DIARIO Editorial: An element called Tacopina
DIARIO Aruba
3/20/2006

Last night, the attorney who is representing Joran in the US found it appropriate to explain, in a lowly way, that I am prejudiced against Joran because his father was in the team who [strobe – handed over?] a few members of my family to the US.

There’s another element who does not know how to read Papiamento and has no notion what I have said about Joran. I have said on various occasions that I don’t know whether he is guilty or innocent! Furthermore, I don’t have any sort of prejudice against Joran or his father! I had no idea that Paul could have been in any commission which judged who is part of my family. That’s news to me!

Joe Tacopina, with his witchy style of bring things forward, forcing a conclusion which doesn’t exist, wants to defend a habitual, chronic liar, who has a confirmed history of violence.

Joran was known in his school as a kid who bullied younger kids; he was described by a teacher as a habitual liar; he was caught with his hands in the lockers of other kids; he was under treatment for his inability to control his anger and the violent part of his character; he was gambling for money in a casino, at an age where it is prohibited to set foot in a casino, and a few times accompanied by his father!

Into what sort of ‘saint’ does Tacopina want to turn Joran? He doesn’t know that Joran lied that Deepak came to pick him up at the beach, and when Deepak stood up and said that it’s not true, he then changed to saying it was Satish. When Satish also stood up and said that it wasn’t true, he left the question hanging, and it will be good of Tacopina, in his great wisdom, to explain to us how Joran arrived at his house in the morning hours, with or without shoes!

Another point which Tacopina, in his febrile attempt to defend his client, does not take into account is the following: how Deepak could have come to pick up Joran at the beach, if Joran declared to 4 police officers on the 13 of June 2005 that Deepak was with him at the beach, that Deepak went back towards the girl, where he had left her sleeping on the sand, and that he believes that Deepak raped and then killed the girl? Tacopina can be a good attorney, but in this case he is far from home!

And how does Tacopina explain the fact that Joran told police that they had sex with Natalee when she was coming in and out of consciousness, and then on television he said that because he did not have a prophylactic he didn’t have sex with her! Who does Tacopina take us for?

For idiots? A 17 year old kid with only one thing on his mind, is going to miss such an opportunity because he has no protection? And Tacopina believes Joran when he told Greta that he NEVER had sexual relations with a girl without using a condom? Come now, Mister Tacopina, give us at least a little more consideration and stop insulting our intelligence!

Tacopina also forgets, perhaps voluntarily?. That his client admitted to police that they took Natalee to his apartment from Carlos and Charlies! How could he be at his apartment with Natalee and at the same time on the beach with her? It would be good for Tacopina to explain to us the mathematics of the timeline, because in our mathematics, you cannot be in two different places at the same time!

On one hand, I enjoyed Tacopina, because he made me laugh with his ridiculous statements. If in reality he is an attorney interested in the truth, he would not be planting so many lies which could even compete with those of his client.

Finally (for now) how does Tacopina explain the concrete fact that his client was the last one who was with Natalee at the time that she disappeared and suddenly, he doesn’t know what happened to her?

Was there magic involved? Tacopina believes that Yomanda, Negro Felipe or Maria Lionza could have been involved? Because it is impossible that Joran doesn’t know what happened to Natalee if he was the last person who was with Natalee in his apartment, or on the beach, like he has admitted on so many occasions!

The types of expressions out of Tacopina do not seem those of a serious person, and even less of those of an attorney who believes in the truth.

It could be his duty to defend his client, whether he believes he is guilty or innocent, but let it be done in a professional way, acknowledging Joran’s multiple lies, and not trying to reduce them to only two, like he tried to do last night! If he wants, I can explain how many lies and changing stories Joran offered police. We are very well aware of everything!