Guest: Ricardo Yarzagaray, Helen Lejuez, Jossy Mansur, Dave Holloway,
Clint Van Zandt, Mickey Sherman, Susan Filan, Jim Moret
DAN ABRAMS, HOST: Coming up, two suspects in Natalee Holloway‘s disappearance arrested today. The prosecutor says there are—quote—“ new facts and circumstances.”
ABRAMS (voice-over): It was exactly what Natalee‘s mother had been demanding. The re-arrest of Deepak and Satish Kalpoe on suspicion of rape and murder. What is the new information and why exactly was another friend of suspect Joran van der Sloot arrested as well?
Plus, we‘ve got an inside look at the fishing boat that may be the last place Olivia Newton-John‘s boyfriend was seen before he disappeared.
The program about justice starts now.
ABRAMS: Hi everyone. First up on the docket tonight, breaking news out of
Aruba. What could be the break prosecutors have been waiting for in the
Natalee Holloway case. Authorities say they have new reason to arrest
Deepak and Satish Kalpoe, the two brothers considered suspects in the case,
but released almost two months ago. They are now back in custody, taken in
by police this morning on suspicion of rape and murder.
Police also arrested another man; a friend and neighbor of lead suspect Joran van der Sloot, Freddie Aaron Batiz (ph). They say it‘s related to another case. That‘s what they say. Prosecutors say all of this is based on new information. Here‘s the quote from them.
“In the early morning hours of Friday, the 26th of August, 2005, police once more arrested the brothers, Satish Kalpoe and Deepak Kalpoe. They are in custody based on the same suspicions as before. They are suspected of the primary criminal act of together with other people committing premeditated murder, alternately together with other people murdering somebody, more alternately rob a person of her liberty with fatal consequences and even more alternately, raping somebody. Aside from these suspicions against the two brothers, there are new suspicions, which at this point the prosecutor is not commenting on. To arrest S.K. and D.K. again, there had to be new facts and circumstances. That is the case.”
I‘ve got a lot of questions about what that means and joining me now from Aruba to help answer those questions, an attorney for Natalee‘s family, Helen Lejuez, and Aruban attorney Ricardo Yarzagaray. Thank you both very much for coming on the program. We appreciate it.
RICARDO YARZAGARAY, ARUBAN ATTORNEY: Thank you.
ABRAMS: All right. Helen, first let me start with you. I assume that this is exactly what Beth Twitty had long wanted. How did you explain this to her when you told her—when the news was announced?
HELEN LEJUEZ, ATTORNEY FOR HOLLOWAY TWITTY FAMILY: Well I informed them of what has happened today and whom has been arrested and why. And you mentioned it very correctly. Whatever you said, that was very correct. You mentioned it all.
ABRAMS: Well what I really don‘t understand, though, Ricardo is this alternately. It says at one point, they‘re under arrest for suspicion of murder, alternately for taking away her liberty, more alternately for rape. I mean this is the exact words in English that the prosecutor‘s office gave to us. What does all that mean?
YARZAGARAY: Yes, there‘s (UNINTELLIGIBLE) possibilities when charging someone that if you start from the top, you can take man one, man two, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) homicide. You know you can take maltreatment with a consequence of death. You can (UNINTELLIGIBLE) sexual assault, sexual assault with a consequence of death. So basically, I think they‘re trying to go for the sure shot, go for the lesser charge and see whatever it is they can get their hands on and prove it. You really have—they really need to prove something and it seems that they have some new information, which has led them to re-arrest the Kalpoe brothers and even another suspect.
ABRAMS: Does this mean, though, that they don‘t know exactly what happened? Does it mean that they‘re still at that point where they‘re saying, look, we‘re convinced they were involved but we don‘t know if it was murder, we don‘t know if it was rape, we don‘t know.
YARZAGARAY: Well, the public opinion is that the brothers and Joran van der Sloot were involved in the murder of Natalee Holloway. That‘s the presumption. But in a legal matter, to prove it, it‘s a whole different thing. So what you‘re going to do is you‘re going to get evidence so that can you charge them. What they are doing now is trying to get the maximum extension to hold the maximum amount of suspects for the maximum allowable time to give the prosecution enough time, space and possibilities...
ABRAMS: All right.
YARZAGARAY: ... to investigate correctly.
ABRAMS: All right. Ms. Lejuez, does this mean now that they get a new clock in effect, meaning when they arrested the Kalpoe brothers initially, a clock began, there were rules, there were obligations on the prosecutors to prove certain things in a certain amount of time. With this re-arrest, do they get a whole new clock to start again?
LEJUEZ: Yes, for all four of them.
ABRAMS: For all four—well why for Joran as well? I mean just because they have new information, I mean wouldn‘t they have to take that to a judge and they would still have to prove more, for example, than they had to prove last time?
