I am not thinking in terms of lawsuits. Just facts, as in Dragnet. I call it splitting hairs if the hotel is trying to distance itself from the fact that these men physically worked on their property. The story itself, per msnbc, was saying that confusion has arisen as to the facts of whether these two men worked at the hotel or not, since the police and news media all say they worked at the hotel, but the hotel is now saying, no, they don't work for us. Now if they work for a security company but work at the hotel, it is splitting hairs regarding the facts for the hotel to jump up and say, no, these men are not our employees. They should just say the truth and not confuse the public. These men worked at the hotel, whether they did it directly or indirectly through a security contract. That was the point. Their whereabouts in regard to where Natalee disappeared from. You know, the facts of the case. I was not into lawsuits, just yet.
I'm not defending the hotel's actions, but just speculating as to their motive. In the U.S., it may not make a difference whether the men were direct employees of the hotel, or employees of the hotel's contractor (i.e., the security firm) because the family could bring a legal action against both the hotel and its contractor. May not work that way in Aruba.
Such preventive lawyering is commonplace in situations like this. Smacks of insensitivity in my opinion, but some businesses feel it makes good sense.
Now if they work for a security company but work at the hotel, it is splitting hairs regarding the facts for the hotel to jump up and say, no, these men are not our employees.
Not really. There is the impact on future hotel bookings to consider. The place is undergoing renovation with plans to open later this year. If it turns out that hotel employees are implicated, that is sure to be noted by travel agents and the public. This is a high profile case.