| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 11/05/2005 1:36:33 PM PST by Admin Moderator, reason:
New thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1516416/posts |
Posted on 08/26/2005 4:40:09 PM PDT by TexKat
Surinamese Deepak Kalpoe, 21, arrives to court in Oranjestad, Aruba, Friday, Aug. 26, 2005. Aruban police arrested Kalpoe and his brother Satish, 18, along with a third person according to government spokesman Ruben Trapenberg, saying he doesn't know if the arrests are connected to the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. The two brothers had been previously detained and released. (AP Photo/Pedro Famous Diaz)
Surinamese Satish Kalpoe, 18, front, gets in a car to go to court in Oranjestad, Aruba, Friday, Aug. 26, 2005. Two Surinamese brothers, Satish and Deepak Kalpoe, who had been detained and released in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway were arrested again Friday based on new evidence, officials said. The brothers were detained on suspicion of involvement, with unidentified 'other people,' in premeditated murder and rape, the prosecutor's office said. Person to the right is unidentified. (AP Photo/Farrah Boekhoudt)
Goodnight, Shebacal.
Sleep well.
****
mark.
I am somewhat familiar with Dutch law, although my familiarity is from securities and contract law, not criminal law.
Having said that, the Dutch legal system is perverse even by the ACLU's standards. Particularly since WWII, Dutch law has been revised to "protect the rights of the downtrodden." And, like the ACLU's perverse stands, they simply end up substituting one person's rights over everyone else's rights. So, the Dutch legal system will agonize over Juran's rights (while totally ignoring the rights of Natalee Holloway).
Remember the infamous case of the Muslim youths gang raping a retarded white girl? Despite overwhelming evidence, the judge decided not to prosecute for fear of a backlash against the already-repressed Muslim community.
Unless Juran or the Kalpoes confess, it is highly doubtful that the Dutch legal system will allow anything short of a confession without duress to be legal.
Every rapist in the world should be booking flights to Aruba. At the very least, these boys confessed to having sex with her while she was unconsious. (sp?)
I hope the Aruban "authorities" rot in hell.
Wouldn't handing over the tapes on air be an important point for chain of custody if there was a dispute later on. If it is done on air, there is proof the only ones that handled the tape was Dr. Phil show and then the prosecutor. if it is later said they were in an altered state.
Regarding the chain of custody of the tape, I think the answer is that Chris Lejuezis is saying that Deepak would have to go before a judge and state that it was him on the tape and he made those statements before the tape and his new statements about the tape could be accepted.
See below, from post 2516:
Snip...ABRAMS: All right, bottom line is he came in, he agreed to sit down with you. He talked to you. He answered questions. Did he pass the polygraph?
SKEETERS: Deepak was going to take a polygraph, but he wanted a large sum of money...
ABRAMS: (INAUDIBLE)
SKEETERS: ... he and allegedly his attorney.
ABRAMS: (INAUDIBLE)
SKEETERS: And he wanted a book deal and a movie deal and I told him I would set him up with an appointment.
ABRAMS: All right
SKEETERS: It was at that time, Dan, that I told him that from now on, any time he and I talk, anytime whether he sees me on the phone or not on the street, I will be tape recording and videoing him at all times.
ABRAMS: All right. Here is more...
SKEETERS: They both understood that.
Snip...ABRAMS: Deepak Kalpoe, one of the suspects in Alabama teen Natalee Holloway‘s disappearance, in an interview about the night that Natalee disappeared. The question is, could that admission lead to different kinds of charges? Could there be rape charges? Something else?
On the phone once again, Aruban attorney Chris Lejuez—he‘s represented NBC in court in Aruba as well—MSNBC analyst and former prosecutor, Susan Filan, and criminal defense attorney Michael Bachner.
All right, Chris, any potential charges as a result of that admission?
LEJUEZ: Yes, it‘s possible, but the admission as such—the tape as such is not enough to be evidence in any kind of criminal case in Aruba. But, it will help the prosecutor in the investigation. They can use it as a stepping-stone to go to a trial, but they need to have more evidence.
ABRAMS: The problem though, Susan, is that these guys‘ statements are just all over the place.
SUSAN FILAN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: They are...
LEJUEZ: But these statements are...
ABRAMS: Hang on...
LEJUEZ: ... not according to our law.
ABRAMS: Let me let Susan Filan take that one. Yes.
(CROSSTALK)
FILAN: And I think that‘s what is really great for the prosecution, because their statements are so vastly inconsistent between each other and amongst themselves that they‘re clearly not telling the truth. And I think he said something very key on this tape. He says if I knew where the body is I would have told somebody by now. Well I thought they said hey, we left her on the beach and she was fine, so he knows she is dead. I think that is very incriminating.
ABRAMS: I don‘t know. I mean I think at this point everyone kind of assumes—I think even the family...
FILAN: ... it‘s coming from his mouth. It‘s coming from his mouth. That‘s—he is the last person with her. He had sex with her. He‘s the last person to see her and he‘s telling us it‘s a body. That‘s very different from us all inferring well since we don‘t know where she is, she must be dead. I think it‘s very, very incriminating.
