Tag Archive for: murder

Joran van der Sloot Confesses to Natalee Holloway’s Murder

/in /by

Joran van der Sloot has finally confessed to killing Natalee Holloway in a proffer eighteen years after her murder.

He pled guilty earlier this week to trying to extort $250,000 dollars from Natalee’s mother, Beth Holloway.  Be warned, his confession while brief, confesses the bare minimum, and is stone-cold chilling. He lacks any normal emotions and clearly has no remorse or regret: classic behavior of a psychopath.

You can listen to his confession here.

I never believed Joran van der Sloot from day one, and shared the boatloads of clues he left in his interviews.

I’ll provide links to those analysis below.

Were you following me when I wrote about Joran?

Van der Sloot’s confession is missing a lot of detail, if you ask me, but it likely alludes to the basic truth: a violent attack due to rebuffed sexual advances.  You don’t tell a psychopath no.

Van der Sloot also killed Stephanie Flores for rebuffed sexual advances as well in Peru.  He admitted to choking Flores, and I suspect that occurred with Holloway, too, sadly. I suspect he used it as a tool to get compliance for his needs, as horrific as that is to think about before killing these women.

He also creepily paints Natalee as an aggressor to his advances in his–what I would call–an edited confession.  I don’t believe for a minute that she got violent with him first by kicking him in the groin for making sexual advances, as he says. He likely choked her first, if she kicked him at all and it was likely a last ditched effort to get away–realizing she was in life-threatening trouble, sadly.  The truth can be so dark and painful to think about.

Do I think he only went into the water up to his knees? I question it: Would that carry a body away with certainty?  That seems questionable to me just on logic, but maybe the Aruba sea has deep drop offs in that location. I don’t know.

We don’t have the whole story here, and never will sadly. Not with a psychopath like Joran.

So this confession?  In my eyes, it’s a whitewashed version and told in a way that still protects Joran. He doesn’t want you to see all of him, still. But he at least owns it for Beth Holloway. I think she needed that to move on.

Looking back at what I wrote over a decade ago is also very chilling to read it now knowing his confession.

You can read my analysis from the Chris Cuomo interview in 2006 here. Or you can browse through all the posts I did over the years on this case by clicking here and here.

My heart goes out to the Holloway family to have to endure this psychopath for so long. Hopefully, they can move on with the lovely memories of Natalee, and find some healing, if that is possible.

Jasmine Hartin on 48 Hours

/in /by

If you watched Jasmine’s story on 48 Hours this past week, you saw quite a story!

Known as a partying socialite, Jasmine and her common-law husband, who is the son of the billionaire Michael Ashcroft, met and lived in Belize.

Jasmine tells us of how she dreamed of having an idyllic life in Belize after growing up less fortunate in Canada.

She and Andrew Ashcroft were raising twins in a royal and lavish lifestyle when Jasmine ended up on a dock late at night with a well known and highly regarded top police official, Henry Jemmott, in circumstances that should absolutely raise questions for you.

Henry Jemmott ended up dead with a bullet behind his ear that night.

In the totality of Jasmine’s story, there are are so many red flags, it’s painful. Add to it that she has changed her story. Her first version was she didn’t do it — a boat drove by and the bullet hit him. Later, she owns it and says it was an accident.

And of course there is a gun expert at the end of the 48 Hour show, too. Did he make you second guess yourself?

Jasmine lacks normal emotions throughout her entire recounting of what happened to her yet when you watch her talk about losing her children, it’s amazing, she has real emotions.

The contrast of the two should flag you.

Why does she have emotions about losing her children, but not about the killing of a “friend” Henry Jemmott?

Furthermore, when she talks about going on the pier that night with Henry, she says to him why are you bringing your gun?

This stands out to me notably. Most law enforcement carry a weapon all the time. If she was his friend, she would have known this, right? Why does she make it a notable point here? Is she trying to create a story? A story that isn’t logical?

Why is a women, and mother in a committed relationship on a dock at 12:45 a.m. with another man–drinking no less? And found to have cocaine in her possession, which she won’t admit to it being hers.

Jasmine herself says, “I think a lot of people misjudge me… they don’t see my wholesome side.” That should jump out you. People don’t see the Jasmine that Jasmine wants you to see. Hmmm. Very telling!

Jasmine tries to tell us a senior police official was giving her gun lessons in the dark, on a pier, while drinking at 12:45 a.m. That should jump out at you like a bolt of lightening!

While I know nothing of the Belize police force and their reputation, Jemmott had a good reputation. Is this behavior consistent with her story? It isn’t.

What trained firearms expert is going to give a woman gun lessons in the dark after drinking in the middle of the night? None that I have known.

Most law enforcement I have known have incredible respect for their weapon, and the safety measures they need to take. They also know if they are careless with a gun, it can jeopardize their job in most places (I am not in expert in Belize culture, but I suspect it is the same there–this is a life/death safety issue regardless).

I do not believe Henry Jemmott behaved as reckless as Jasmine is painting him here. His reputation was solid.