LEJUEZ: No, because they added rape to it and that gives you a new timeline again.
ABRAMS: So they did add the rape charge, right? I mean that is something new. And did that add that with regard to Joran van der Sloot as well?
LEJUEZ: Yes, they added for three of them and the fourth one is on another case. Yes.
ABRAMS: OK. I‘m sorry. My producer‘s telling me they have not added it for Joran, so we‘ve got to be careful on this. Helen, are you sure? Because my production team is telling me that they did not add a rape charge with regard to Joran.
LEJUEZ: That information I have, so maybe not. We still don‘t have the full information. They are not giving the full information, they‘re not giving the information even on the other suspect, but we have had words already, yes.
ABRAMS: Finally, Ricardo, on this other suspect, they say it‘s unrelated. He happens to be a friend of Joran‘s and of the Kalpoe brothers. Do you believe that it‘s completely unrelated to this case?
YARZAGARAY: Well, I think it‘s a legal chess game what they‘re playing. They‘re trying to divide and conquer somehow and trying to let them make statements against each other. Try to shuffle the cards, put different charges on different people, see who‘s going to crack, who‘s going to tell something about the other one.
ABRAMS: Yes, that‘s what I think.
YARZAGARAY: That sort of thing.
ABRAMS: Yes. All right. Helen and Ricardo are going to stick around with us. When MSNBC—when NBC‘s Michelle Kosinski spoke with Satish Kalpoe‘s attorney, David Kock, on Monday, he certainly gave her the impression the authorities had nothing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID KOCK, SATISH KALPOE‘S ATTORNEY: On the other hand, as you know, there is one person who has kept changing his story and I think, too, that that is one of the reasons why that person is still detained. But none of the case has progressed at their to solutions or that we know more things than we did not know on May the 31st or the 30th. So in that aspect, the case really hasn‘t moved forward. And I don‘t see a change coming really in that very soon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Well it seems he was wrong about that, although we should be clear. No one‘s been charged in this case. These people have been arrested. Joran van der Sloot hasn‘t been charged in this case. The Kalpoe brothers haven‘t been charged. They‘ve been arrested on suspicion of the particular crime.
Joining me now from Aruba is Michelle Kosinski who did that interview. All right. So Michelle, it sure sounded at the beginning of this week like David Kock, the attorney for Satish Kalpoe, was pretty confident they weren‘t going to have anything new.
MICHELLE KOSINSKI, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: He was confident. In fact, up until today, that‘s what he‘s been saying. That there just is so little in this case. Other parties in this case have said the same thing, although, keep in mind, defense attorneys have been very worried and some of them challenged it in court to get more access to prosecutor‘s files. Those were Joran van der Sloot‘s attorneys.
Because they felt that prosecutors had something that they were withholding. And we‘ve heard that they wanted transcripts, things like cell phone records, but they basically had a feeling that there was some new information and now prosecutors spelled it out. They do have new information. They do have new suspicions. Where that‘s coming from, we don‘t exactly know because prosecutors won‘t comment on those details.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KOCK: If there‘s evidence against my client, there‘s none at all. I mean the only thing that really happened in this case was that in the beginning, my client together with his brother and the other suspect told a story that was not true, of course. And you can try to second-guess the reasons maybe for that, et cetera, but shortly after they were detained, they changed that and he in any case—at any case, has stick to that continuously. And what I‘ve indicated in the past is that you cannot be interrogated day after day after day and keep telling very elaborate stories that in details match.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KOSINSKI: So that‘s what he‘s saying. That he felt that his client did one thing wrong and that was basically not telling the right story in the beginning. But his attorney claims that he did that at the prodding of Joran van der Sloot. That‘s the claim there.
Now Joran‘s attorneys won‘t comment on anything like that. But he said basically he told the story to try to help his friend and that‘s all he did wrong. But prosecutors now are saying something much different. Both of these brothers are now accused of doing the same things and those accusations are very, very strong. The strongest language we have heard yet from prosecutors.
ABRAMS: Did you get a chance, Michelle, to speak to David Kock today since the arrest?
KOSINSKI: Yes, I did talk to him briefly. And he told me a couple of things. He said at first that you know early on when these arrests happened, the defense attorneys were very angry and they said they were given absolutely no detail. In the beginning they didn‘t know why their clients were being arrested.
They had heard at first that this was unrelated to the Natalee Holloway case. Later in the day prosecutors spelled it out that it absolutely was connected to her disappearance. But they had been hearing things about other allegations out there and even after prosecutors spelled out this was connected to Natalee Holloway, his attorney still said that he feels that the arrests are based in part, he believes, on other allegations possibly involving photos and young girls. He wouldn‘t say where that information came from.
