Natalee Holloway: Deepak & Satish Kalpoe Mislead the Court & Continue with VISA Excuses to Dodge Depositions in LA County, CA Dr Phil Defamation Case
Deepak and Satish Kalpoe appear to not want their day in Court …
It would appear that Deepak and Sataish Kalpoe are fraidy-scared to come to the United States and be deposed. What, the Kalpoe’s do not want their day in court? Looks that way … Kalpoe’s continue to make excuses for being deposed as Defense counsel claims they are intentionally filling out Visa applications so to be denied access to the United States.
Dr. Phil defense attorneys accuse Kalpoe’s of misleading the Court.
The Kalpoe’s appear to have tried to get two Visa applications denied within 6 months because they thought that it would delay the process. Of course they and their attorneys seem to have misinterpreted the law. Or possibly did not even bother to review it at all.
So Deepak and Satish Kalpoe that they were going to get rich quick by suing Dr Phil and Jammie Skeeters. Since the initial law suit filing, the case has been dismissed against the late Jamie Skeeters. The Kalpoe brothers were suing for defamation of character. Of course our first thought was, didn’t one have to have character first in order to claim defamation?
In motion to compel documents filed with the court the lawyers for Dr. Phil McGraw continued to file motions to compel the Kalpoe brothers to be deposed i in Los Angeles, CA. For three years the Kalpoe’s have come up with ever excuse not to come to the United States to be deposed. Read the Motion to Compel HERE. Defense attorneys are looking to compel the Kalpoe’s to appear in Los Angeles County, CA on or before April 15, 2010 to be deposed. It is hard to believe that Deepak and Satish, so quick to sue have never yet been deposed. Does any one really wonder why?
Did Deepak and Satish really not think they were going to be grilled regarding their conduct and participation in the disappearance and death of Alabama teen Natalee Holloway?
Their actions had everything to do with their character, or lack thereof and would be open to questioning. Exactly what reputation would one have to defame when as a suspect in the death and disappearance of Natalee Holloway, you lie to Aruban and Dutch LE? In the end … this case always ties back to the night that Natalee Holloway disappeared and was never seen again. All questions, whether they be civil or criminal begin there.
The Kalpoe’s claim that they cannot make it to the United States to be deposed by Dr. Phil’s attorneys because they have issues with their VISA’s. It’s no wonder that they were denied by the United States government, especially when from all accounts they were purposely incorrectly and inaccurately filled out by the Kalpoe’s. Dr. Phil’s immigration expert referred to the Kalpoe’s Visa applications as, “two shoddy Visa applications which were defective and contained contained numerous discrepancies, and were predictably denied”. Plaintiffs (Kalpoes) offered the Court no explanation as to why they did not contact an immigration attorney to prepare and file their Visa applications. Hmm.
Defamation of character, eh? These folks intentionally fill out a simple Visa application to suit their purpose not to be deposed.
Dr. Phil Attorneys Use Scared Monkeys Natalee Holloway Posts as Exhibit in Court Docs Against Deepak & Satish Kalpoes
Scared Monkeys makes the list of exhibits for the defense in the case of Deepak & Satish Kalpoe v. Dr. Phil. Scared Monkeys has been on this case from the beginning, long before and certainly long after most of the media coverage.
A recent court document was filed on July 7, 2008 with the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles – Central District by the attorneys of Dr. Phil McGraw, CBS Television and the Estate of Jamie Skeeters as a special motion to strike compliant pursuant to California code of Civil procedure § 425.16 against the claims of Deepak and Satish Kalpoe.
Scared Monkeys has attained a copy of the filing and to our surprise a Scared Monkeys post was used as an exhibit for the defense. The post by Scared Monkeys actually makes up pages 55 – 123. The post and what is Exhibit A-51 was written on February 16, 2008 entitled, “Scared Monkey’s Welcomes Bill O’Reilly & Geraldo Rivera to the Fold as they Finally Embrace the Aruba Boycott and Date Rape in Natalee Holloway Disappearance”. The full article can be read HERE. Not only was the post used, but comments as well.
As many have stated since the Kalpoe’s filed their defamation law suit, how can one have their character impugned if there was no character or reputation in the first place? From the outset of the Natalee Holloway disappearance and the case against the three main suspects, Joran Van der Sloot, Deepak Kalpoe and Satish Kalpoe … the media in print, TV, radio and internet have done stories based upon the actions and words of these three suspects. The Kalpoe’s were arrested by the ALE. They brought that upon themsleves. It was the 3 suspects who lied to the police and stated they returned Natalee Holloway to the Holiday Inn the night they drove off with her from Carlos ‘n Charlie’s. It was the suspects who lied about the two black security guards and implicated them in a crime where they were arrested. It was the three suspects who continually changed their stories and statements to the police and investigators.
