JUSTICE JACOB "BOB" WIT

In light of recent actions by the judiciary in this case, we felt another look at the judges past actions was warranted.

The next two publications are being pulled forward from our archives to help answer questions arising about Judge Rick Smid, and Judge Jacob "Bob" Wit.


Jacob “Bob” Wit was the judge present at the van der Sloot property on June 15, 2005 who reduced the scope of that search to only the apartment occupied by Joran van der Sloot. His actions that day lead us to wonder why he would risk his career by aiding his good friend, Paulus. Why did Justice Wit wait for the prosecutor at the van der Sloot home to limit her search areas? Why didn’t he simply make that ruling from the bench in the courtroom? Why did he feel the need to do that from the van der Sloot home?

Justice Wit is a judge for the Caribbean Court of Justice. As such, he has a stringent Code of Ethics he must follow at all times – both in and outside the courtroom, as you will read below.What could his relationship with Paulus van der Sloot have provided this judge in order for him to put his career on the line?

This is a short list of the Code of Ethics Justice Wit obviously violated.

We wonder if the Caribbean Court of Justice is aware of Justice Wit’s actions?

Propriety

This code was violated by Wit as seen by his presence at the van der Sloot home prior to the searchers arriving. Both Ben (Voc)King and Paulus van der Sloot are members of the legal profession.

1.3 A judge shall avoid close personal association with individual members of the legal profession, particularly those who practice in the judge’s court, where such association might reasonably give rise to the suspicion or appearance of favoritism or partiality.

Justice Wit used not his home, but that of a suspect in a criminal investigation as a meeting place for himself, said suspect, and a prosecution official.

1.4 A judge shall avoid the use of the judge’s residence by a member of the legal profession to receive clients or other members of the legal profession in circumstances that might reasonably give rise to the suspicion or appearance of impropriety on the part of the judge.

Was there any official reason given, in writing, for Wit’s verbal order at the van der Sloot home for curbing the areas of the search? Or did he merely do this to help his friend Paulus?

1.9 A judge shall not allow the judge’s family, social or other relationships improperly to influence the judge’s judicial conduct and judgment as a judge.

Was the mere presence of Justice Wit at the van der Sloot property enough to dissuade Karin Janssen from arguing the merits of her search warrant granted by the Joint Court? Did Wit use the prestige of his office to intimidate the searchers?

1.10 A judge shall not use or lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge, a member of the judge’s family or of anyone else, nor shall a judge permit others to convey the impression that anyone is in a special position improperly to influence the judge in the performance of judicial duties.

Integrity

Justice Wit’s conduct here was certainly not above reproach – as even the acting Chief of Police was distraught at the limits set by Wit on their search of the van der Sloot property.

3.1 A judge shall ensure that his or her conduct is above reproach in the view of reasonable, fair-minded and informed persons.

Wit’s actions assured that not only would justice not be done, but failed to even attempt to create the appearance of justice.

3.2 The bahaviour and conduct of a judge must reaffirm the people’s faith in the integrity of the judiciary. Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be done.

How could Justice Wit ever again require others to uphold this Code of Ethics, when he himself ignored them to aid his friend and colleague, Paulus van der Sloot?

3.3 A judge, in addition to observing personally the standards of this Code, shall encourage and support their observance by others.

Impartiality

By reducing the scope of the search of the property of his friend and colleague, Justice Wit blatantly disregarded all thoughts of bias, favour, and prejudice.

4.1 A judge shall perform his or her judicial duties without favour, bias or prejudice.

Not only did Justice Wit lose the confidence of the public with his curtailing of the search, he lost the confidence of the Aruban prosecutor, and law enforcement – as evidenced by the public statements made by Chief Dompig in October 2005.

4.2 A judge shall ensure that his or her conduct, both in and out of court, maintains and enhances the confidence of the public, the legal profession and litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of the judiciary.

Justice Wit should have disqualified and excused himself from making any rulings in this case, as his actions showed he was clearly unable to decide any matters in this case impartially.

4.5 A judge shall disqualify himself or herself from participating in any proceedings in which the judge is unable to decide the matter impartially or in which a reasonable, fair-minded and informed person might believe that the judge is unable to decide the matter impartially.

Paulus van der Sloot, being an attorney and a substitute Judge, continues to be a member of the same fraternal body as Justice Wit. This fact alone should have caused Justice Wit to disqualify himself from making any decisions in this case. They both served on the Joint Court at the same time.

