Peru Frees American Held Since 1995
Posted on 06/07/2010 9:17:37 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
LIMA, Peru - A high-ranking Peruvian government official confirmed to NBC News Monday night that Joran van der Sloot confessed to the slaying of a 21-year-old Lima woman.
According to La Republica newspaper, he said that his anger exploded and he broke Stephany Flores' neck after she grabbed his laptop without his permission, and found out that he was involved in the disappearance of an American woman.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
MAKE THAT: I am expecting many Arubans to blame Natalee for the murder of Stephany.
He should have just had a simple password on the computer when he was away, to keep casual snoopers out ...
Well, the article said it was a maximum of 35 years in Perus ... so I guess it depends on how long he lives ...
Can’t believe that he kept this on his laptop during international travel, he must be dummer than a sack full of windmills.
What he said doesn't mean that he carried anything incriminating. It appears to me to mean that he had "information" about him being the suspect in that case, and that's what the girl found.
It could have also had some personal thoughts (something he wrote) and/or something about that TV reporter in Holland getting him on camera with a "confession" (even though nothing came of it). So, all of what she saw may be no more than what was already available to the public.
I take that as he didn't want to be known as "that guy" -- rather than there was something that incriminated him.
You are assuming his confession is true. I'm guessing he killed just to kill...especially given the anniversary date of the Holloway affair. He probably had this "confession" in mind before Flores ever got to his hotel room.
Looks like Peru’s goons beat something out of Joran all right, but it still has an odd smell. If Natalee had gotten a gawk at Joran’s murder video, do you think she would choose to (1) confront Joran personally about it? or (2) sneak away as quietly as possible and go to the police?
Ummm..., that wasn't a confession about Natalee Holloway's disappearance, but rather a confession to the killing of the Peruvian girl, Stephany Flores,
And in that light (of what Joran van der Sloot said about the killing) -- it didn't seem that he was saying that she found out something about a murder or a killing -- but rather -- she found out "who he was" -- as in -- "a suspect in the Natalee Holloway disappearance".
So, it's more likely that what that girl, Stephany Flores, came across was something having to do with him being arrested and questioned and other "information" about him being a "suspect" in that disappearance of Natalee Holloway.
He got mad because he did not want "to be known" as "that suspect in the Natalee Holloway disappearance".
I wonder what was on the laptop about Natalee that he freaked out about when she saw it. What a sick punk this guy is. He knew his goose was cooked because he doesn’t have dear daddy to do the dirty work for him anymore
I know a lot of people are assuming that Joran van der Sloot was killing someone else on the anniversary of Natalee Holloway's disappearance as some kind of sick thinking on his part --- but it may be something completely different.
The way I "read" this is that he wasn't known as the "suspect in Natalee Holloway's disappearance" and he wanted to keep it that way. And when the girl looked on his computer, and found out from the "information" that he had there that he was the main suspect (and maybe he had other news stories about himself, too, there) -- that made van der Sloot mad, because it "blew his cover" and he didn't want "to be known" that way.
As I read it, they got into an argument about her (i.e., Stephany Flores) finding out "who he was" by getting on to his computer. They argued, he got madder, he got abusive, hit her and then in his anger broke her neck (either accidently or on purpose).
I don't think he figured "his goose was cooked" -- in that he was "caught for the disappearance of Natalee Holloway" -- because that's all been gone through extensively, thus far, and no one has anything on him about that, other than suspicions.
What he was "caught" about -- is that he was "identified" as the main suspect in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway and that interfered with his plans in that country.
Finally, justice for Natalie Holloway....
I'm not convinced of that ... I mean, if he gets justice for his killing of Stephany Flores, I wouldn't consider that to be justice for Natalee Holloway's disappearance. We don't know what happened there, we have no details, we don't know if he was killed, if she had an accident, or got drugged up and died or anything.
It's not what I would call justice for the disappearance of Natalee Holloway.
His life is officially over.
Well, for most people that would be true, being that 35 years is a very long time. But, he is young and he could live a lot longer, so there may be some life left for him after those 35 years ....
It also depends on what else happens with the U.S. case against him, too. That might add a few more years.