But keep in mind we have three arrests today. Two of them are connected to Natalee Holloway, according to prosecutors. And the third, the friend and neighbor of Joran van der Sloot, is not connected to the Holloway case. And we know that there is new information against the Kalpoe brothers that prosecutors have. So somehow these three are connected, yet separate, so what ties them together and what separates them? That will be the question and those will be the details that we‘ll be...
ABRAMS: Did it sound like the lawyer was conceding that there are some photos out there with regard to young girls that are somehow connected to all this or not connected, but that exist?
KOSINSKI: He said he knows that there are allegations out there.
KOSINSKI: As to whether those photos exist, yes, and we couldn‘t get to the point as to—and in fact, the conversation had to end because of phone reception. So we never got in touch again to get more detail about that. But we found that interesting. That he felt that these arrests were based possibly in part on other allegations and that‘s consistent with what we heard from other attorneys too connected with this case in the beginning. They were saying...
KOSINSKI: ... that there were these other allegations out there. They thought it was not connected to Natalee Holloway...
KOSINSKI: ... but now we know...
KOSINSKI: ... at least with the Kalpoe brothers, it is.
ABRAMS: And we‘ve been hearing for weeks now, about allegations of other women or at least one woman who was going to claim that Joran van der Sloot drugged her, according to “Diario” newspaper, raped her. That person still, as far as we know, has not come forward but that didn‘t have to do with the Kalpoe brothers, which makes this all even more intriguing.
Michelle Kosinski, thanks, as always appreciate it.
Coming up, we get reaction to all this news from Natalee‘s father, Dave. And prosecutors expected back in court next week to decide what they want to do with Joran van der Sloot. At least what the court is going to do with him. Do today‘s arrests mean no way he‘s getting out? A lot of people said he might.
Plus, we go inside the fishing boat called “Freedom”, the last place Olivia Newton-John‘s boyfriend was apparently seen before he disappeared.
Your e-mails, that‘s the address. Later in the program when I read the e-mails, I‘m going to be defending Michelle Kosinski. A lot of people have some things to say about her scoop. I‘ll be defending her.
ABRAMS: We are back with more on this big news out of Aruba that those two brothers, Deepak and Satish Kalpoe, long suspects in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway have been taken into custody by the authorities. Prosecutors saying they are once again holding onto the brothers on suspicion of murder and rape.
We‘ve learned that police have arrested a third person today along with the Kalpoes. Freddie Aaron Batiz (ph), a neighbor of Joran van der Sloot‘s, also taken into custody. Prosecutors say it‘s in connection with another case. All of us are shaking our heads wondering boy that would be one heck of a coincidence.
Joining me now from Aruba with more on today‘s arrest is “Diario” newspaper managing editor, Jossy Mansur, who seems to know all in this case. All right, Jossy, good to see you. What do you know about this other guy that‘s been arrested?
JOSSY MANSUR, “DIARIO” MANAGING EDITOR: The guy has been arrested on the suspicion and the charge of selling photos of young naked girls.
ABRAMS: Selling photos of young naked girls. All right.
MANSUR: That‘s correct.
ABRAMS: Does that charge have anything to do with this case that you know of?
MANSUR: That I know of, no. But this third suspect that was arrested today was questioned in the beginning related to the Natalee Holloway disappearance case, yes.
ABRAMS: How close is he to Joran and does he know the Kalpoe brothers?
MANSUR: You know, I see him in very many photos with Joran and other friends of that same group. In other words, I call them the party boys; those that go out and prey on young, unsuspecting girls or overage girls also. He‘s very close to them.
ABRAMS: Now, do you know is the allegation that Joran or either the Kalpoe brothers are in any of these pictures that he‘s being charged with selling?
MANSUR: No, no, that I have no knowledge of.
ABRAMS: Do you have any more information on why the Kalpoe brothers were arrested today? What new information the prosecutors had?
MANSUR: Well from what I understand is that in the beginning—from the beginning and the questioning, the interrogations that took place in the beginning, now that the police have gone back to square one to review the whole case once again and that they‘re going for a lesser charge in this case. They do have admitted confessions of these three with regards to sexual assault.
ABRAMS: But then why would—I mean why would they have just arrested them now? I mean if that‘s the case, then they would have been able to keep them a long time ago.
MANSUR: No, because it‘s up to the judge. The judge made the decision that he didn‘t see any additional evidence presented so he let them go.
ABRAMS: Wait a sec...
MANSUR: Not the police or...
ABRAMS: But Jossy, if they have confessions of these guys confessing to sexual assault, the judge wouldn‘t let them go, would he?
MANSUR: You know, I don‘t know about that. I‘ve seen many strange cases take place in courts in Aruba.
ABRAMS: All right. Anything else about this other guy that‘s been arrested?
