Infiltrator Van der Eem in Aruba for book
Amigoe.com
02/18/2008

ORANJESTAD -- Patrick van der Eem has arrived in Aruba, where he will tell an American writer his story about the declarations that he elicited from the Holloway-suspect Joran van der Sloot. His Dutch representative Peter Schouten confirmed this to the media yesterday.

A book will be published in the US with the story of Van der Eem (34). The title of the book is going to be ‘Disposed’. He already has an agreement with an agent of a publishing company. The first chapter will be published in the American newspaper, the New York Post.

Van der Eem will tell how he and his family experienced the undercover operation in the disappearance case of Natalee Holloway. Crime journalist Peter R. de Vries brought the entrepreneur from Almelo, Van de Eem, in as infiltrator to get the truth about the disappearance of the American teenager. According to Schouten, there is big interest for the story in the US. He sees a possible box-office hit with Van der Eem revealing the undercover operation.

Common Court confirms judge-commissioner’s decision as to Joran van der Sloot’s freedom
DIARIO Aruba
02/16/2008

ORANJESTAD (AAN): In what relates to the appeal by the Public Ministry against the denial of the judge-commissioner on February 1st, 2008 to detain the suspect, Joran van der Sloot in the Natalee Holloway case, the Common Court of Justice of the Dutch Antilles and Aruba arrived to a decision on February 14, 2008 at 5:30 in the afternoon.

The Common Court confirmed the judge-commissioner’s decision. To arrive at its decision, the Common Court considered that after taking note of the video and audio materials and also of the partial transcript of these materials, there is currently, in the opinion of the Common Court, insufficient facts and circumstances from which serious objections against Joran van der Sloot for the acts he is being accused of.

The Common Court has as a starting point that given the time that has passed and the fact that Joran van der Sloot has already been detained a few times, the question is if serious objections can be said to be the basis to actually place a person under preventive detention again, and the answer is not easily answered in a positive manner.

Although Joran van der Sloot in various conversations with Patrick van der Eem made extensive and detailed declarations in what regards to what happened on the night of the disappearance of Natalee Holloway, the Common Court considered various arguments to not take serious objections solely on the basis of these declarations.

In so doing, the Common Court considered that Joran van der Sloot gave different contradictory declarations once again, which has resulted in various times that the declarations cannot be confirmed by objective facts.

Currently, the parts of the recorded conversations that contain new elements, are not confirmed by objective facts. Considering as well the possible presence of a serious personality problem in the suspect, in combination with the fact that he spoke of things – as he himself said – that do not fit with the truth, The Common Court has sufficient reason to doubt the incriminating character of the declarations.

There is no other legal option open to the Public Ministry to appeal the Common Court’s decision. The decision has as a consequence that the Public Ministry cannot detain Joran van der Sloot at this time. The investigation of the Holloway case continues, and Joran van der Sloot remains a suspect.

After concluding the investigation, the Public Ministry will take a decision as to the prosecution of Joran van der Sloot.

[translated by Getagrip]

No custody for Van der Sloot
Amigoe.com
02/15/2008

ORANJESTAD – After the Public Prosecutor appealed the decision of the examining magistrate not to detain Joran van der Sloot, the Common Court of Justice of the Neth.Antilles and Aruba announced yesterday evening that Joran van der Sloot will not be arrested again in the Holloway-case.

After having examined the possible slanderous image- and sound recording in secret by the editorial office of the Dutch crime journalist Peter R. de Vries, the Court says that there is not enough material to charge him. The Court can in any case not really answer the question whether based on that, the suspect must be taken into preventive custody. The decision also includes the situation that the suspect had given several inconsistent declarations, ‘whereby it also appeared more than once that these declarations could not be objectively confirmed’. What also played a part is the statement of Van der Sloot about having made up everything he had said in De Vries’ programme. The Court does not rule out the fact that the suspect has a ‘serious personality problem’.

“The Court questioned the verity of this statement, while we could have arrested him for a third time”, explained district attorney Dop Kruimel. Some of the things he said were partly consistent with justice’s own investigation. Others were not though, like the boat he mentioned; that has not been found yet.”

The OM has no statutory remedies left against the decision. The investigation in the Holloway-case will continue with 25 detectives working on it and Van der Sloot remains the suspect. The OM will decide on further prosecution of Van der Sloot after they are done with the investigation.

According to his lawyer Bert De Rooij, “Joran van der Sloot is not well off. He is in hiding and is constantly being threatened. Whether that is in the Netherlands or in Aruba, is not known. The lawyer said that he is not hiding for the police, but for the people’s tribunal. He has serious reasons to believe that he won’t make it across the street if we let him go free.”

Crime journalist Peter R. de Vries is of the opinion that by not arresting Joran van der Sloot, he is being rewarded for undermining the police investigation. He also does not understand that the Court does not want to arrest him because the Court is under the impression that Joran is a consistent liar. “The fact that a person constantly lies in a case of life and death, is precisely a motive to keep him/her locked behind bars.”

INFORMANT

The police have not told the Aruban authorities that Patrick van der Eem had come forward with the indication that Joran van der Sloot would perhaps talk to him about the Holloway-case. That’s what Justice-minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin told the Lower House on Thursday. Van der Eem, who was used by Peter R. de Vries as informant, reported to the Gelderland-Midden police last fall. The police didn’t work with him, because he made a condition that was against the rules. In connection with the privacy of Van der Eem and the sensitivity of the information, Hirsch Ballin didn’t go into this condition. The police also did not inform the Public Prosecutor. The minister indicated that it is part of the existing work arrangements. Besides, the OM would have most probably not accepted the man’s conditions, said the minister.