Where is Natalee Holloway? Part five: Dad.

Joran Van der Sloot frequently talks about the brief period he spent in the car with Natalee. He uses a lot of time-jumps (“and then,” “a little later”), thereby leaving out important — even crucial — details. These are sensitivities he prefers to avoid because they could severely damage his credibility. Based on our truth-analysis (see also Part 4), I suspect that Natalee Holloway rejected Joran Van der Sloot in the car and that he then beat her, and sexually assaulted her.

Physical violence was not unfamiliar to Joran in 2005. In his book he describes being repeatedly involved in fights on Aruba. He often handed out blows, and when the police were called things would cool off without much fuss. It is reasonable to assume that Joran, as the son of a locally prominent judge-in-training, felt untouchable — a seventeen-year-old kid with girls on each arm who still hung around casinos and nightclubs on a Sunday evening just before final exams. That is how the fatal night played out, when Natalee Holloway got into his car.

Whatever the immediate trigger for the violence in Deepak’s car, the moment Joran refused to take “no” for an answer and physically attacked Natalee Holloway changed everything. Natalee was not some Aruban beach bum you could tussle with and then amicably share a beer. She was a sensible young American woman from a higher social class in Alabama. Her parents had political connections and substantial means. Force her into sex and punch her a bloody nose, and you’ve got a very big problem.

The helper

After the moment I pinpoint as “the attack in the car,” Joran Van der Sloot always takes us in his statements to his house, where his father was asleep. By then it was already well past midnight, around two o’clock in the morning. At these specific points, Joran consistently tries to make us believe that it was Natalee who wanted to go to his house for sex. But the real reason they drove there was likely much more pragmatic. Joran needed help. At seventeen, he was stuck with Natalee Holloway, whom I believe he had badly beaten. She could not simply be taken back to her hotel.

Maybe his father would know what to do and help him out.

Paul Van der Sloot was a calm, level-headed man. A lawyer and a judge-in-training. He could assess the situation and find a solution for what Joran had done. But above all, he was the man Joran trusted completely. If anyone would help him and remain silent about what he had witnessed that fateful night, it would be his father Paul.

I am by no means the first to suspect this. During his investigation into the disappearance of Natalee Holloway, crime reporter Peter R. De Vries also believed that father Paul had helped his son Joran on that fatal night. But De Vries was never able to prove it. Joran never admitted it, and father Paul denied ever actively helping Joran to dispose of Natalee Holloway’s body. Still, we can infer a great deal from their words.

Friend or father

During the hidden-camera recordings in Peter R. De Vries’s program, Joran Van der Sloot spoke about the moment when he had to get rid of Natalee Holloway’s body. He said that someone named Daury had helped him — a friend of his.

But was this really a friend? Or was it his father Paul?

In some fragments, Joran recalls the words and dialogues he supposedly exchanged with his helper that night. They provide us with a wealth of information.

Joran: “I spoke with him (the helper). I say to him: ‘I really… Something happened. Something bad.’” (video 1:05:20)

Joran almost says: “I really did something bad.” That would be active. But he catches himself in time and corrects it to a safer passive: “Something happened.” Here we see him switch from the active — “I really” — to a passive register: “Something happened.” The latter is vague and nonspecific. Misleading suspects often use passive constructions to conceal responsibility or identity.

This tells us there is a high probability that Joran actively “did something bad” and that this created “a problem” the helper had to help him solve. But of course, we already suspected this from earlier, and it only serves to confirm our conclusions.

Joran: “Then he came over there. And he says to me: ‘Joran, what have you done.’” (video 1:06:12)

In Joran’s account, the helper comes to look at the girl (Natalee). The helper sees Natalee and directly links what he sees to Joran’s actions. He literally asks, “what Joran has done.” This suggests that Natalee Holloway did not look “fine” at that moment, contrary to what Joran himself claims. She was most likely badly beaten, and that is why the helper immediately connected her condition to what Joran had actively done to her.

Also note the shift in verb tense — “I spoke with him” — to the present tense: “I say to him.” This usually indicates that the suspect is reliving the scene and experiencing it in the present. Hence the switch to present tense.

“Jorán”

Equally important is the emphasis Joran places when quoting his helper. He does not say Jóran, as most people do, but Jorán — with the stress on the second syllable. This is a somewhat atypical pronunciation that we hear his father use in the interview with Twan Huys for Nova (video 3:17). His mother does this as well.

In that moment, Joran is, as it were, hearing again what his helper once said to him and reconstructing it in a split second. He does this intuitively, without time to think about it. It is a textbook example of leakage, also known as a slip of the tongue. Information slips out because the transfer of thought to speech happens too quickly, and the suspect loses control over what he says. Joran inevitably knows what he knows. He knows what his helper said to him, and how he said it. This is reflected in Joran’s language.

Joran: “And he says to me: ‘This is a big problem.’ (…) But he sits there and he says: ‘Joran, you know, you know too, I would do a lot for you, but this, this is going to be a big problem.’ He said: ‘Anyway, anyway, you’re going to get the blame for this.’” (video 1:06:49)

Once again, note the present tense — “he says,” “this is,” “he sits there,” … Joran is fully in the moment, reliving it.

Joran describes his helper as sitting: “He sits there.” It may seem like a small detail, but it is plausible that the helper literally sat down for a moment, as people often do when the situation becomes overwhelming. In truth-analysis, body positions — “standing,” “sitting,” “lying down” — usually indicate heightened stress, which certainly applies here. The problem is so severe that the helper has to sit down and even questions whether he should intervene: “I would do a lot for you, but this, this is going to be a big problem.”

Also note the phrase “this is going to be a big problem,” which points to the future. It is already a problem now, but it will soon become an even bigger problem (“going to be”). This shows that the helper anticipates the situation deteriorating further. Dark clouds are gathering.

The helper then makes clear why this will be such a big problem: “In any case, in any case, you’re going to get the blame for this.”

The words “in any case” implies a multitude of possible scenarios or cases, all leading to the same outcome: Joran will be blamed for what happened. This suggests that at this point in Joran’s account, Natalee Holloway may still have been alive. Injured, physically battered, but alive.

And that is precisely the problem for Joran and his helper. Natalee could not simply return to her hotel, because her friends, teachers, and parents would want to know what had happened to her. An additional complication was that her friends had seen her leave with Joran and the brothers. Even if she lied and said she had tripped and broken her nose in a fall, no one would believe her. Her friends would point directly at Joran. Hence the helper’s statement, the realization that dawned on him: “In any case, in any case, you’re going to get the blame.”

This illustrates the nature of the dilemma they were in. What were they supposed to do? They couldn’t possibly kill her.

Or could they?

Begging for her life

In the first podcast with Ruud Tuithof, I already voiced my suspicion that Natalee Holloway begged for her life and even tried to negotiate with Joran and his helper. A line like “Tomorrow I have to go back anyway” — which Joran attributes to Natalee — sends chills down the spine. More than likely, this was Natalee desperately trying to reassure Joran and his helper that she wouldn’t tell anyone, because she was flying back to Alabama the next day.

But a helper like Paul Van der Sloot knew better. He understood that of course Natalee Holloway would tell what had happened — and that his son would “get the blame in any case”.

It is horrific to suspect that Natalee Holloway realized what fate awaited her: that she would be silenced.

But why? Why did she have to die? What was really at stake for Joran?

You will read about that soon, in part six.