Snip...ABRAMS: Jamie Skeeters, let‘s be clear, he knew he was being taped or not?
SKEETERS: Yes, I have that on tape. I have it witnessed by another former FBI and Deepak himself and another citizen of Aruba.
ABRAMS: OK. You‘re saying that yes, you believe he did know he was being taped?
SKEETERS: I have that on tape...
ABRAMS: Right, OK. All right, so Susan, what of that? I mean what of the fact that he knew he was being taped and Michael Bachner is saying look, if he‘s telling the truth about having sex with Natalee, he‘s going to what, admit that he had sex with Natalee, but then he‘s going to deny that he had anything else to do with it?
FILAN: No, absolutely not. He‘s trying to get himself out of hot water. You can‘t assume that what he is saying is going to be truthful. If he was going to be truthful he would have cooperated and said the truth long by now. What is happening here though is with this statement that we all had sex with her.
If the prosecution wanted to put a case together using the mom‘s testimony about the daughter‘s character saying that this is not a girl that would have ever had sex with one stranger, let alone three and you have an admission from one of them that we all had sex with her, that does sound like gang date rape, and so it is possible to file charges. A jury would then have to decide this case on the mother‘s testimony about the daughter‘s character, but you know there is something to work with. It‘s not an absolute nothing. It‘s difficult without forensics. It‘s difficult without the body, but it‘s not a zero possibility.
ABRAMS: Very quickly, Chris, what do you make of that?
LEJUEZ: No, I don‘t believe that they can use this tape in the court-in a court of trial—in a trial. That does not constitute evidence according to Aruban law.
(CROSSTALK)
LEJUEZ: If you want to use a tape, you need to have permission to tape the person. Permission has to come from a judge of instruction. They didn‘t have it. The tape has possibly, I don‘t say it is the case, but it could have been edited, it could have been changed, it could have been someone else, we don‘t know.
ABRAMS: Assume for a moment...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: Chris, assume for a moment they are able to verify that it is Deepak on the tape. But let‘s assume that, you know, yes, it‘s just a little portion of it, but that they are able to verify he knew he was being taped and that it is him on the tape. You‘re still saying they couldn‘t use it in court?
LEJUEZ: Well, I would have to admit again in front of a judge here in Aruba...
ABRAMS: Yes.
LEJUEZ: ... that it was him, and that he stated—he made those statements.
(CROSSTALK)
LEJUEZ: His new statements, his admissions can be accepted.
ABRAMS: All right. Chris Lejuez, Susan Filan, Michael Bachner, Jamie Skeeters, thanks a lot. Appreciate it.
SKEETERS: And he wanted a book deal and a movie deal and I told him I would set him up with an appointment.
That greedy little Deepak scum. Didn't he tell Beth in the cybercafe, when she mentioned reward money to him, that he didn't need any money?
ABRAMS: Chris, assume for a moment they are able to verify that it is Deepak on the tape. But let‘s assume that, you know, yes, it‘s just a little portion of it, but that they are able to verify he knew he was being taped and that it is him on the tape. You‘re still saying they couldn‘t use it in court?
LEJUEZ: Well, I would have to admit again in front of a judge here in Aruba...
ABRAMS: Yes.
LEJUEZ: ... that it was him, and that he stated—he made those statements.
(CROSSTALK)
LEJUEZ: His new statements, his admissions can be accepted.
Is Lejuez the other citizen of Aruba that witnessed the tape being made? In his answer he says I would have to admit again in front of a judge...........his admissions can be accepted.
If this is the case they would need to show nobody had the chance to alter the tape. It went from Dr Phil show to the prosecutor.
SKEETERS: ... he and allegedly his attorney.
ABRAMS: On the phone once again, Aruban attorney Chris Lejuez—he‘s represented NBC in court in Aruba as well...
My guess is the other citizen of Aruba was Deepak's lawyer.
I think Lejues is speaking hypothetically.
mark
BOR will be doing a segment on Natalee this evening.
Good to know, thanks!
This is Beth's statement about the Deepak tape on Fox News last night:
-----
Reporter:
I know you heard what deputy chief Dompig is saying about the unedited full audiotape. Are you hearing something different?
Beth
Well absolutely,I do know there is controversy over this. I spoke to the Dr. Phil producers this morning and they specifically stated that the request from the prosecutors office had not come in yet. Where this fault lies, I am not sure. I certainly hope this will be turned over soon so we can begin with this.
Is a confession any good without the person providing a witness or evidence (a body) or some kind of forensic evidence that is proof that the confession is true? Can you plead guilty to a crime under Dutch law without something to back it up?
I know I should be just shocked that there are more lies coming out of aruba....but well I'm not.
How she keeps her cool is beyond me.
Shebacal - the Statute is TWO friggin years. That's why all the stalling, fiddling, piddling etc. is going on. After 2 years they cannot prosecute the case. They are DELIBERATELY running out the clock.
My reply to Pauly would be bull$*it also!!
Yes Dompig said that they had made an "official" request of the Dr. Phil show for the tape BUT Beth said the Dr. Phil show told her that they had NOT received ANY request from Aruba for the tape. I tend to believe the State side people. Aruban LE is STILL in CYA mode!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.