As has been reported with the latest turn in the never ending carousel ride called the Natalee Holloway Witness revolving carousel, “the latest lead in the Holloway case evaporates into thin air.”
One day Guido Wever is arrested in The Netherlands and charged in ”assisting in the murder, heavy battery and kidnapping” of Natalee Holloway. This coming after he had been previously questioned at the outset of this investigation. The next week he is released for lack of evidence as if it was nothing. Rather peculiar that one goes from public enemy number one with direct ties to Joran Van der Sloot, the primary suspect in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway, and being extradited back to Aruba, to released on a lack of evidence. My what a difference an extreme high priced attorney makes.
The man, identified only as “Guido W.,” 19, was freed unconditionally with the consent of Aruba prosecutors after six “long, hard days” of questioning, attorney Gerard Spong said. He was the ninth person arrested and jailed in the case. All have been freed for lack of evidence.
However, Guido W. remained a suspect and agreed to be available for questioning when summoned by police, Spong told The Associated Press.
So what was his explanation as to the scratches on his face? The ones that so many witnesses said they saw in the days following Natalee Holloway’s disappearance?
The latest lead in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway evaporated Tuesday when Dutch police released a man identified by witnesses as having long, deep scratches on his face shortly after the Alabama teen vanished in Aruba nearly a year ago.
Guido W. was detained after five witnesses claimed to have seen him with deep, 3-inch-long scratches on his face that could have come from human nails, Spong said.
But those witness accounts were delivered eight months after the disappearance, he said. Police had questioned the teenager three times before he left Aruba on June 8, and no one had reported seeing suspicious facial scars.
His attorney, Gerard Spong, said that Wever’s tennis coach stated that he saw no such scratches. Sprong then basically called the witnesses liars. However, for what purpose would they lie? Maybe Wever was wearing make-up?
The defense also had testimony from the suspect’s tennis coach that he was not scarred and photographs of him from that period, the lawyer said.
“It was obvious that this was a fake story,” he said.
Spong said the witnesses were fellow casino workers, but he declined to speculate on the motives behind their statements.
Why does the story necessarily have to be fake? Because it behooves a defense attorney’s client to say so and in turn besmirch the character of others? What else would a defense attorney say that was paid big dollars to defend his client?
Guido Wever was an aspiring male model. I am sure that Wever knows how to put on make up. I am sure he is familiar with base, cover up and many other facial cosmetic products. Why were the casino employees lying? Not just one casino worker or two, but five came forward and stated, “to have seen him with deep, 3-inch-long scratches on his face that could have come from human nails.”
Guido Wever worked as a croupier at the Excelsior casino in the Holiday Inn where Natalee Holloway stayed. Natalee and her friends frequented the casino during their trip on multiple occasions. Wever is a known friend of Joran Van der Sloot and was with him the day after playing tennis and that night gambling. Wever then takes off for The Netherlands nine days after Natalee disappears. Wever’s attorney states that his departure was planned in advance.
But Spong said the young man’s father booked the air ticket to the Netherlands a month earlier, long before Holloway landed on the island.
Police also questioned him about the white car he drove in Aruba. A white car was seen near where Holloway disappeared, but Spong said “half the population” of Aruba drives similar cars.
I am sure that Spong produced the credit card receipt or the ticket showing the purchase date? Or the airline provided confirmation to this and they did not just take him for his word. Had Wever given the casino any formal notice that he was quitting his job? Had Wever told any other casino employees or friends of his impending departure? How about Joran? Would have been a great question to ask Joran Van der Sloot during the interrogations as to whether he know if Wever was leaving to the Netherlands.
The remarks regarding the car are a typical defense attorney response. half the island may drive white cars attorney Spong. However, half the island was not friends with Joran Van der Sloot, the last know person to be seen with Natalee Holloway. Half the island also did not play tennis with Joran the following day and go gambling with him later. That is hardly an answer to a question.
I am sure your client has no problem stating where he was the night that Natalee Holloway disappeared and what he did the next two days. That would be pretty easy to answer for someone with nothing to hide. Let’s just hope the police actually asked these questions.
Then comes one of the most amazing defenses I think many of us have ever seen or heard. Move over “Twinkie Defense”, there is a new defense in town. Why is Guido Wever innocent of any wrong doing of the charges against him of “assisting in the murder, heavy battery and kidnapping”. Wever’s attorney states, ‘My client is gay.” SO WHAT! What does gay have to do with assisting in a murder, kidnapping and heavy battery? Are we supposed to believe a gay person has never done such things before? No one charged him with rape. For what purpose would Gerard Spong use the “gay card”? With all the privacy laws that Dutch law claims to have like providing an individuals name, his lawyer comes out and states he’s gay? So much for that privacy issue.
Netherlands — The lawyer for 19-year-old Guido Wever, the latest person to be arrested and released in connection with the disappearance of American teen Natalee Holloway, said Tuesday that his client did not make a good suspect because he is gay.
‘My client is gay,” lawyer Gerard Spong told FOX News, adding that Wever sometimes wears makeup.
I still fail to see how Spong’s admission that his client is gay and wears make-up somehow gets Wever off the hook. If he was not involved and is innocent that is one thing, but the reasons given by his attorney are foolish at best. If anything, it is more damning to have made such a comment.
OK, Guido Wever is gay and wears make-up. As stated earlier when we only discussed that Wever was a male model he knew how to use facial products. Now there is an admission that he wears make-up and obviously knows how to apply it.
Could we not also now surmise thanks to Wever’s attorney that Wever wore make-up to cover up any scratches that others may have seen at one point on his face? Could we also not speculate that Wever may have helped Joran apply make up to his face if there were any scratches on it, hypothetically? They did supposedly play tennis the following day. Has anyone ever seen Joran wearing any form of cover up make-up on?
One really has to wonder how we get from attempting to extradite a suspect back to Aruba and charges of “assisting in the murder, heavy battery and kidnapping” to released on not enough evidence. What a difference a week, some phone calls and a high priced attorney makes. One thing is for certain, these actions and comedy of errors that are far from laughable are being watched and remembered.
The release of Guido W. apparently leaves Aruban authorities no closer to cracking a case that has generated worldwide media attention and tarnished the island’s reputation. Islanders fear that Aruba, which gets 70 percent of its gross domestic product from tourism, will be permanently scarred by the mystery.