MANSUR: No. That‘s all the information that‘s been put out so far. Even in the official statement by the prosecution with regards to these detentions today, they don‘t mention his name.
ABRAMS: All right, Jossy Mansur, once again thank you very much. We appreciate it. And...
MANSUR: You‘re welcome.
ABRAMS: ... we should—you know we should point out that that is, you know, it‘s unconfirmed, this part about any confessions, et cetera. I find it hard to believe that the Kalpoe brothers confessed to anything and that they were released. I mean Aruban court or not Aruban court, weird things happening, not weird things happening, I find it hard to believe. But it sounds like the prosecutors have something new, something new today.
Joining me now by phone is Natalee Holloway‘s father. Dave Holloway joins us once again. Dave thanks for coming back on the show. We appreciate it. So this is what you and Beth had been asking for, for a long time now.
DAVE HOLLOWAY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY‘S FATHER (via phone): Very much so, Dan. My understanding is the Kalpoe brothers were charged with premeditated murder and rape. The prosecutor apparently had enough evidence to move them pass the normal detention on to the pretrial detention, which allows them to possibly take DNA and do other things that they would not otherwise do, based on the first 10 days of arrest. So they‘re in detention for eight more days.
ABRAMS: You‘ve been told that the Kalpoe brothers are in detention for eight more days until they have to go to a court?
ABRAMS: OK. How did you find out about the news?
HOLLOWAY: The FBI person that‘s assigned to us called me early this morning, prior to me leaving work and indicated that the Kalpoe brothers and another individual had just been arrested and wanted to make me aware of the situation. He did not know if the charges or any specific details. I learned those later on through speaking with our family attorney.
ABRAMS: Dave, aren‘t you getting the sense that the arrest of their friend is somehow connected to this case? I mean they‘re saying it‘s separate but the notion that somehow a close friend of Joran‘s is being arrested on the same day as the Kalpoe brothers and the notion that that‘s entirely coincidental is a little hard to believe.
HOLLOWAY: I understand he‘s a neighbor of Joran‘s and they are very close friends. I‘m not going to speculate or anything like that, but I would venture to say that it‘s probably related. But it may not be.
ABRAMS: Right. How are you feeling today?
HOLLOWAY: Well, you know, we were looking at the September 4 deadline and getting prepared for it of a possible release, but hopeful that detention would continue for another 30 days. We were expecting something to happen and it finally did. And I‘m feeling a lot better that maybe we‘ll get to the bottom of this case after all.
ABRAMS: Dave Holloway, as always, thank you for taking the time. We appreciate it.
HOLLOWAY: Thank you, Dan.
ABRAMS: All right. Joining me now, MSNBC analyst, former FBI profiler Clint Van Zandt, who met with Deepak Kalpoe last week in Aruba, former prosecutor, Susan Filan, criminal defense attorney Mickey Sherman, and Aruban attorney Ricardo Yarzagaray joins us once again.
Ricardo, real quick, let me just ask something about what Dave just said about eight days. Is that your understanding? That the Kalpoe brothers—they haven‘t been charged. Joran hasn‘t been charged. Is your understanding that the Kalpoe brothers can now be held for just eight days before the prosecutors got to hand over to a court what they have?
YARZAGARAY: Well, first of all, the word charge has a lot to do with semantics. Formally charged, you might want to translate that into the summon before the trial hearing, in which the prosecution lays out exactly what they‘re going to try you for. Looking at the eight-day period, it might appear that the Kalpoes fell back into the time clock where they left off and maybe concurrently, a new time clock has started, so it‘s difficult to say.
ABRAMS: What do you make of the arrest of this other guy, this friend?
YARZAGARAY: Yes, I agree with you that it‘s more than coincidental I think. And if you talk about separate charge, one of the separate charges that are also in play here, other than maybe selling photos, is mind you disposing of a body, which is a separate crime, and if this person is a friend of Joran van der Sloot, I think that the prosecution in the back of their mind, want to crack him to see if he had something to do with the disposal of the body...
ABRAMS: Do you know that...
YARZAGARAY: ... that way starting a bottom down, going up investigation.
ABRAMS: Do you know that? That that‘s the charge here or are you just speculating maybe?
YARZAGARAY: No, this is...
YARZAGARAY: ... there‘s many presumptions...
ABRAMS: Got it. Got it. All right. Clint, real quick, you spoke with Deepak last week.
CLINT VAN ZANDT, FORMER FBI PROFILER: Yes.
ABRAMS: Do you think he was surprised to getting arrested again today?
VAN ZANDT: No, I don‘t think so. When I talked to him, you know, I said is this going to end on September 4? And he said oh, no. Number one, Beth is not going to let it end. And he says there‘s an ongoing investigation. He says you don‘t see it, but he said this investigation is still ongoing. This was someone, when I talked to him, Dan, he was concerned about his future. He was concerned about the investigation and it looks like he may have had reason to be concerned.