The Kalpoe’s claim to be victims; however, they brought all of what happened following Natalee Holloway’s disappearance on themselves. They have no one to blame but themselves and their lies. Its nothing more than a get quick rich scheme for people who only made $950.00 US a month (response from Interrogatory) to cash in for millions at the expense of missing Natalee Holloway.
Scared Monkeys has been on the story from the beginning and its good to see that we are continuing to help in the case and issues that have come about from the case of missing Natalee Holloway. It would also seem that Dr. Phil owes us a thank you as well. This is about “Justice for Natalee” … not $’s for the Kalpoe’s.
AUM sleuths Take a look at Natalee Holloway Missing in Aruba Case … Hint, Go to Scared Monkeys … Premeditated
More sleuths try to uncover the mystery and answers of the Natalee Holloway case. They may want to start with internet investigative work that has gone on since day one following Natalee Holloway’s disappearance.
Students from three area universities and the The Auburn Montgomery Continuing Education Office and the Alabama Crime Prevention Clearinghouse met to investigate the disappearance of Natalee Holloway in Aruba. These aspiring sleuths may want to first started with the following information as to the nature of the crime.
“Students from all three universities will be working together to solve cold cases,” said Sheryl McCollum, CCIRI director.
“They will be conducting investigative research where students will formulate a theory based on every piece of research they come across.”
Research will consist of going back to the scene of the crime and interviewing detectives in to get a true sense of what they think may have happened.
A hint to these soon to be sleuths … start here at Scared Monkey’s and then here at the Scared Monkeys forum, the achieves too. You may also want to read the actual witness and suspect statements as well.
Thirty Students from three area universities will try to do what countless law enforcement officials in this country and on Aruba have been unable to do — solve the disappearances of Natalee Holloway and Chandra Levy.
Although Natalee Holloway will be one of the program’s two initial cases, Beth Holloway Twitty told students at the event that the program is not just about her daughter — the Mountain Brook student disappeared more than two years ago during a high school graduation trip to Aruba.
“I think we all know that,” she said. “I think that it’s about each and every individual.”
“I think the things you can uncover … will help millions and millions,” Twitty told the students.(Montgomery Advisor)
Natalee Holloway: John Q. Kelly On the Record … Civil Case & Where is the Missing Statements from Joran Van der Sloot ( Aruba Cover up & Corruption)
ARUBAN COVER UP AND CORRUPTION … WHERE IS JORAN VAN DER SLOOT’S 5/31/05 WITNESS STATEMENT?
John Q. Kelly briefly discusses the Dutch reporting of a civil case possible being brought against Joran Van der Sloot by the parents of missing Natalee Holloway. At the moment it appears to be a non-story as Beth Holloway has had no conversations with the attorney in question.
However, the real question that has to be answered is what part did the Aruban police take in the cover up, corruption and destruction of documents and evidence in the case of Natalee Holloway. If they covered up and destroyed the initial witness statement, what else did they subsequently destroy as well? Possibly evidence taken from Deepak’s car? Once one questions police actions … all of their actions come under scrutiny.
Since the beginning of the investigation Beth Holloway had made references to a crumpled up piece of paper on that looked like a statement that was on the desk at the police station when she spoke with the ALE discussing her Natalee’s disappearance. Scared Monkeys has always questioned why there would have been no statement from Joran Van der Sloot, yet everyone else had been questioned at the outset. Are we really supposed to believe that no witness statement existed from the #1 prime suspect, Joran Van der Sloot, who was last seen with Natalee Holloway until 6/9/05.
The very same witness statement that Joran van der Sloot actually references in his own book. The very same witness statement that most likely gives rise to a confession and admission of guilt and where the ALE knew to ask questions of seizures.
Greta: He must have told the police that first time he spoke with them because why would they have asked Jug about the shaking and the epilepsy type seizures or something? I think to myself, what are the Aruban police up to? But that is for another day.
John Q. Kelly: May 31st Joran was the first person interviewed by Jacobs who was taking statements. Every police report subsequent to that. The statements made by Deepak, made by Satish, made by Beth that day we have them all. There is no statement from Joran until June 9th.