4.5.1 A judge must be sensitive to the fact that fraternal bodies are shrouded in mystery and clothed with a perception of secrecy and of providing unconditional assistance to members in times of need, trouble and distress. Persons who are not members of such bodies are likely to conclude that a litigant, belonging to the same fraternal body as a judge, enjoys an unfair advantage. In such circumstances, it would be appropriate for a judge to disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the impartiality of the judge might reasonably be questioned.

There has been no transparency regarding Justice Wit’s decision to limit the scope of the search. Quite the contrary. His actions even took the Prosecutor by surprise, as this decision by Wit was only made known to Janssen the day of the search, when she arrived to execute the warrant.

4.5.2 A judge should therefore recognize that transparency assists in combating corruption and suspicions, and he or she should encourage judicial colleagues and the court staff to assist in promoting the intrinsic merits of transparent conduct and infusing public confidence in the role, functions and operations of the court.

4.6 A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceedings in which there might be a reasonable perception of a lack of impartiality of the judge including, but not limited to, instances where:

Did Justice Wit become aware that evidence could very well have been obtained through the forensic search of the van der Sloot home and property? Is that the reason he tied the hands of the Prosecutor?

4.6.1 The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings;

Equality

Did Justice Wit have discussions with Paulus van der Sloot, unbeknownst to the Prosecutor and law enforcement officials, that led him to understand the involvement of his friend in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway?

5.7 Without authority of law and notice to, and consent of, the parties and an opportunity to respond, a judge shall not engage independent, personal investigation of the facts of a case before him or her.

Accountability

7.1 Institutions and procedures for the implementation of this Code shall provide a publicly credible means for considering and determining complaints against judges. This is to be pursued without prejudice or hindrance to the universally recognized and hallowed principle of judicial independence.

7.2 By the very nature of their judicial office, judges are not, except in accordance with the law, accountable for their decisions to any organ or entity within the jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice or elsewhere, but are accountable for their conduct to institutions that are specifically established to implement and administer this Code.

7.3 The implementation of this Code shall take into account the legitimate needs of a judge, by reason of the nature of the judicial office, to be afforded protection from vexatious or unsubstantiated accusations and due process of law in the resolution of complaints against the judge.

We can’t help but wonder what the Caribbean Court of Justice would have to say about Justice Wit’s actions in the Holloway case.

Has the institution charged with implementing this Code been made aware of Justice Wit’s conduct?

Perhaps they should be…

http://www.caribbeancourtofjustice.org/codeofethics.html

Natalee and her family deserve justice, and we will not let up until they have it!
Natalee's Freebirds

RICK SMID- ARUBA’S DIRTIEST JUDGE

In light of recent actions by the judiciary in this case, we felt another look at the judges past actions was warranted.

The next two publications are being pulled forward from our archives to help answer questions arising about Judge Rick Smid, and Judge Jacob "Bob" Wit.

Many of the judicial rulings by the Dutch judges in the Natalee Holloway case have been highly questionable, some so openly biased in favor of the van der Sloot family they smack of corruption. For instance, when a search warrant was being executed on the van der Sloot home on June 15, 2005 investigators were surprised to find Curacao Judge Bob Wit open the door and inform them their search would not include the main van der Sloot residence or the surrounding property.

Eight days later when Joran’s father Paulus van der Sloot was arrested for "reasonable suspicion" in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway, Judge Bob Wit intervened again, disallowing a search of the van der Sloot home. Ironically, no such limitations were ever placed on the search of the homes of two black security guards who were arrested on June 5, 2005. In fact, Aruban police ransacked their homes and perp walked them in front of the media, only later having to release them because there was no evidence that, unlike Joran van der Sloot and Deepak and Satish Kalpoe, they had ever been in contact with Natalee Holloway.

Since when do suspects in a murder investigation get a free pass from having their house searched? Prior to the disappearance of Natalee Holloway it is well known that Paulus van der Sloot had been a Dutch judge in training. Did his connections to the judiciary in Aruba and nearby Curacao have any influence on these rulings by Judge Bob Wit? Judge Bob Wit's early decisions in the Natalee Holloway case would start a chain reaction of pro-Dutch, anti-victim rulings that would eventually free the van der Sloots from facing criminal charges.