ABRAMS: You know, Mickey, this is all odd though. I mean it‘s odd in the sense that the Kalpoe brothers had been arrested. A court released them saying you don‘t have enough evidence to hold them. They say that they‘ve now got new evidence. You know you‘re hearing different people. Jossy saying well you know they confessed. I can‘t believe that they confessed and that a judge let them go.
MICKEY SHERMAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: There‘s no way that they confessed. If they confessed, they would be arrested whether it was Aruba or Red China. You know it is odd because it‘s so strange to us here in this country. You know I think we‘ve become spoiled and maybe perhaps we now appreciate our system a little more. And not that their system is so horrible, but it‘s like musical chairs. They keep arresting people not on probable cause but on suspicion, but then again they‘re not arresting them. They‘re just detaining them. But they‘re not detaining them. They‘re now charging them. It‘s impossible to figure out.
ABRAMS: I‘ve got to go to Susan Filan, but Ricardo, real quick, is it possible that they confessed as Jossy says and that the court still released them?
YARZAGARAY: Yes, thank you for the chance to try to explain that. Remember (UNINTELLIGIBLE), the judge—the investigative judge, he established probable cause and he said that the investigation was on track. One or two stages after that, the Kalpoes were let go, were released. Basically, you know the discussion was if it was consensual or it was a rape charge, if you want to call it like that. You know, that being said, if you look at the difference between a witness and a suspect, you have to remember in different charges, if you‘re a suspect or a witness, remember, a witness does not have the right to remain silent. They might use a person as a witness against the suspect and that person may not say I have the right to remain silent. So you have concurrent situations here.
ABRAMS: So you think it‘s possible they‘ve actually gotten a—almost effectively a forced statement from the Kalpoe brothers where they fessed up?
YARZAGARAY: Well, they made different statements that, you know they flip-flopped from the beginning...
ABRAMS: But flip-flopping is one thing...
ABRAMS: Right. But flip-flopping is one thing. Confessing is something else.
YARZAGARAY: Excuse me. Can you repeat the question...
ABRAMS: I was saying that flip-flopping is one thing, but confessing is something very different.
YARZAGARAY: Yes, I would have to have read the statements myself to say if it was or if it was not a confession. As far as I know, there was a little fooling around in the car. As far as I know, they admitted to that. I don‘t know if all three of them confessed or stated that they did...
ABRAMS: All right...
YARZAGARAY: ... assault or sexually assault Natalee.
ABRAMS: All right. Susan Filan, we‘re coming back to you in this—right after this break. I‘m sorry. Everyone‘s sticking around. Hi, Susan. Be right back.
Coming up, do today‘s arrests mean there is no way that Joran is getting out when prosecutors go to court next week?
And our continuing series, “Manhunt: Sex Offenders on the Loose”, our effort to find missing sex offenders before they strike. We are finishing this week‘s search in Alaska. We‘ve been getting a lot of feedback on this week.
Please help authorities locate Kirk Featherstone, convicted of sexually abusing a minor in ‘84. Featherstone is 50, 6‘5”, 225, hasn‘t registered with the authorities.
If you‘ve got any information about where he is, please call the Alaska Department of Public Safety, 907-269-0396.
Be right back.
ABRAMS: Coming up, our continuing coverage of the two suspects, back behind bars in connection with Natalee Holloway‘s disappearance and the third suspect, Joran van der Sloot, expected back in court next week. Does this all mean he‘s not getting out? First the news.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY‘S MOTHER: Jug and I and several other family members, we felt early on, as early as May 31, that these boys should have been arrested then on that day and like Jug said, we spoke with our attorney and FBI this morning and just really encouraged by this news and just—we just want to wait though until we get further updates from them before we come forward with any more information on it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: That‘s Beth Holloway Twitty reacting to the news that Satish and Deepak Kalpoe, those two brothers who had been rearrested early on in this investigation have been re-arrested now in connection with Natalee‘s disappearance on suspicion of murder and rape.
Susan Filan, do you think that Beth Holloway Twitty‘s pressure, her repeatedly calling for them to be rearrested may have had some effect here?
SUSAN FILAN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: I think it may have, Dan and I also think shows like yours that have been so diligent in bringing this to the public‘s attention has put pressure on the government. What I think is so interesting here is a rape charge without a body, which leads me to believe there are statements of some sort that would have to be the evidence that the prosecution would be looking to introduce against these boys.
ABRAMS: What do you make, Susan, of this friend who‘s been arrested too?
We heard Jossy saying it‘s for selling pictures of young girls.
