ARUBA - Robyn Gardner, 35, Maryland woman missing in Aruba, 2 Aug 2011 - # 8

[LambChop]

I think it was a publicity stunt that could only come from the stunted mind of Jose Baez. Never in the history of accused killers have we ever seen (correct me if I'm wrong) the accused drag his or her children into the mess by having them stand behind them during an interview.

Let's imagine it for a moment:
Patsy and John Ramsey with Burke standing behind them while Patsy sobs, "I did not kill that child!"
Jeremy Irwin and Deborah Bradley with the two boys behind them, "Yeah, I was drunk!"
Kate and Jerry McCann with the twins standing behind them, "Madeleine is still missing and those responsible for taking her are still at large."

Even harder to imagine, and equally as ludicrous:
Charles Manson with children in tow
Ted Bundy with daughter in tow
Smiley face killer with daughter in tow

As horrible as some people may seem, and are, they don't drag their children into it so that the crazies of the world know who to go after if they are convicted. Ridiculous. GG should have had enough sense to object to his children being shown on camera - they gave him no more credibility in my eyes. It only made him seem more of a callous prig. IMO

And for some people, obviously, this little stunt worked. Con-men (and I'm not saying he is one) usually give you the appearance of being an overall nice guy. He does appear, at times, to be very convincing until you notice how he loses it and immediately tries to recover. Apparently he has fooled a lot of women until they got to know him from what we have read has been reported. jmo

 

[LambChop]

I have a question..on the video where GG is pretending-(to me) to be knocking on doors and he is looking for help..when help came,did any LE say they found HIS snorkeling gear on the beach?

I don't think that information was ever released but I wish we knew. Apparently all he had on was his mask. jmo

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

I think it was a publicity stunt that could only come from the stunted mind of Jose Baez. Never in the history of accused killers have we ever seen (correct me if I'm wrong) the accused drag his or her children into the mess by having them stand behind them during an interview.

Let's imagine it for a moment:
Patsy and John Ramsey with Burke standing behind them while Patsy sobs, "I did not kill that child!"
Jeremy Irwin and Deborah Bradley with the two boys behind them, "Yeah, I was drunk!"
Kate and Jerry McCann with the twins standing behind them, "Madeleine is still missing and those responsible for taking her are still at large."

Even harder to imagine, and equally as ludicrous:
Charles Manson with children in tow
Ted Bundy with daughter in tow
Smiley face killer with daughter in tow

As horrible as some people may seem, and are, they don't drag their children into it so that the crazies of the world know who to go after if they are convicted. Ridiculous. GG should have had enough sense to object to his children being shown on camera - they gave him no more credibility in my eyes. It only made him seem more of a callous prig. IMO

Thanks Vplate,

I see you are associated with child advocacy. Children need people like yourself to speak out on their behalf and I for one am grateful for your contributions.

Respectfully I would like to mention that his sons are all in their teens,and would not be "dragged" into anything. Also I am from an Italian family, which I believe GG may be. In my experience the Italian family is a very strong unit, with great loyalty to one another, especially father and sons . It does not surprise me in the least that his three sons would "have his back" so to speak. The "protect their own" mentality if you will.

Also I am not sure I understand your point in the list of suspected murderers.:idea: Does the fact they did NOT have their children present when interviewed make them "responsible" parents? You know the kind you'd let babysit your kids--especially when some are such good parent material they didn't just murder an adult they murdered their very own "CHILDREN". ullhair:

I think it may be safe to safe GG's sons appearance is a non-issue.:twocents:

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

I think it was a publicity stunt that could only come from the stunted mind of Jose Baez. Never in the history of accused killers have we ever seen (correct me if I'm wrong) the accused drag his or her children into the mess by having them stand behind them during an interview.

Let's imagine it for a moment:
Patsy and John Ramsey with Burke standing behind them while Patsy sobs, "I did not kill that child!"
Jeremy Irwin and Deborah Bradley with the two boys behind them, "Yeah, I was drunk!"
Kate and Jerry McCann with the twins standing behind them, "Madeleine is still missing and those responsible for taking her are still at large."