JUDGE RICK SMID, ARUBA’S DIRTIEST JUDGE, IGNORES INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE AGAINST THE MAIN SUSPECTS

“Aruba’s Dirtiest Judge” honor, however, goes to Dutch Judge Rick Smid for his extremely questionable rulings in the Natalee Holloway case. This one judge has caused as much damage to the Holloway case being solved as is humanly possible. IT WAS RICK SMID WHO SET THE STAGE FOR JORAN VAN DER SLOOT TO FLEE THE ISLAND OF ARUBA.

Police statements from Joran and the Kalpoe brothers—the last people to be seen with Natalee Holloway-- have revealed many disparities in their accounts of what happened that night she disappeared. In a secretly recorded conversation in a police van on June 25, 2005 the three suspects engaged in heated arguments about who was responsible for Nataleee’s demise, implicating not only each other but Joran’s father Paulus.

It is clear from these tapes and other statements the suspects gave to police, that the three suspects had detailed and intimate knowledge that something bad had happened to Miss Holloway. Joran even described the victim’s undergarments in great detail. Judge Rick Smid chose to completely ignore the fact that the main suspects were telling different accounts of what happened to Natalee that night. Why did judge Smid ignore such glaring and obvious contradictions in the stories of the three suspects? Even the simplest of minds would know that some of the parties were telling lies, indicating a clear measure of guilt.

JOSSY MANSUR, EDITOR DIARIO ARUBA
Monday, November 21, 2005

No one has accused them of murder, but they themselves admitted to police during interrogations that something bad happened to Natalee while she was with them, without specifying what ‘something bad’ was! That they admitted to committing sexual abuse against her.

It is not extensive that the judge who presided over the case and decided that some things were inadmissible. He could be the best judge in the world, but in this case, he made light of and greatly neglected to pay attention to the three suspects’ admissions, since he didn’t even interrogate them about what was left hanging in the air, such as the declaration of Joran at the beach that he believes that Deepak raped and killed Natalee! How did this matter end there? How were the other accusations and counter-accusations among the three suspects not evaluated for their just content?

RICK SMID SHIELDS THE SUSPECTS FROM FURTHER TESTIMONY AND ALLOWS THE MAIN SUSPECT TO FLEE THE ISLAND

Judge Rick Smid was very aware of the discrepancies and inconsistencies in Joran van der Sloot’s and the Kalpoe’s stories when he made several of his rulings in the case. Judge Smid was also aware Joran had lied about dropping Natalee Holloway off at the Holiday Inn, and had told four differing and contradictory stories as to how he got home that night. The Kalpoe brothers to this day disagree with Joran van der Sloot on how he got home early that morning.

In an Aruban court on August 30, 2005 Judge Rick Smid ruled there was enough evidence that Joran van der Sloot should be held in police custody another 30 days. Then Judge Smid does something very unusual. He returns to his office in Curacao and faxes in a reversal of his ruling only hours later. Citing an obscure Dutch case dubbed the “Ponson Rule”, Judge Smid ruled that Joran’s schoolwork was more important than the case of a missing, and most likely, murdered, tourist. It should be noted the Ponson Rule was originally instituted for a baseball player who was involved in a case nowhere near as serious as murder.

As a direct result of Judge Rick Smid's ruling, Joran van der Sloot (to this day the main suspect in Natalee Holloway’s disappearance) was released from police custody on September 3, 2005 and immediately fled the island of Aruba to the safety of Holland three days later.

Less than two weeks later three Dutch Superior Court judges in Curacao delivered their final coup de gras. On September 14, 2005, in a ruling by three Dutch judges from Curacao, Joran van der Sloot and the Kalpoe brothers were all released unconditionally. This order prevented law enforcement from taking any further testimony from the three suspects in the Natalee Holloway case - despite the fact their accounts of what happened the night Natalee Holloway disappeared in their company are drastically different. Why would these three judges release the three main suspects from giving further testimony when those same judges knew full well the suspects lied to police, with conflicting stories from one suspect to the next?

Rogue Judge Rick Smid's rulings would be a devastating blow to the Natalee Holloway case. When Aruba spokesperson Steve Cohen promised the American public the three suspects would be brought back in for questioning in December 2005, it was revealed they would never have to testify again without new evidence. All of this as a result of Judge Rick Smid's abuse of his position on the bench.