FILAN: Well, there‘s been some kind of speculation and surely, that‘s all it is at this time, that somehow, her disappearance had something to do with luring into—her into some kind of a pornographic event that may have gone terribly wrong and resulted in her sexual assault and her—sadly, her death. So maybe there is some connection, but I find it difficult to believe that he‘s simply selling pictures alone and not in some way...
FILAN: ... connected to this case.
ABRAMS: Clint, what do you make of that?
VAN ZANDT: Yes, I do too, Dan. This is, you know, it looks like we‘ve got three different parties now. We‘ve got Satish and his brother who have kind of welded at the hip. They haven‘t given up. We‘ve got van der Sloot who hasn‘t given up, but now we‘ve got this third player. We‘ve got Freddie, whose name I heard when I was down in country last week.
If you get a new player, you‘ve got someone else to start to interview, to start to use his statements against the brothers, use his statement against van der Sloot, you know whatever role he may or may not have in this. It‘s someone else who‘s entered into the equation to help you break down the existing statements of the other suspects.
ABRAMS: And look, Mickey, while we said before that it‘s very unlikely that the Kalpoe brothers simply confessed before they were released. It is possible, is it not, that they have made statements about sexual contact with Natalee that has—quote—“evolved over time” and as a result, that they just keep getting themselves into more trouble.
SHERMAN: Yes, but it‘s not likely they would have admitted or said or indicated that they participated in some kind of a sexual assault. I would assume that if they talked in a sexual manner, it did not include them having committed a crime. That‘s why it‘s odd that they are now back in custody if they allegedly made these statements a while back. You know...
ABRAMS: Maybe they didn‘t...
ABRAMS: Maybe as Ricardo points out, maybe they have made some of these statements since and maybe they‘ve agreed to be re-interviewed, et cetera, by the authorities.
SHERMAN: I don‘t know. But they‘ve lawyered up and...
SHERMAN: ... they seem to, you know, to put up a big Chinese wall. But the only thing that bothers me is they just—it seems that they‘re just locking people up to sweat them and hope that somebody will rat somebody else out. And don‘t get me wrong, whoever committed this crime should suffer, you know, totally. But it just seems that the system is designed maybe to create something that‘s less than justice.
ABRAMS: Clint, do we know if the Kalpoe brothers have been speaking to the authorities?
VAN ZANDT: To my knowledge, they have not. You know, Dan, once everybody got lawyered up down there, they quit talking. But you know the interesting thing is Freddie now—there‘s a period of time, as you well know, before you have to or before you can have counsel. So they‘ve got Freddie and perhaps the Kalpoe brothers all over again, where they can talk to without the presence of counsel. I agree with Mickey. I mean sometimes you see law enforcement agencies, they just try to use pressure...
VAN ZANDT: ... instead of investigative techniques...
ABRAMS: All right.
VAN ZANDT: ... to go out and find the evidence.
ABRAMS: Ricardo, you work down there. Do you think that‘s what they‘re doing?
YARZAGARAY: Excuse me?
YARZAGARAY: Yes, well maybe. Who knows? I do think that the prosecution should give more information. On the other hand, if they do give information they shouldn‘t have maybe, you know, it‘ll jeopardize the case. Imagine if the Kalpoe brothers were followed in the meanwhile that they were set free. I don‘t know. Those are questions and among those, even more questions that the prosecution is going to have to answer and I do think that the prosecution should have been more forthcoming with the information, especially in regards to the family.
ABRAMS: Susan yes or no. You don‘t expect Joran van der Sloot to be released, do you, next week?
FILAN: I do not...
FILAN: ... and I don‘t expect the prosecution to be more forthcoming.
That would jeopardize an ongoing investigation.
FILAN: They‘ve got their hands full as it is, little forensic evidence.
They‘re doing just right.
ABRAMS: Clint, Susan, Mickey, Ricardo, thank you all, I really appreciate it.
VAN ZANDT: Thank you, Dan.
ABRAMS: Up next, we go inside the fishing boat that could be the last place Olivia Newton-John‘s boyfriend was seen.
And it turns out a few of you are unhappy with my defense of NBC‘s Michelle Kosinski for getting to speak to that warden and to Joran van der Sloot behind bars. Your e-mails, my responses coming up—email@example.com is the address. Please include your name and where you‘re writing from. I respond at the end of the show.
ABRAMS: Coming up, a first look inside the fishing boat that it was apparently the last place Olivia Newton-John‘s boyfriend was seen before he disappeared.
ABRAMS: We are back with new details about the mysterious disappearance of Olivia Newton-John‘s long-time boyfriend, reportedly last seen on an overnight fishing trip about eight weeks ago. We also got a look inside the boat called “Freedom” that Patrick McDermott apparently boarded on June the 30th with 21 other passengers never to be heard from again. And a statement from one of those passengers who talked with McDermott, he says, during the trip, says he last saw him eating on the galley of the boat sometime during the evening of the 30th.
