ÿÿ
I think the most frustrating thing to
me is that Jim really didn't advance the case for his innonence by the answers he gave to several of the questions.
(John Miller) "Police accused Van de Velde of stalking 3 women. Phoning them, following them, watching them. Police said the women had all told them the same thing. Van de Velde was creepy."
(Miller) "Why did you have this reputation of being a stalker?"
(Van de Velde) "I have no idea. I have no idea. But let me be very clear, there was no misunderstandings or minor incident blown out of proportion. This incident, these incidents never happened. I have no idea what they're talking about...Well, I know of only probably one person and my suspicion is probably because she worked with them and she wanted to protect herself, perhaps, from the fact that the relationship didn't work and I moved on."
This stalker accusation is one of the
main reasons the NHP considers Jim a
suspect, and Jim said so in the
interview. He answers this question
very awkwardly, like he has something
to hide, and to say he has no idea why
these 3 women reported this to the
police just adds to the suspicion,IMHO. And saying that one of the women would
report this because the relationship
didn't work and "he moved on"
(dumped her) doesn't make a whole lot
of sense. And he doesn't know the other two? Come on.
He should make every attempt at finding exactly why these women have reported this and attempt to dispel any suspicion.
And (from a post on this thread) there is Anna Ramirez a friend who although still feels Jim is innocent does harbor some new doubts as the result of Jim's description to her of a failed relationship. From the Time article "But as the spring wore on, she (Ramirez) began to wonder. She was troubled by a conversation in January with Van de Velde about a recent failed relationship he'd had. She wondered why he wanted to discuss the subject and why he seemed so upset... She said she still believed him to be innocent, but her doubts continually bobbed to the surface."
In another part of the program John
Miller asks Van de Velde about
Suzanne's dad's contention that
she was very upset about Jim's handling of her thesis. "She was crying and she
didn't cry very easily," said Mr.
Jovin.
"Tears over what?" is Jim's
response."That would surprise me... My
name may be kind of caught up in the
anxiety."
Suzanne's friends also reinforced the
claim that she was very upset."Can you
believe he wouldn't even read my essay
till (last) Wednesday," she had told them.
I find it hard to believe that Jim
didn't sense that all was not well with Suzanne. After all he was her senior
thesis advisor and she had stopped
going to the class field trips(not
discussed in the 20/20 interview). Jim
was described as being very attentive
to all his students and to neglect
Suzanne in this way would be a great
departure for him. Suzanne had also
talked over this problem with a student advisor though she never made a formal
complaint. Surely this fact must have
made its way back to Jim.
Jim took 3 lie detector tests, 2 were inconclusive and the final one he passed, but in that one he didn't have to answer a direct question about if he had killed Suzanne. The inconclusive tests, one wonders did he pass some questions and not others that were more sensitve. Was he too emotional during the questioning? Why, did he have something to hide? Just adds to the overall suspicion I feel. |