Worse, Jasmine’s account of the gun going off and subsequent events seems completely abnormal. She says…

“So, the shot went off and he fell on top of me. And all I could feel was warmth. And I later then realized — he was bleeding on me. I was shaking him. … I didn’t know what to do. … As I’m trying to wiggle my way free to render aid, his body was slipping into the water from the dock.I didn’t know what to do. I didn’t know if he was dead.”

Her friend was found by police, not on the dock, but in the water. In the water. Is that how you treat a friend you accidentially shot? Come on, Jasmine!

Her statement is loaded with red flags. One after another. Do you see them? I will share more in the comments below in the coming days! Feel free to share the hot spots you saw too. I couldn’t possibly address them them all.

Do I believe Jasmine Hartin’s story? I do not. I do not know what happened that night precisely — that would require further analysis, but I do know it’s NOT what Hartin wants us to believe!!

48 Hours: Scott Peterson Revisited

/5 Comments/in /by

CBS 48 Hours revisited the Scott Peterson case this past weekend. Did you catch it? In 2004, Scott Peterson was convicted of killing his wife and unborn child in a largely circumstantial case. He was given the death penalty for the crime.

Peterson’s death penalty sentence was overturned in August 2020 by the California Supreme Court. The reason is Peterson’s trial judge dismissed jurors who opposed capital punishment without asking if they could put their views aside which shouldn’t have been done. Peterson, however, did not have his conviction overturned. His new sentencing is supposed to take place this summer.

Janey Peterson, Scott Peterson’s sister-in-law claims that Scott Peterson is innocent and explained how the family has created a war room to fight on his behalf to get his conviction overturned. Janey believes the burglars across the street from the Peterson home are involved in Laci’s death.

Unfortunately, nothing that Janey presented offered me something concrete to bite into. You could easily argue away her theories presented.

Janey really loses her credibility when she suggests that someone tried to frame Scott Peterson.

Janey Peterson: Her body wasn’t taken to the bay December 24th. The bay wasn’t sealed off as a crime scene. …There are multiple points of access directly to the water, 24 hours a day. I think they took Laci, had Laci, realized the national attention that this case was getting, realized they were in trouble. What better way to get outta trouble than go put the body where the husband was?

So if you believe Janey, you believe someone took, harmed and killed Laci, but oh decided to sit on the corpse not knowing what to do with it. You know, no worries. Then when the story broke and it was a big story, oh wow! They found their way to get out of the crime. They will “frame” Scott by placing the body in the bay.

I don’t think you can come up with something more outlandish than that. Add to the this that when authorities went to arrest Scott Peterson, he wasn’t at home or trying to solve her murder. No, he was down in San Diego golfing, with DYED blond hair with 15K in cash in his pocket. It seemed this grieving husband was about to possibly leave the country. Yeah, that’s what innocent victims do.

I don’t think so!

I can tell you nearly ever clip of Scott Peterson I see, he is leaking clues like a sieve. And he leaks them every time. If you attended my class, I showed you some of them! They are really hard to argue when you see them pointed out.

The reporter in the 48 Hours show picked up on one clue herself. Scott Peterson’s wife is missing during their interview. When his cell phone rings, he doesn’t even think to answer it? If your spouse was missing, would you ignore phone calls? A man who knew his wife was dead certainly would. And he’d also would not want anything to interrupt his “show time” on TV.

Men like Peterson lie so much they think they can fool anyone, until their arrogance and ignorance trips them up. He wanted TV time to convince people he was innocent. I think that backfired on him big time. People instinctively knew his behavior didn’t add up.

Even more so, when you watch that interview, listen to his demeanor. He play this low-key, monotone character. It’s his attempt to act concerned and sad, but he doesn’t show an ounce of sadness. True sadness activates muscles in the face that for Peterson are not moving!

And yes, Scott Peterson’s smiles during the trial did not bode well for him. He wasn’t a grieving victim in this case. Not at all. I believe all the circumstantial evidence built a strong rope as the prosecutor said that told the real story. I believe Scott Peterson is exactly where he should be.

What was Chauvin’s face saying when the verdicts were read?

/8 Comments/in /by

Many people are wondering what Chauvin is feeling or expressing in this video when the three guilty verdicts are read and confirmed by the judge. We don’t see much because of the mask on Chauvin’s face, and he isn’t making a universal expression, but we can glean some information from his eyebrows and his darting eyes.

His eyebrows are down and pulled together in what appears to be a bewilderment expression. I think if he were to tell us what he is feeling he would tell us in that moment, waiting for and hearing the verdict, he felt it was surreal–almost hard to process.

One of those moments of “Am I really here? Is this really happening?” type feelings.

I suspect that he may have witnessed something before the verdict was read that indicated things were not going to go his way.

His gut may have known instinctively what was coming. Perhaps the jurors didn’t make any eye contact. Something flagged him if you ask me and it wasn’t a good indicator

His eyes dart back and forth in disbelief indicating he can’t believe this is happening. He is trying to digest and process what seems unreal.

If you notice, his expression doesn’t change before, during and after the verdict is read.

He is literally frozen in disbelief.

To sit and witness your entire future be decided in front of you like this must be overwhelming. No one considers themselves a killer or a murderer–even the coldest killers don’t see themselves that way. They always feel some form of justification–even when their isn’t one, or they wouldn’t have killed.

