If Arubans, Aruban officials, or those assigned the task of figuring out or preventing a boycott from taking away from the already declining tourism numbers in Aruba want to understand why it is occurring? You all need to look no further than the following events taking place today in Aruba as described in the Amigoe and Bon Dia articles, “The Vand der Sloot family suing for damages”.
Individual have a sense as to what they consider right and wrong. No politician has to tell them this, they are able to make up their own mind. Thus the reason why although a boycott backed by a politician is nice, but not necessary. The idea that Paul Van der Sloot is suing for damages after spending a couple days in jail and having taken part in discussing with the three prime suspects how to potentially cover each other’s stories let alone coach the three suspects is beyond imagination to many. The idea that two black security guards who were initially arrested and spent more time in jail than did Paulus due much in fact because Paulus’ son Joran Van der Sloot lied to police have yet to be considered “not suspects” is beyond the pale. What is probably the most insulting is how exactly can a suspect in an unsolved crime be a party to sue for damages?
“… the Court of Appeals ruled in favour of the Van der Sloot family members that also the damages suffered by the family members, including Joran qualify for compensation.”
The idea that a suspect in an ongoing investigation to what the Prosecution has said, “… young lady in question has lost her life as a consequence of a punishable crime committed against her.
The idea that a suspect in an ongoing crime investigation let alone individuals who may have knowledge of what that suspect said or did is able to not only have their day in court but sue for damages while the rest of the investigation has been handled the way it has and the past court decisions made only make many American question everything about Aruba.
An American family has lost a daughter and somehow a suspect who has lied to police repeatedly that even resulted in others being falsely imprisoned and is still a suspect in a criminal investigation is somehow under Aruban law allowed to be compensated for damages?
And people wonder why Americans do not want to visit Aruba? Surely you cannot be serious?
Amigoe; January 12, 2006: The Van der Sloot family can claim damages
ARUBA Ã¢â‚¬” Paul as well as his family members can claim damages due to the arrest of Van der Sloot in connection with the investigation on the disappearance of Natalee Holloway.
The Common Court of the Neth.Antilles and Aruba decided this yesterday in the appeal case that was instituted by the family members of Van der Sloot. The actual damage claim case serves this Friday. In November, the judge in the court of first instance ruled that only the damages suffered by Paul van der Sloot himself can be considered for compensation. However, the Court of Appeals ruled in favour of the Van der Sloot family members that also the damages suffered by the family members, including Joran qualify for compensation. The Court decided that not only the suspects, but everybody that suffered a loss can claim compensation, including his family members.
Only damages that the family have suffered due to the arrest of Paul van der Sloot, not the arrest of Joran; that is a different matter. Lawyer Arie Swaen, who will represent Paul van der Sloot this coming Friday, doesn’t want to tell how much compensation the family is going to claim. “We have not agreed on that yet.”
Also from Bon Dia Aruba , January 11, 2006: The Superior Court has now given a reason Friday Paul van der Sloot and family start case of damages and prejudice (Hat Tip Translation: Getagrip)
ORANJESTAD Ã¢â‚¬” Now that the Superior Court has handed down the judgment in favour of Paul van der Sloot, he and his family are bringing a case of damages and prejudice against the Government.
An investigation Bon Dia Aruba is conducting shows that yesterday the Superior Court in CuraÃƒ §ao handed down the judgment in the appeal of Paul van der Sloot which was dealt with on December 19, 2005.
In an exclusive interview Bon Dia Aruba had with attorney Swaen, who represents Paul van der Sloot, he explained that the judgment that the Superior Court gave yesterday is about the appeal which took place December 19, 2005.
Mr. Swaen explained that the appeal was about the decision of the Court of First Instance on the case of Paul van der Sloot to be able to bring a case of damages and prejudice against the government.
In the case, Paul van der Sloot asked for him and his family to bring a case of damages and prejudice.
The Court of First Instance decided that only Paul van der Sloot could bring a case of damages and prejudice, not his family.
SUPERIOR COURT JUDGMENT
Yesterday, the Superior Court handed down the decision on the appeals case, where the three judges declared that they do not share the opinion of the Court of First Instance.
The Superior Court showed that according to article 179 lid 3 Sv, it is possible for the family of Paul van der Sloot to also sue for damages and prejudice.
(the rest of the translation)