Even harder to imagine, and equally as ludicrous:
Charles Manson with children in tow
Ted Bundy with daughter in tow
Smiley face killer with daughter in tow

As horrible as some people may seem, and are, they don't drag their children into it so that the crazies of the world know who to go after if they are convicted. Ridiculous. GG should have had enough sense to object to his children being shown on camera - they gave him no more credibility in my eyes. It only made him seem more of a callous prig. IMO

Thanks Vplate,

I see you are associated with child advocacy. Children need people like yourself to speak out on their behalf and I for one am grateful for your contributions.

Respectfully I would like to mention that his sons are all in their teens,and would not be "dragged" into anything. Also I am from an Italian family, which I believe GG may be. In my experience the Italian family is a very strong unit, with great loyalty to one another, especially father and sons . It does not surprise me in the least that his three sons would "have his back" so to speak. The "protect their own" mentality if you will.

Also I am not sure I understand your point in the list of suspected murderers.:idea: Does the fact they did NOT have their children present when interviewed make them "responsible" parents? You know the kind you'd let babysit your kids--especially when some are such good parent material they didn't just murder an adult they murdered their very own "CHILDREN". ullhair:

I think it may be safe to say GG's sons appearance is a non-issue.:twocents:
And we are forgetting one thing--GG has said this was an accident,his sons are standing up for an innocent man (at this time)

 

[katydid23]

Thanks Vplate,

I see you are associated with child advocacy. Children need people like yourself to speak out on their behalf and I for one am grateful for your contributions.

Respectfully I would like to mention that his sons are all in their teens,and would not be "dragged" into anything. Also I am from an Italian family, which I believe GG may be. In my experience the Italian family is a very strong unit, with great loyalty to one another, especially father and sons . It does not surprise me in the least that his three sons would "have his back" so to speak. The "protect their own" mentality if you will.

Also I am not sure I understand your point in the list of suspected murderers.:idea: Does the fact they did NOT have their children present when interviewed make them "responsible" parents? You know the kind you'd let babysit your kids--especially when some are such good parent material they didn't just murder an adult they murdered their very own "CHILDREN". ullhair:

I think it may be safe to safe GG's sons appearance is a non-issue.:twocents:

I disagree that it is a non-issue. GG was reported, publicly, to have taken pictures that were 'beyond pornographic.' And he admits to leaving his friend in severe danger in rough waters with out so much as a look backwards or a loud scream for help. And on top of that, he is hoping to cash in on a million dollar bonus, because of her death, one that he is partially responsible for. He took a drunk woman, who never snorkeled before, to a rough patch of water, just before dark, and then left her when his tennis shoes became heavy. And with all of this, he wants his young boys to stand up behind him, and take the fall with him? I see that as cowardly. His boys had NOTHING to do with this situation. In fact, it has been reported that he has not seen them all that much. So now all of a sudden, he did this all for them? The insurance was for their benefit? Didn't I read that he just went to court to try and LOWER his child care payments recently?

If he wanted his kids support they could have sat in the green room and waited for him to finish his PR campaign. They did not need to have their faces plastered all over the media at this time. What if they find out slowly,through more evidence, that their dad is guilty? Are they going to appreciate that they were standing up there with him on national tv?

 

[LambChop]

The impression that the majority of the audience seems to come away with was that GG was hiding behind his children. Using them to send a message to the interviewer, "Don't ask me those difficult questions in front of my boys." There is no other reason for having them there. When you have children you try protect them. If GG did not want those "beyond pornographic" questions asked he never should have done any interviews in order to shield his sons from the publicity. Only one appeared to be close to the age of 18. The other two are considered minors.

For some, GG got the exact reaction he hoped to get, IMO. Then there are those of us who have known people just like GG. Fool me once, shame on you....fool me twice shame on me. jmo

 

[Nova]

-respectfullly snipped by me-

Personally I found Giordano genuine throughout his interview, especially considering the fact that he had almost 4 months to prepare himself in case he would be giving any interviews.

1-When asked about the insurance money he said that money felt dirty, said it was the insurance that has put him in jail and cost him 4 months of his life.
If he were slick and deceiving he could have said the insurance money felt dirty because Robyn lost her life, but he did not say that.