Lyle and Erik Menendez

/8 Comments/in , /by


ABC’s 20/20 aired the newest twist in the Lyle and Erik Menendez story this past weekend: Young millennials, specifically those on TikTok, are calling for the release of the murderous brothers. They claim that after enduring a lifetime abuse at the time of the murders, these two shouldn’t have to serve a life sentence.

In our modern day, it seems if you can generate enough interest in a case, perhaps you can renew interest and free people? I’m all for freeing the wrongly convicted and those who confessed to a crime they didn’t commit, but to free two cold-blooded murders like the Menendez brothers?

It boggles my mind.

To the younger generation, I say this:

Lyle and Erik weren’t children when they killed their parents. They were not dependent to their parents for food, shelter or freedom. These “boys” were actually grown MEN, ages 18 and 21 at the time they intentionally killed their parents. They were capable of taking care of themselves.

They had the FREEDOM to leave at any time, to file complaints against their parents and take responsible action for the abuse they suffered if they felt they were seriously wronged. They say they were afraid their parents would kill them if they did. And if so, they still could have moved out, started their own lives, secured their safety and cut contact. They had other options besides murder.

Furthermore, it wasn’t like they snapped that day at the abuse of their parents. They planned the murder. They could have planned their escape equally.

Erik wrote a screenplay detailing what he eventually did–before he did it. He wrote of the murders. The motive in his screenplay? Money. And then once they committed the atrocity, they lied about it and denied it, and hello, spent the money! It doesn’t take rocket science to see this.

They didn’t show any signs of pain and agony over the destruction of their family in such a brutal way–their parents harm to them or their harm to their parents. No, the men went out and lived lavishly on their parents money as if they won the lottery. They estimate when this happened they spent upwards of $700K before their arrest and that was 30 plus years ago!

The men acted callous, cold, arrogant, selfish and calculating.

Do I think the father was sexual abusive to the boys? That’s a good question.

I see pain, when the men testify at times, even agony, however, their story doesn’t 100% jive for me as honest. Erik says as to the reason they killed their parents was, “Me telling Lyle, that uh, my dad had been molesting me” (see video below). He suggests that was the final blow.

But what doesn’t ring sincere here is this: Erik says, “…it was Lyle who first penetrated him with a toothbrush as they played in the woods when he was 5.” It wasn’t his father, ironically, who molested him first. And Lyle admits to doing this to his brother multiple times.

So your brother molested you first and you find him a reasonable and trustworthy person to say hey dad did this too me too?

It could happen (it’s not impossible as many years past), but the odds are low.

And now that news breaks your brother, the brother who molested you?

Think of it another way, if you were Lyle: If you come from an incest family, and you too committed incest. How would you feel about it?

You would feel intense shame. You would want to hide it because you took part in it too. You would feel sick, dirty and gross and would want to bury that memory once you learned it was wrong. You would likely shun the topic and avoid it at all costs because you would think you were as sick as dad — even if you knew better. Emotions are hard to shake from an experience like this–even decades later as an adult who got therapy and understands you were a victim. That’s how a normal person would think in this experience: Bury it, deny it and do not talk about it. If your brother tried, you’d shoot him down. Quick. Right?

Does that make sense?

Personally, if this story is true that Lyle sexually abused Erik in real life, I honestly don’t think they would say a word in public either. What would be the benefit? It’s way too humiliating and not needed to be shared. I think most people who endured something like this would rather die than talk about it. Normal people who feel shame would have to hide this at all costs. Someone who doesn’t feel shame, remorse or guilt wouldn’t know this.

So something is off.

Was there abuse? Potentially.

Could it just be they are showing excruciating pain because they had to testify to something –“a story”–that is so humiliating as this a last ditch attempt to try to stay out of prison? They needed a defense and there were few they could claim.

Imagine saying you abused your brother when he didn’t to save yourself. How would that feel? That’s a possible explanation too. It would be utterly humiliating.

Terry Moran says seeing the vein pop in Lyle during the testimony of the sex abuse made him believe the abuse. For me, that blood popping vessel was anger. Why was Lyle angry at this point? Was it anger that he had to say this stuff “a story” to fight for their lives? At first, in that segment of the video I feel Lyle has empathy towards his brother, and then as his brother tells the story I see anger and disgust.

We just aren’t getting the true unfiltered story here, plain and simple.

You are getting a mix of truth and lies that would take me hours of testimony watching to ferret out. There likely was some abuse, but they embellished it for sympathy. That’s most probable by the behavior I see, and where I sit after watching the 20/20 clips.

Several of their abuse stories are pure fabrications–100% to garner sympathy for them–without doubt. Do I believe an abused son would get into bed with his mom and touch her “everywhere”? And she would tolerate it? I absolutely do not. They had to paint mom a villain too.

I believe the Menendez brothers lived a very affluent lifestyle, and were raised by a narcissist father who fostered and nurtured narcissist/psychopathic thinking in his children, which ultimately was his and his wife’s undoing. I do not believe these men should be set free.

What do you think?