remember details that are important to us, and forget the rest. Knox really wants us to know that she wasn’t in the room, but doesn’t remember anything else. How interesting is that?
  3. “I was scared so I covered my ears.” When people are afraid because someone is screaming, they typically react by (A) running away for help, or (B) running to the aid of the screamer. Fear evokes a response.You don’t ignore a fearful/terrifying scream from someone, and hope it goes away by covering your ears when you or they could be in danger…unless, of course you know the reason behind the screams — and know you are not in danger.
  4. “After that, I don’t remember everything” When people are deceptive, the often have a selective memory — remembering “only” what they want us to know and forgetting everything else. It’s so convenient. Too convenient — especially considering strong emotions should have been elicited by the screams — which in turn should have burned searing memories that can’t be purged, no matter how hard she tries. Yet Knox seems to only remember one selective thing. I’m not buying it.

If Knox wasn’t in the room participating in the killing, then her words (if they are indeed hers) certainly hint that she knew what was going on behind those closed doors. It hints she was involved with Patrick and Meredith, yet her story is leaving out any involvement with Meredith.

Each of these four sentences has a red flag in it. That’s a strong indication of deception. I don’t believe Knox is being honest with us –if these do in fact prove to be her words verbatim. That is now the question.

* Modification added 11/10/07 4:14 PM

To see more posts about Knox, click on the labels below.