ASSOCIATED PRESS
September 1, 2005

The judge in the case issued two rulings: In the first, he agreed with prosecutors' request to extend the period of van der Sloot's pretrial detention by 30 more days.But later Thursday, the judge issued another ruling that sided with the defense — an order to immediately suspend the execution of his earlier pretrial detention order.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9163292/

BETH TWITTY
NANCY GRACE September 13, 2005

GRACE: What was the grounds? Why did they release them?
TWITTY: You know, Nancy, there was absolutely no -- no grounds for them to be released. And I spoke with the Dutch interrogators. And even as of September the 1st, things were really progressing well, and Joran and Deepak and Satish, they had -- these young men had divided, and they were not denying a crime anymore. They were merely implicating each other. And the list of inconsistencies was presented before Judge Smit. The reasonable doubt was there. I don`t have any idea why he fled the island and then faxed a reversal decision. It just is incredible.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0509/13/ng.01.html

JOSSY MANSUR, EDITOR DIARIO ARUBA
Monday, October 1, 2005

Did the judge who came from Curacao probably plan take the decisions he took, spoiled the case? With all due respect for the position you have taken, have you seen what happened?The case was resolved in phases the same judge planned: first release Paul v.d. Sloot , then he came back to release the Kalpoe brothers and the third phase he executed now when came to set Joran free because Joran expressed his wish to continue his studies. I have similarly not made any accusations of any sort against the Kalpoe brothers; what I have repeated is what can be found in the Polis reports where they started pointing the fingers one against the other! It is in these three phases here that Americans see the corruption of our justice system.

THE DUTCH JUDGES ARE PART OF THE ARUBA "GOOD OLE BOY" NETWORK THAT PROTECTS THEIR OWN

The Aruban government and law enforcement are riddled with good ole boy friendships that usurp their ability to exact justice when one of their own is involved in a crime. It has been rumored that Judge Rick Smid was a close personal friend of Paulus van der Sloot and had stayed in his residence on occasion during his visits to Aruba. Judging by his rulings, this would seem to be the case.

Jossy Mansur points out that the Dutch judges were in collusion all along in an editorial that ran in his newspaper, El Diario Aruba. Given such a biased series of rulings in the Natalee Holloway case it is hard not to believe these judges all worked in unison to deny justice to the American victim in favor of saving their fellow Dutch nationalists' from facing their crimes in a court of law.

To this day Joran van der Sloot is considered the main suspect in the Natalee Holloway case, and his father Paulus was recently denied compensation when it was revealed through a wiretapped conversation he had met Natalee Holloway the same day she disappeared – not once, but twice. It is well known that Paulus van der Sloot is suspected of covering up his son's criminal acts against Natalee Holloway and some believe he had direct involvement in her demise. His lies in police statements concerning his whereabouts the night Holloway disappeared, in addition to stating he had never met Holloway, exposed in court, serve to reinforce such suspicions.

But yet the Dutch have chosen to do nothing in the case even though it is well proven all of the suspects lied as both witnesses and suspects, and thanks to the Dutch judges' orders they will not have to face questioning again without new evidence against them.

EDITOR JOSSY MANSUR OF DIARIO NEWSPAPER
NANCY GRACE October 4, 2005

GRACE: … Jossy, regarding the connection, what I perceived to be a close connection between the judge, Paulus Van Der Sloot and the retired chief of police who initially handled Natalee`s case, Van Der Stratten, were they friends?
MANSUR: Of course, they were friends. It stands to reason they were friends because Paul Van Der Sloot had many friends within the police department; he had many friends within the Department of Justice. And he had many friends with -- and he was friendly with all the judges in Aruba. He worked out of the same office as they did and did the same work.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/04/ng.01.html

RICK SMID'S HISTORY OF LENIENCE ON CRIMINALS RAISES QUESTIONS OF HIS INTEGRITY AND ABILITY TO SERVE AS A JUDGE. IF RICK SMID WILL DO THIS FOR NON-DUTCH CRIMINALS, IMAGINE WHAT HE WILL DO FOR HIS DUTCH FRIENDS AND CO-WORKERS

Rick Smid refuses to have human traffickers and drug dealers arrested:

