Amsterdam, February 4, 2008
Concerns: The unlawful ‘Confession’ by Joran van der Sloot
Through the Criminal Interrogation Method of Peter R. De Vries
At first I thought, what a good move by Peter de Vries, but after viewing the movie, I discovered something very important:
The young man was interrogated by an Antillean under the direction of Peter de Vries.
Presumably that went as follows. An Antillean for very suspicious reasons contacts Joran van der Sloot.
Then he goes to Peter de Vries and offers to solve the Nataly Holloway case.
Peter asks the Antillean: Would you like to unmask this ‘killer of Nataly’ for me with hidden cameras.
The Antillean agrees.
Now we have a result, a confession.
How dare they!!!
Peter de Vries has not only proven himself to be a scoundrel, swindler and liar (that I knew for a long time), but also a very dangerous criminal;
Peter de Vries has deliberately had drugs administered to Joran van der Sloot, had an Antillean man pose suggestive questions to him, as a result of which disclosures would have come to the surface as to about what happened to Nataly …
The drugged young van der Sloot is in a trance; he does not realize what he is saying, and as a result of the suggestive questioning he confess to a murder with which he most likely has nothing to do.
People under drugs argue that they are Jesus Christ, let alone that they would not ‘confess’ to the murder of a girl.
Anyway, Peter de Vries has made a mess of this case.
Even worse, Peter de Vries has shown fascist and communist interrogation methods in public.
Even if this boy had something to do with the disappearance of Nataly, Peter is responsible for extracting a ‘confession’ through the use of drugs.
That is strictly prohibited under international law.
A neo-Nazi, who after the war confessed to a number of things under the influence of drugs, was acquitted. Since then, this is strictly prohibited to question anyone under the influence of drugs (all the more so because these methods are unreliable, because the respondents simply confess to everything that is demand from them. Even if this Antillean dick under the direction of charlatan Peter de Vries at the end would have asked: ‘Did you discover America’, then, the drugged van der Sloot would have said that Amerigo Vespucci discovered Americas in the same boat that first transported Nataly.
Administering drugs to anyone is a criminal act;
That is punishable.
It is not ethical.
I think that this case is totally different from what people have now been made to believe.
Anyway, it is unacceptable to give drugs to anyone in order to extract a statement.
It would have been nice of Peter de Vries, if he had informed his audience that he subjected Joran van der Sloot to a large dose of drugs and then had him interrogated.
Then at least, the public would have known that this was a lurid, criminal Gestapo – CIA – KGB method, which is prohibited and unreliable.
I do not know yet whether Joran van der Sloot is responsible for the disappearance of Nataly, but certain is that the Antillean and Peter de Vries are guilty of first giving drugs to someone (for that I have evidence) and then questioning the person involved.
That must now be announced publicly.
Dr. Slobodan von Piva
World Director Reserve Police-International