Radio Netherlands Worldwide

SSO Login

More login possibilities:

Close
  • Facebook
  • Flickr
  • Twitter
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
Home
Sunday 21 September  

Van der Sloot lawyer quits

Published on 31 May 2011 - 10:20am
More about:

The Peruvian lawyer defending Dutch murder suspect Joran van der Sloot says he's no longer willing to work with his client.

Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf reports that Máximo Altez has been at odds with Joran van der Sloot for quite some time. The Dutchman is awaiting his trial on charges of killing Stephany Flores, the daughter of a well-known Peruvian businessman.

Mr Van der Sloot and his lawyer don’t see eye to eye on a number of issues, including the appropriate defence strategy. There have also apparently been disputes over the payment of bills.

Altez’ decision comes on the eve of the first pro-forma hearing in the Flores case. The Peruvian student was found dead on 30 May 2010 in a Lima hotel room rented in Mr Van der Sloot’s name.

(gsh/kh)

© Radio Netherlands Worldwide

 

Discussion

Anonymous 2 June 2011 - 5:06am / Canada

MNIN2010, if you'll just read the reports and try to think critically, you'll see that Altez was representing van der Sloot on a pro bono basis. That was understood from the beginning. It is the fame and recognition from the case that is the attraction: Altez stated that attorneys are fighting to replace him. So apparently there is a fourth "thing" that you overlooked. Also, Altez was willing to take on the corrupt Peruvian legal system in a way that van der Sloot probably saw as risky. You yourself have argued that such a defence would be foolhardy. - Mary S.

MNIN2010 3 June 2011 - 2:14pm

Oh.. and if the Peruvian justice system is as corrupt as you say it is, Joran has no worries. All he would need to do is pay off the prosecutor and judges.. right?

MNIN2010 3 June 2011 - 2:08pm / USA

"If I read the reports and think critically?" Is that really what you're doing Mary S? ******* My viewpoint. I see a mountain of evidence against Joran. I see contradiction in Joran's testimony. I see Joran as a kid with a history of trouble all over the world. I see a desperate and broke Joran. I see a credibility problem with Joran. I see a grieving mother desperately searching for her daughter who went missing at Joran's hand. I see a family mourning their dead daughter who was murdered in Jorans hotel room. ******** You, on the other hand, see this as an opportunity to get back at something. You blame the grieving mother. You blame the grieving parents. You blame the local police. You blame the prosecutor. You blame investigators from a different country. You blame the hotel staff. And you praise Altez for representing Joran. Why? Did something happen to you while you were visiting Peru? Why would you take the time to create multiple personalities on this website and CBS42 and write nonsensical conspiracy theories blaming Peruvian and US authorities but not Joran? What is it about the Peruvian justice system that you think is corrupt and unjust? What is it you're trying to get back at? ******* As to your other comments, it's true that some attorneys want to take on highly visible cases. They do that because winning a famous case brings fame and higher value clients. But that's not what is about to happen here. The world literally hates Joran. Any attorney that represents Joran will be equally disliked. The case cannot be won for Joran by any attorney anywhere. It can't even be plead down. Joran has nothing to offer in exchange for a plea bargain. The judges will give the prosecutor whatever he wants. There is nothing in this for any attorney. All they can do is sign up Joran, get infamous, and lose. This case will not help "change the system". ******* Joran literally has no defence. There is nothing he can say to counter and explain the evidence. Anything he does say won't be believed because of his poor credibility. Altez recognized that and was attempting the only thing possible. To attack the legality of the "confession" the "evidence", the "original attorney", and the "system". Because even if he lost the case, that would allow him to appeal the verdict(appeals can only be based on procedural objections made during trial). He held out the "crime of passion" carrot to see if the prosecutor would bite. But that didn't happen did it? Altez couldn't win and he knew that. ******** Joran can't even try the "can't get a fair trial here" defence because Peru doesn't use a jury. They have a panel of judges who have tried many cases, have seen it all, and can easily wade through Joran's pile of lies. That defence would simply insult the judges. US attorneys call that peeing on the judges leg. Not a good thing to do. ******* As to why Altez quit I can only speculate. I'm going to guess that Joran told Altez the lie that he returned from getting coffee and found Stephanie snooping through his computer and accidently killed her. When Altez presented that story to the world, the prosecutor countered with 1)the videos show Joran didn't have the time to do that, 2)there was nothing on Joran's laptop to support that claim, 3)Her credit cards were in his wallet when he was caught in Chile, 4) she suffered blunt force traumu that broke her neck and he strangled her with his own shirt, therefore Joran is lying. That violated requirement 2 of the attorney wants list. It's important for a client to tell the attorney the truth because the attorney will look like a knob when he presents the story and he will lose invaluable credibilty when the evidence shows otherwise. That is what I believe happened. Joran lied to his attorney, Altez presented the story, it was immediately discredited destroying valuable credibility, Altez recognized his only option was to prepare for an appeal, Joran wanted to continue down the "crime of passion" path which would not have worked, and that is when they parted ways. Again, speculation ****** Joran will be convicted of robbery + murder and sentenced to whatever the prosecutor asks. At this point, it is 30 years imprisonment. He's lucky it isn't life. Now.. who's not thinking critically about this case?

MNIN2010 1 June 2011 - 3:53pm / USA

Attorneys want three things from their clients. First is money. Joran has none. Altez claims Jorans lack of ability to pay him isn't the reason he dumped him. But I'm sure it didn't help keep him on. Second is honesty. Every attorney wants truthful answers from their clients. If they ask a question, they expect the truth. If they don't ask a question, they want their client to remain silent. Joran is not credible. Nothing he says is believable. He has lied to everyone. He can't keep his mouth shut either. Look at his confession to extortion. geez. Third they want the reigns. They want to run the case. They decide the defense and they present it. They want their clients to trust them and let them do their job.

It's pretty clear that Joran is not a dream client for Altez. No money. No credibility. And he wouldn't agree to Maximo's defense plan. No surprise he dumped Joran.

RNW on Facebook

RNW Player

Video highlights

Ladies on the move
RNW is keen on featuring inspiring women in our target countries, women who...
What about men?
In many countries, men don't stick around to raise their children. This is...