Doubt about the use of ‘evidence’ from hidden camera
Amigoe.com
02/04/2008

ORANJESTAD/DEN HAAG – The Dutch top-lawyer Gerard Spong expressed his doubts about the use of ‘evidence’ collected with a hidden camera. He did this in the TV-program Nova yesterday evening. Peter R. de Vries says that with these images, he has solved the Natalee Holloway-case, because Joran van der Sloot has supposedly confessed to a friend his involvement with the disappearance of Holloway.

The question whether the evidence with a hidden camera is illegal and whether the Aruban justice is allowed to use that, is ‘contriving’. He then refers to the Netherlands’ sentence by the European Court in Straatsburg on October 25, 2007 for the use of secret tape recordings. “That was according to the European Court, a violation of the right on privacy. This court decided that monitoring and recording conversations by a private person in the context of and on behalf of an official investigation with the use of technical assistance of the police, is inadmissible.”

According to Spong, even without the assistance of the police, penetrating the personal life with visual technical means is also inadmissible. “But if that illegal evidence is given to justice on a silver plate, it may, according to the verdict, still be used in some cases. I am not certain whether this is also the case here, but it is indeed exiting.”

Besides, whether Van der Sloot had lied in his ‘confession’ or not, it still is not a confession about murder, says the lawyer. According to Antillean law, a person that buries, hides, carries off, or takes off a body with the intention of concealing the death, will be sentenced to a maximum of 6 months imprisonment or a fine of a maximum of 300 guilders. It is not possible to keep the person in custody for such fact. Spong is wondering why, after professional judicial advice of his father, Joran van der Sloot, while knowing that the criminal consequences for him are so relatively small, has opted to remain silent in the Holloway-case.