ARUBA - Robyn Gardner, 35, Maryland woman missing in Aruba, 2 Aug 2011 - #11

Status
Not open for further replies.
What statement do you want a link to?

Here's a link to Giordano's attorney, Chris Lejuez, stating the prosecutor disclosed blood found on a towel was Gardners.

<snip>

Lejuez said that during the hearing prosecutors disclosed that a DNA test confirmed that blood found on a towel came from Gardner. But the attorney said that Giordano has maintained that she cut her toe on a rock while they were on a beach and used the towel to stop the bleeding.

<snip>

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...l?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk3|108468




The other statement by Taco Stein confirming DNA evidence was from a video at a link I previously posted here. Go to 5:55 on the timestamp and hear Stein's words below. I interpret his words as a confirmation.



Video: Public Prosecutor's spokesman Taco Stein elaborates on Gary Giordano's release from jail
Tuesday, 29 November 2011 21:36


5:55 on timestamp

<snip>

"The Dutch National Crime Lab has analyzed small blood traces that were found at the initial location for DNA and it was established that they could be identified with Robyn."

<snip>

http://arubaherald.com/court/1738-vi...from-jail.html

Could it be they first claimed "could be identified" because there was no known record of RG's DNA. They would have to use her toothbrush, hair samples from her brush or comb that were on the island and she had hair extensions which were not her hairs, right??? And what was left at home that they could use other than a sample of her mother's DNA? jmo
 
I have been thinking about these witnesses who claimed to have seen GG and RG arrive at the beach and then leave. Witness's are mistaken all the time, dont actually see what they claimed to have seen, misinterpreted things etc etc. But, we should be able to test whatever they claim against any physical evidence that exists. The physical evidence is irrefutable, so if their testimony does not match, it is either distorted or wrong.

We know from video evidence the RG/GG left the restuarant at ~4PM, and that GG arrived back at 6Pm. That leaves two hours to account for.

We know that GG had been swiming in those two hours because (A) a witness claims to have seen his shoes wet; and (B) it is obvious from TV footage of the search that he had been wet and had not combed his hair before it dried.

People claimed to have seen them on the beach.

Now, if this was true, and they just came there, stood a round, and then drove off never to return, then there should be no physical evidence on the beach.

There should be no towel, no shoes, no dress, no blood.

If any of those things were on the beach, then the witness must be mistaken.

His shoes being wet, and dry shorts means he had been swimming? As for his hair, what? Not even his hair, he's bald. He takes his hair off to comb it lol
 
Wasn't it the day before that they were seen, by surveillance cameras, walking on the beach and leaving?

There is a time/date stamped video from the day before where they walked past the camera. The following day shows them in the restaurant. jmo
 
Could be and the FBI could not confirm 100% that it was false. Or it could be the FBI concluded that it was, in fact, a forgery and Aruba wanted their own people to verify it. Problem is unless he puts in for a claim with the insurance company they won't charge him, I believe. And I don't believe these policies were notarized, were they? jmo


Any links or reports about her sig being a forgery?
 
Any links or reports about her sig being a forgery?

Go back and watch the GMA interview with Baez and GG. He indicates he filled out the insurance information on the computer, he did not. There are copies of the handwritten documents that he faxed to the insurance company.

He's been convicted of forgery. I don't see this theory as a stretch at all.
 
Go back and watch the GMA interview with Baez and GG. He indicates he filled out the insurance information on the computer, he did not. There are copies of the handwritten documents that he faxed to the insurance company.

He's been convicted of forgery. I don't see this theory as a stretch at all.



I was not aware of that
 
Go back and watch the GMA interview with Baez and GG. He indicates he filled out the insurance information on the computer, he did not. There are copies of the handwritten documents that he faxed to the insurance company.

He's been convicted of forgery
. I don't see this theory as a stretch at all.

Could you tell me when this happened
Are you talking about a prior case? or this insurance policy?
 
Could you tell me when this happened
Are you talking about a prior case? or this insurance policy?

It was a prior case:

"According to ABC News, Mr. Giordano has a long history of litigation with other businesses and personal contacts. Some of these have been allegedly dismissed on the basis of fraud, including a $5 million dollar lawsuit Giordano filed against another temporary staffing company in January, 2010.

In that action, Mr. Giordano was accused of forging documents to a contract, and ultimately dropped his claim."

http://www.examiner.com/news-analys...ons-claiming-death-benefits-for-robyn-gardner
 
"According to ABC News, Mr. Giordano has a long history of litigation with other businesses and personal contacts. Some of these have been allegedly dismissed on the basis of fraud, including a $5 million dollar lawsuit Giordano filed against another temporary staffing company in January, 2010.

In that action, Mr. Giordano was accused of forging documents to a contract, and ultimately dropped his claim."

http://www.examiner.com/news-analys...ons-claiming-death-benefits-for-robyn-gardner

Thank you
I was confused
i thought VL was referring to this case when she said he has been convicted of forgery

My mistake
 
Sorry, but I think you are incorrect in that conclusion. IF GG was trying to stage a scene then there WOULD be a reason for the towel and the dress to be there. He could have driven off, disposed of her, then planted those things while he pretended to look for her.