2-Same with going over events in the sea, he said he got water in his mouth, strong currents etc, while (since he wears lenses) he could have said he had gotten water into his eyes due to the currents and due to the fact that he wears lenses he became disoriented and that he had no choice but to go back to shore, take care of his eye problem and only after that was able to notice Robyn was no where to be found.

3-He could have said that he loved Robyn, and that he was devastated by her having gone missing.

He never said any of those things (and there are much more things he could have said yet didn't), while he could have, none of it could be checked, no one could have objected to it maybe some would doubt it but still, he would have come across maybe as more likable then he was perceived now.

But the fact that he choose not to lie about those things, tells me he is just not some slick liar and deceiver. Therefor I do not think the interview harmed him, plus his explanation about the insurance was very reasonable. IMO

The same statements that make GG sound credible to you can also be explained by his just being a bad liar.

 

[seabass]

Bottom line, for me, is that whether or not he is guilty or innocent (and I'm talking about reality, not in a court of law) he HAS to know he's under suspicion for a reason and probably not very well liked. He knows who JB is/was and has to know that he's a slick attorney but that he is not very popular due to who he was formerly attached to (she who must not be named, LOL!). For those reasons, I find it absurd that he would subject minors to be on national television, putting their own safety on the line. They go to school, do they not? Walk around town, malls, get on Facebook, etc? People who didn't know who they were before certainly do now. It's just opening up his children to a world of undue harassment, even if that wasn't his intent. It really says nothing to me about his guilt or innocence (although I do agree that he wanted to convey himself in the best light, a "family man" and didn't want uncomfortable questions asked about the pics) BUT it does tell me he's not thinking about their well-being. Even if they themselves wanted to be there, I would have told them no. I'm betting his attorney thought that was a great idea. It backfired, IMO. Made him look worse.

 

[Micheline]

I have a question..on the video where GG is pretending-(to me) to be knocking on doors and he is looking for help..when help came,did any LE say they found HIS snorkeling gear on the beach?

Yes Stein said Giordano's snorkel gear was found.

(he did not indicate where, but since GG claims was wearing it in the sea and he was not carrying it with him while knowcking on shutters the gear was probably somewhere on the beach)

 

[Micheline]

I think it was a publicity stunt that could only come from the stunted mind of Jose Baez. Never in the history of accused killers have we ever seen (correct me if I'm wrong) the accused drag his or her children into the mess by having them stand behind them during an interview.

Let's imagine it for a moment:
Patsy and John Ramsey with Burke standing behind them while Patsy sobs, "I did not kill that child!"
Jeremy Irwin and Deborah Bradley with the two boys behind them, "Yeah, I was drunk!"
Kate and Jerry McCann with the twins standing behind them, "Madeleine is still missing and those responsible for taking her are still at large."

Even harder to imagine, and equally as ludicrous:
Charles Manson with children in tow
Ted Bundy with daughter in tow
Smiley face killer with daughter in tow

As horrible as some people may seem, and are, they don't drag their children into it so that the crazies of the world know who to go after if they are convicted. Ridiculous. GG should have had enough sense to object to his children being shown on camera - they gave him no more credibility in my eyes. It only made him seem more of a callous prig. IMO

I guess it depends on how you see Giordano's place in the disappearance of Robyn in order to feel whether he has dragged his children into something or not.

If you believe this man went on a short trip and lost his travel partner while snorkeling, after which he was jailed for 4 months while not having commited any crime, then he is not dragging his children into anything.

 

[Micheline]

The same statements that make GG sound credible to you can also be explained by his just being a bad liar.

True.
You can also see these statements as him being a very calculated liar, since why else would he not state the obvious (claiming he did look back, claming he is devastated, claiming he got water into his eyes) and be perceived differently, maybe he was using reversed psychology to mislead people.
I do not think so, but I am aware that things can be interpretated multiple ways and being bended towards the direction of people's believes.

I do not think either of those though simply because 4 months is a very long time to think of what you are going to tell people once back home, but if someone did not commit a crime there is no need to think up clever stories, plus I am sure Giordano could easily have followed a script or thought up a story that was more acceptable.