10 gets you 100 that the Peruvian goons told Joran he could get off easier on a confession to a “crime of passion” (this holds true for a number of Romance and Latin American countries whose law is based on the Napoleonic Code). Rather than the cold, soulless thing it would have been seen as.
Quite true. It could very well work out to be a shorter sentence for him, to have gotten mad at some "indiscretion" that the girl, Stephany Flores, engaged in (by accessing his computer without permission and finding out he was the main suspect in Natalee Holloway's disappearance) and having killed her in a fit of passon -- rather than being some cold-blooded killer who goes around killing women for the heck of it.
By dying, I guess he found out sooner.
I wonder if you have to explain what douche your kid is when you face your maker?
Actually, that looks good to me ... LOL ...
It really doesn’t matter if he confessed or not. They have him entering the hotel room with the girl and leaving with changed clothes without her. Tells the hotel not to disturb her. I don’t know how much more they need than that even without a confession. Especially if there is ANY physical evidence in the room.
It could make a difference in the circumstances of how the killing came about. If it was a crime of passion, on the spur of the moment, then it might be a reduced sentence -- from something that was a planned and premeditated murder.
It would be in his interests to present it as something that "got of control" and that he was angry and in a fit of passion, accidently killed Stephany Flores, and didn't mean to.
If there is nothing to show that he intended to kill her beforehand, and even if he did drug her in order to get her there in the first place -- he could very well maintain his story of it being in a fit of passion and being drunk at the time.
He's already given a "reason" for him being angry (i.e., the girl getting on his computer and digging/snooping around) -- so that can fit in with an argument getting heated and him slapping her around and then accidently killing her.
“He’s already given a “reason” for him being angry (i.e., the girl getting on his computer and digging/snooping around)”
Bullpuckey! Peruvians are not going to believe anything this liar says and they are not going to believe it is a crime of passion! He didn’t even know this woman!!
Bullpuckey! Peruvians are not going to believe anything this liar says and they are not going to believe it is a crime of passion! He didn’t even know this woman!!
LOL ... I've seen drunks commit "crimes of passion" and not even know who they were doing it to ... :-) It happens ...
As to whether that is the case here, what I'm saying is that if he says that and they don't have anything which shows it to be premeditated for a killing, then he's going to have the last word in the matter. Without anything to say it was pre-planned, I don't see how someone else, who wasn't there, is going to say differently.
It will come down to the evidence showing that -- or not.
The "rationale" for the anger has been "stated" by van der Sloot, and it's something that anyone can see could happen. I would not like someone snooping around in my computer -- but the difference is, I put a password on it to prevent "casual snoopers" (like friends, acquaintances and others) from doing so. And furthermore, I don't get mad to the point of killing someone. So, that's the difference for me, but I would not be too happy about it either.
So, that's the "rationale" for the argument and the anger. And it's not too hard to understand, especially with people drinking (or possibly on drugs) to get "overly angry" at the very slightest things. I've seen that, too, with many other people, so I know it happens very easily, and it's "plausible".
It's a "plausible explanation" for what happened -- but that doesn't mean it's an excuse -- it just means that this sort of thing can and does happen with people, far too many times, unfortunately.
AND..., if someone is already predisposed to abusing women, for one thing, and they have a "short fuse", for another thing, and they've been drinking -- no, it's "not a stretch" to see this sort of thing happening.
See the following for the attitudes in the legal system and law enforcement ...
The culture there has a lot more men beating their wives and also having mistresses along with being married. It's not a "favorable" society towards women and you're going to encounter those types of attitudes in the legal system and in law enforcement.
It's conceivable that the police interrogators could very well shake their heads "knowingly" upon hearing that woman violated the man's privacy in such a way. And although they may know that the guy has to go to jail for his crime, they also "understand" why it happened, too ... you see ...
Yes, the legal system is different. Chances are the 3 judges are going to be sympathetic with the Father who ran for President twice.
There is no juror of the peers! Not good for Sloot!
Oh... I have no doubt he’ll be convicted... as it’s obvious from what they have on him that he did the crime... I’m just saying it will be the lesser penalty ... not the 35 years but more like 10 years or less...
Here, in some states, you might be talking about the death penalty... but there, you’re probably talking about maybe 10 years ...
I am sure you are probably right but 10 years in a peruvian prison will be like an eternity for this kid!!
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.