Greta: Something is funny. Something is not quite right. I would like to see our State Department get a little busy on this one. (Fox: On The Record 2/20/08)
Then there is this bit of information from Joran Van der Sloot’s book (translation) … “It is already 4 PM in the afternoon when I sign my witness statement and my father and I leave the interrogation room.”
Oh, I guess Joran Van der Sloot is lying here too?
WHAT WITNESS STATEMENT? NO ONE HAS EVER SEEN SUCH A STATEMENT! WHAT HAPPENED TO IT AND WHERE IS IT? WAS IT DESTROYED BY THE ARUBAN POLICE?
Interestingly enough we seem to have most, if not all the witness and suspect statements (HERE) from the initial parts of the investigation. All, but Joran Van der Sloot’s 5/31/05 statement that is in question. The very same one that probably tipped off the Aruban police to ask Beth Holloway and Jug Twitty about whether Natalee Holloway had a history of seizures.
From Page 111 of Joran’s book:
Tuesday May 31st 2005
Joran rides bus to school, takes exam, visits with principal Werner and sleeps in sick bay.
Paul calls school at 10:30am. Jan van der Straten wants Joran to give a voluntary witness statement, since the family was creating quite some noise.
Paul meets with principal, then he and Joran head to Bubali Station.
Joran calls Deepak who says, “stick to our story, the police has also phoned Satish and me and asked us to come.”
Aruba, Just How Much Evidence Do You Need to Actually Prosecute a Case? When is New Evidence not New Evidence, or is the Issue the Judge Reviewing It?
When is new evidence not new evidence … when it takes place in Aruba. Is it the evidence that is the issue, or is it the judges that are reviewing the evidence?
One needs to ask the following question of Aruba officials and the Aruban people. What would happen in Aruba if a suspect was tried and convicted of a rape, murder or other violent crime and was serving time in prison only to have new evidence presented in their case because of new technology. Say for instance, new DNA testing that proved 100% that the convicted suspect could never have committed the crime. In Aruba, would that be considered new evidence? Would that new evidence be used to exonerate the suspect and allow the falsely convicted suspect to go free like HERE or HERE. Or would the Aruban legal system say, who cares … you must finish your sentence for a crime that you did not commit?
Now answer that very same question in reverse. What’s the difference when that same new evidence proves that a crime was committed and by who? Would not that be considered new evidence in an investigation? Hmm?
Thus is the situation in the Natalee Holloway investigation where the Aruban prosecutor, Hans Mos, presented new evidence from a suspects computer hard drive that stated, “Natalee Holloway was dead”. Evidence that the prosecutor states was only made newly available through new technology from the Netherlands. How can new evidence gained from new technology not be considered new evidence is the real question. The question then really becomes, is it the evidence that is the issue or the judge reviewing the evidence.
With the newest digital technologies from the Netherlands, the investigation team this time recovered what was impossible earlier. On the hard drive of a confiscated computer was a chat-session, in which one of the suspects said that the missing teenager Natalee Holloway is dead. The OM didn’t say which of the suspects said that, but the information is substantial and especially ‘new’ evidence, and sufficient for the OM to arrest the three. Obtaining information from new technology is also considered new evidence, explained Mos. He compared it with a DNA-investigation that after years, can still give evidence.
Take a good hard look at what this evidence really is folks. A suspect who was last seen with Natalee Holloway before she disappeared forever and said she was dead. This occurred between 5 and 6 hours after Natalee Holloway was last seen with the three suspects. Why would a person who was seen leaving Carlos n’ Charlie’s with Natalee Holloway ever reference the word “dead” if they did not have person knowledge that the Alabama teenager was in fact dead? We have been told all during this case, “if there is no body, there is no crime”. That is utter nonsense, if a suspect references the fact that the person in question is dead … then guess what … that is a complete admission to the fact that she is. Now the question arises, how and why would any of the three suspects make such a claim or even have knowledge of such information? This admission of “death” is long before the story had ever been reported or the TV cameras and media came to Aruba.
In an Internet chat shortly after Holloway vanished, one of the three suspects said she was dead, Mos said.
The chat, retrieved from a computer hard disk, was among new evidence prosecutors used to justify re-arresting the three in November, he said.
New technology that was not available in 2005 was used to find that chat and more between two of the three suspects, as well as others, he said. (CNN)
We will not even get into the fact that the three suspects had an MO and openly bragged on line about what their plans were to do to American girls that they picked up. No premeditation there, huh? Think there were references to the potential use of “date rape” drugs in those chat sessions? Seriously people, how exactly do you think that a person walks out of a bar in less that 1/2 hours with another person that they had never met before? Hmm?