 

[katydid23]

True.
You can also see these statements as him being a very calculated liar, since why else would he not state the obvious (claiming he did look back, claming he is devastated, claiming he got water into his eyes) and be perceived differently, maybe he was using reversed psychology to mislead people.
I do not think so, but I am aware that things can be interpretated multiple ways and being bended towards the direction of people's believes.

I do not think either of those though simply because 4 months is a very long time to think of what you are going to tell people once back home, but if someone did not commit a crime there is no need to think up clever stories, plus I am sure Giordano could easily have followed a script or thought up a story that was more acceptable.

Or maybe he is a sociopath, so he does not understand what is wrong with his story. Maybe it never even occurred to him that his story would make him sound callous, coldblooded, selfish and cowardly. Maybe it never occurred to him to say that he cared about her or tried to help her.Maybe it never occurred to him to say that the insurance was dirty because she died, instead of making it all about him being in jail for 4 months.

 

[LambChop]

Or maybe he is a sociopath, so he does not understand what is wrong with his story. Maybe it never even occurred to him that his story would make him sound callous, coldblooded, selfish and cowardly. Maybe it never occurred to him to say that he cared about her or tried to help her.Maybe it never occurred to him to say that the insurance was dirty because she died, instead of making it all about him being in jail for 4 months.

And he was detained by the Aruban authorities for 4 months and then released but is still a primary suspect. Once he told LE his story he was locked into it so whether or not he spent 4 months in jail or not I don't think he is in a position to change the "details" now since the FBI is probably fully aware of what his statement was. I believe this was his original plan to take her snorkeling there because it is safe and remote. I just don't think he thought much about the fact that the fishman was watching them, which puts a big hole in his story. jmo

 

[Dushi]

The interviews have told us Garys story using Garys own words

Up until the interviews we were told the story through someone else

 

[Dushi]

First stage of grief, denial.......so we can understand he wants her to be still alive. jmo

Possibly denial

But if so, he is still raising money to search other places

Setting up a fund to do this when there is no proof at all that she ever left the Island that I am aware of

 

[LambChop]

Possibly denial

But if so, he is still raising money to search other places

Setting up a fund to do this when there is no proof at all that she ever left the Island that I am aware of

That is the hinky part. Why not just go down there and talk with authorities. It is about the most affordable way to get information and it's a starting point. Instead he seems to want others to help him pay for his trip when he is losing the advantage of time while things are fresh in people's minds. jmo

 

[Niner]

So I guess no more media interviews with GG??!! At least I haven't seen or heard of anymore since GR's show...

and...


:welcome4: seabass!!! :seeya:

 

[Nova]

I guess it depends on how you see Giordano's place in the disappearance of Robyn in order to feel whether he has dragged his children into something or not.

If you believe this man went on a short trip and lost his travel partner while snorkeling, after which he was jailed for 4 months while not having commited any crime, then he is not dragging his children into anything.

No, not really. Whether he is innocent or not, GG knows he is suspected by many, including Aruban LE. Lambchop pointed out that GG also must know that (fairly or unfairly) JB is thought of as a defense attorney who represents murderers.

A parent who actually had his kids' interests at heart would not have displayed them on national TV under these circumstances; he would have wanted to shield them from guilt by association.

 

[Nova]

True.
You can also see these statements as him being a very calculated liar, since why else would he not state the obvious (claiming he did look back, claming he is devastated, claiming he got water into his eyes) and be perceived differently, maybe he was using reversed psychology to mislead people.
I do not think so, but I am aware that things can be interpretated multiple ways and being bended towards the direction of people's believes.

I do not think either of those though simply because 4 months is a very long time to think of what you are going to tell people once back home, but if someone did not commit a crime there is no need to think up clever stories, plus I am sure Giordano could easily have followed a script or thought up a story that was more acceptable.

Micheline, I accept that there is insufficient evidence to arrest GG at this time.

But just because he isn't a super-villain with a perfectly calculated answer for everything doesn't mean he is innocent.

 

[LambChop]

And I don't think the US authorities feel he is a flight risk so I would imagine they, too, might be waiting to see if RG's remains turn up on a beach somewhere. That portion of the island faces Venezuela so it is possible remains could end up on a beach there, too.

Since we do not know everything the Aruban authorities had it is possible both the US and Aruba are waiting for the results to come back on the computer which will probably take awhile. jmo