PHILIPSBURG - Two men considered to be the local organisers of what the Prosecutor’s Office believes to be a Chinese-led human smuggling operation are facing six- and eight-year prison sentences. They were also accused Thursday of involvement in the drug trade, mainly cocaine.The Prosecutor further requested the immediate arrest of both suspects, who had been released from pre-trial detention in April, but this was turned down by Judge Rick Smid. http://news.caribseek.com/Sint_Maarten/The_Daily_Herald/article_50851.shtml

Rick Smid gives human trafficker 38 days in jail:

PHILIPSBURG--While investigations are ongoing into the alleged involvement of a police commissioner in human trafficking, a 28-year-old man was found guilty by the Court of First Instance on Wednesday of having tried to bribe Chief Immigration Officer Ademar Doran.Judge Rick Smid sentenced Stephen Bruney to 180 days, 142 of which to be suspended, with three years’ probation and 200 hours of community service. http://www.thedailyherald.com/news/daily/k024/bribe024.html

IN COWARDLY FASHION, SMID RELEASES THE SUSPECTS UNDER THE MEDIA BLUR OF HURRICANE KATRINA

Had Hurricane Katrina not taken the spotlight off of Aruba, Judge Smid may have reconsidered his ruling. Instead it seems he found the catastrophe the perfect time to make such a bold and suspicious judgment. While American eyes were turned to the Gulf Coast of the U.S., Rick Smid took full advantage to free Joran van der Sloot and allow this suspect’s flight to Holland.

Smid takes advantage of a catastrophe to deal his own damage:

NANCY GRACE
September 13, 2005

BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY`S MOTHER: Well, you know, Nancy, I was thinking, I knew there was corruption and cover-up involved. But I certainly didn`t know they were cowards either, and to hide beneath the cloak of Hurricane Katrina is just reprehensible. And you know, I think -- I think of the Dutch government, and I want to keep the focus on this political party in place, NEP (ph). I think of this judge, Rick Smit. And I can`t imagine putting the suspects` rights or the suspects, you know, before the victim of Natalee, and that why should he choose to be concerned about Joran attending university in The Hague? It just is unbelievable.
GRACE: What was the grounds? Why did they release them?
TWITTY: You know, Nancy, there was absolutely no -- no grounds for them to be released. And I spoke with the Dutch interrogators. And even as of September the 1st, things were really progressing well, and Joran and Deepak and Satish, they had -- these young men had divided, and they were not denying a crime anymore. They were merely implicating each other. And the list of inconsistencies was presented before Judge Smit. The reasonable doubt was there. I don`t have any idea why he fled the island and then faxed a reversal decision. It just is incredible.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0509/13/ng.01.html

QUESTIONS ABOUT RICK SMID AND HIS FELLOW JUDGE BOB WIT:

*Why would a judge block the search of the home belonging to a suspect in a murder investigation? Was this because Paulus Van Der Sloot was a Dutch judge in training? If not, why were the two black security guards not given the same consideration days earlier when their homes were ransacked by investigators and police?

*Why would Judge Rick Smid rule a suspect be held in custody for another 30 days and reverse his own ruling within hours after he had fled the island of Aruba to his office in Curacao? Was he afraid he might have to explain his ruling to the media while he was still on the island of Aruba? What was Judge Smid afraid of? Why the deception?

*Why did Judge Rick Smid overlook incriminating testimony by a suspect and release him by citing his “schoolwork” as being the more important factor in the case? Since when does a suspect’s "schoolwork" take precedence over finding justice for a murdered tourist? Is it because Joran Van der Sloot is Dutch and Natalee Holloway is merely a missing victim?

*What kind of judge can look at basic, rudimentary statements with conflicting testimonies from three suspects and release them from further questioning by the authorities?

*Why have all these Dutch judges made such favorable rulings in favor of Joran Van Der Sloot, shielding him from further legal action when, in fact, he is the main suspect in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway? Joran Van Der Sloot, who has been diagnosed by both Dutch and U.S. investigators as a "pathological liar", remains free today as a result of such obviously biased rulings.

*What kind of judicial system places favoritism over justice through the use of ambiguous rulings in favor of suspected criminals?

The judges from Curacao, including Rick Smid, have given the Dutch judicial system a black eye worldwide.

"And he (Paulus Van der Sloot) was friendly with all the judges in Aruba. He worked out of the same office as they did and did the same work." ~ Jossy Mansur

Natalee and her family deserve justice, and we will not let up until they have it!
Natalee's Freebirds