We‘ll get to that in a minute, but first joining me now “Inside Edition” chief correspondent Jim Moret, who was out on the boat last night, and once again by MSNBC analyst, former FBI profiler Clint Van Zandt. All right, Jim, what did you learn?
JIM MORET, “INSIDE EDITION” CHIEF CORRESPONDENT: Well I learned a few things, Dan. First of all, we know that Patrick McDermott made the reservation alone. He paid for his ticket in cash. We talked to folks on the boat. We were told that they recognized him. He was a regular. He brought his own gear. He was meticulous with his gear. He had been on a trip before with his son.
This time, he was alone. Each person as they come on the boat, they‘re assigned a number, based upon the number in which they stand in line. He was number two on the manifest. So there seems to be little question that he got on the boat. I know that was one of the bits of speculation that there was, you know his items, his passport and so forth were left on the boat, but he never got on. We seem now pretty certain that he got on the boat and he was recognized by people who‘ve worked on the boat before.
From the 7:00 hour to the 8:00 hour on the 30 -- rather on July 1, that‘s when they were coming back into harbor. That‘s when you settle up your bill in the galley and person number two, which would correspond to McDermott, settled up the bill in the galley and then generally at that point, Dan, you go out on the back of the boat and you‘re standing outside and you‘re just watching as you enter into the harbor. But no one that we‘ve talked to has said that they‘ve seen him since. Can‘t pin anybody down saying that they actually saw him getting off the boat.
You indicated you have somebody that you‘ve talked to who last saw him the day before. I‘m on my way to go talk to somebody who said he had a conversation with him on the boat.
MORET: I‘ve yet to determine when though...
MORET: ... so there are still more questions than answers. But Dan, it‘s highly unlikely that anyone could have fallen off that boat without being spotted between 7:00 and 8:00 in the evening. It was still light enough. There were plenty of people on that boat who would have spotted or heard something.
ABRAMS: Yes and the boat then docked, was done about an hour later. And so...
ABRAMS: So—let me read you—this is from Tony Mayo, who was a passenger on board the trip. This is from the “Herald Sun”. The crew of the “Freedom” asked passengers to fish for mackerel before departure to be used later for bait. I didn‘t have a mackerel lure. McDermott saw that I didn‘t have the right lure. He gave me one to use. The last thing I saw him do that night was eat a hot dog in the galley. I don‘t forget people who give me things. I kept an eye out for him all day long, but never saw him again. I just figured he was sick or something.”
MORET: Well it‘s possible he could have been in his bunk. I mean we know that his belongings were left in the bunk and we don‘t know if he was actually fishing. We know that he‘d gone on a number of trips before. But you know frankly, I still don‘t have the feeling that he fell overboard or jumped overboard. It still seems—you know, I still have more questions, Dan, than answers.
MORET: It wouldn‘t be impossible to imagine him simply walking off that boat, never to...
ABRAMS: Although there was a gas stop, right Jim? I mean there was a stop after people paid their fish tabs. An hour before the boat docks, they stopped for gas. It‘s possible he could have gotten off at that point, right?
MORET: It is possible but they don‘t allow passengers to disembark at...
ABRAMS: Yes, but if you‘re going to intentionally try and walk away from your life, you‘re not going to ask for permission.
MORET: But if you‘re about to walk away from your life in 10 minutes anyway, why do it there where you would be spotted as doing something unusual.
ABRAMS: You know a lot of people don‘t do things the best way to do them. I don‘t know. The bottom line is no one has seen him—I mean no one saw him that we know of get off the boat, right, when it docked.
MORET: That‘s correct. Well we—I‘ve been told that there are a couple of crew members or a couple of passengers who believe they saw him, but you know, recollection is a funny thing and as you look back five, six, seven weeks, we sometimes remember things imperfectly.
ABRAMS: All right. Jim Moret, thanks a lot, good stuff. You can see more of his look at this case on “Inside Edition” tonight. Check your local listings for times.
Coming up, I guess I wasn‘t the only one who took issue with some networks claiming they‘re above reporting on the Natalee Holloway case. Your e-mails are up next.
And our continuing series “Manhunt: Sex Offenders on the Loose”, our effort to find missing offenders before they strike again. Wrapping up our search in Alaska.
Please help locate Roland Ernest Dean, convicted of sexually assaulting and abusing a minor. Dean is 65, 5‘8”, 150, hasn‘t registered with the authorities.
If you‘ve got any information, call the Alaska Department of Public Safety, 907-269-0396. We‘ve been going in alphabetical order each week.
ABRAMS: I‘ve had my say, now it‘s time for “Your Rebuttal”. Controversy still surrounding NBC‘s Michelle Kosinski‘s exclusive visit to the prison where Joran van der Sloot is being held in Aruba, not surprising some of the other networks are jealous about her scoop interview with the warden and her brief interview with Joran himself, but I was surprised that a few of you were buying into the hype.
Shelby Michelle from Louisiana, “I can understand how you would justify Michelle Kosinski‘s actions since you have to, but she is not fooling all the American people. She knew exactly what she and her camera crew were there for. I hope she enjoyed filming Joran in his underwear.”
Jerry from Las Vegas, “Trying to defend your colleagues in Aruba is hard to swallow. If she just wanted to see inside jail facilities, she could have selected any jail in America. She wanted to get the young man on tape.”
OK, look, I feel no obligation to defend Michelle. If she had behaved, you wouldn‘t hear me defending her. I don‘t have to. First of all, Jerry, she obviously wanted to see the inside of the prison where Joran was being held, not just any prison. Even the judge appreciated the fact that she didn‘t do anything wrong.
She was invited into the prison, asked if she wanted to see the juvenile unit. Then asked if she wanted to go speak with Joran. Now I know some of you are you saying that she should have told the warden how to do his job. That she should have effectively served as a defense lawyer here. But all she did was ask some basic questions.
Joran never asked her to stop talking to him. Even afterwards in court, he had no bad words to say about her behavior. Did the warden make a mistake? Probably. Did NBC abide by the court‘s order not to air the video? Yes. So what‘s the problem? People are invited into prisons every day and every day they see prisoners in their prison garb.
Jenny Seidule from Houston, Texas. “As a lawyer you made yourself look like you took a stupid pill defending the camera crew and the interview with Joran in jail. I‘m getting so tired of ugly Americans, as we are called in other countries, trying to push these people around.”
Push what people around? The warden invited her. No one disputes that. I think that‘s a condescending comment to the Arubans, Jenny.
Mary Conklin, “They taught me in my journalism classes that you couldn‘t, say, go into some famous person‘s hospital room and film them without their permission. Of course, that‘s in America.”
Yes and Mary, and that‘s in a hospital. I guess they didn‘t teach you, first of all, that there are different rules that apply to a hospital and a prison. In one place you have fewer rights. She was invited into the prison by the person who makes the decisions. Journalistically, she did everything right here. I say she deserves credit, not scorn.
Last night, I defended our show‘s coverage of the Natalee Holloway story and criticized some at other networks for their hypocrisy. I think they essentially want to cover the story and then pretend they‘re not really covering it. It seems actually most of you agreed with me on that one.
Jean Morrison from Pittsford, New York. “Go get them Dan. CNN and ABC are so full of beans. So no need to defend your decisions. I love your show.” Well thank you Jean.
Maureen Murray from Binghamton, New York. “If these other networks and anchors were as honest with themselves and their viewers as you are with us, we wouldn‘t have to waste time on such silly debates.” Thanks Maureen.
Elizabeth Landry, “This was one of your best ‘Closing Arguments‘ ever. All of my friends are fascinated with the case because it could have happened to any of us in college and our heart breaks for this family. Thank you for being so honest. We need more of that in the evening news.”
But Doreen Miller from Warren, New Jersey. When will the media reach the cutoff point? Will you continue to cover this for years? As I said, disgraceful.”
Well, Doreen, I think Debbie Mills from Ontario has the answer. Your ‘Closing Argument‘ tonight was spot on. If we, the viewers, did not want to know about the Holloway case, you wouldn‘t cover it.”
Melissa Buckler from Chapin, Illinois. “This case not unlike the overboard groom incident has grown into a pursuit for justice abroad. American citizens are interested because if not for various media outlets coverage, both these crimes against fellow Americans would have been swept under the rug.”
Your e-mails abramsreport—one word -- @msnbc.com. We go through them at the end of the show. Please include your name and address—where you‘re (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
We‘ll be right back.
ABRAMS: “OH PLEAs!”—it is hardly surprising that employees at Wal-Mart in Conway, New Hampshire, were not exactly accommodating to one patron, a man in an orange jumpsuit and handcuffs who entered the mega retail store asking for a hacksaw. Well with the always-low prices and the ability to get anything, where else would a fugitive run?
The employees alerted authorities to the young saw-seeking gent adorned in a prison uniform. As it turns out, the alleged jailbird was a budding comedian. Eighteen-year-old Johan Turner (ph) wasn‘t an escaped a jailbird. He was apparently just kidding. Ha, ha, police arrested him for disorderly conduct.
Have a great weekend.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
Copy: Content and programming copyright 2005 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Transcription Copyright 2005 Voxant, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material other than for research. User may not reproduce or redistribute the material except for user‘s personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may
infringe upon MSNBC and Voxant, Inc.‘s copyright or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.