I tend to agree that the towel and dress being found on the beach they were seen on is an indication that it was the last place they were when she went missing. If they left they would have taken that with them, and "when" would GG have had an opportunity to return to that beach to "plant that evidence.

Especially evidence of the towel with RG's blood on it. I mean why leave a towel with RG's blood on it, obviously it was not a lot of blood, so I am not really sure what importance that it has other than backing up his claim they went snorkeling from that beach area. JMO
 
This video shows their rental car passing by the restaurant a little after 3 pm on August 1st, the day before Robyn disappeared, then a little later catches them walking passed the closed gates.

Was there a trial run? Shocking video footage shows murder suspect Gary Giordano taking Robyn Gardner to the place where she would disappear a day later CCTV footage shows Girodano taking Robyn to the stretch of beach where she vanished the next day

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...o-taking-Robyn-beach-disappear-day-later.html

So a different camera?

Then there is a very real possibility that the date was not set correctly and it is actually footage from the day she went missing.
 
Sorry, but I think you are incorrect in that conclusion. IF GG was trying to stage a scene then there WOULD be a reason for the towel and the dress to be there. He could have driven off, disposed of her, then planted those things while he pretended to look for her.

I thought the witness said they left together and didnt come back. If they didnt come back then the items couldn't have been on the beach.
 
His shoes being wet, and dry shorts means he had been swimming? As for his hair, what? Not even his hair, he's bald. He takes his hair off to comb it lol

Swimming trunks don't take long to dry, they are made from materials designed to be non absorbent. Shoes would take much longer.

It is obvious from his hair that he had been in water.
 
Swimming trunks don't take long to dry, they are made from materials designed to be non absorbent. Shoes would take much longer.

It is obvious from his hair that he had been in water.

I must have missed witness statements that his hair was wet. Do you have a link? TIA
 
So a different camera?

Then there is a very real possibility that the date was not set correctly and it is actually footage from the day she went missing.

They have footage from the day she went missing, so the date is correct.
 
It was a prior case:

"According to ABC News, Mr. Giordano has a long history of litigation with other businesses and personal contacts. Some of these have been allegedly dismissed on the basis of fraud, including a $5 million dollar lawsuit Giordano filed against another temporary staffing company in January, 2010.

In that action, Mr. Giordano was accused of forging documents to a contract, and ultimately dropped his claim."

http://www.examiner.com/news-analys...ons-claiming-death-benefits-for-robyn-gardner

Sorry, I stated convicted but honestly couldn't remember if he was - too lazy to find the link. Thank you :)
 
I tend to agree that the towel and dress being found on the beach they were seen on is an indication that it was the last place they were when she went missing. If they left they would have taken that with them, and "when" would GG have had an opportunity to return to that beach to "plant that evidence.

Especially evidence of the towel with RG's blood on it. I mean why leave a towel with RG's blood on it, obviously it was not a lot of blood, so I am not really sure what importance that it has other than backing up his claim they went snorkeling from that beach area. JMO

Sorry to be such a pain, but how do we know the dress was recovered. I know a witness said they "saw" the dress and the towel, but only the towel was recovered. I've tried and I'm not coming up with anything. Did they return the dress to her family with her other personal belongings?

I make a point of this because if they don't have her dress, where is it? Did GG pick it up and forget the towel? If her dress was on the rocks in a certain area, then there would be no question where they entered the water, right?
 
I tend to agree that the towel and dress being found on the beach they were seen on is an indication that it was the last place they were when she went missing. If they left they would have taken that with them, and "when" would GG have had an opportunity to return to that beach to "plant that evidence.

Especially evidence of the towel with RG's blood on it. I mean why leave a towel with RG's blood on it, obviously it was not a lot of blood, so I am not really sure what importance that it has other than backing up his claim they went snorkeling from that beach area. JMO

So many questions and so few answers.... But why assume that just because the dress and towels were there that was the last place they were when Robyn went missing? Criminals attempt to cover up crimes every day by staging scenes such as this, so it just seems logical that we need to look outside the box, so to speak. I mean, doesn't it seem a little too obvious that just because the towels and dress were found there that that's where Robyn went missing? Doesn't it seem a little too easy ? IDK, as I said before I know I'm a skeptic, but regardless Gary Giordano is just not a believable character, imo. And especially since Robyn's body was not found in that area where Aruba officials claim the body should have washed ashore according to the currents and conditions during that time.

Also, there were the couple of witnesses that said they did not go in the water and instead saw them drive away from the area. I don't care what some of the naysayers say, I just can't see how every witness can be completely discounted, imo.

Also, maybe GG didn't realize that there was that little bit of blood on the towel until he was asked about it. He was after all drinking vodka and so drunk he was making bizarre statements like "she might be dead now", and was walking around like a zombie when he should have been trying to save a girlfriend from drowning, :waitasec: so who knows... JMO
 
Swimming trunks don't take long to dry, they are made from materials designed to be non absorbent. Shoes would take much longer.

It is obvious from his hair that he had been in water.

His hair ? But it always looks the same to me... :floorlaugh:

I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't say things like this. :ashamed:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
186
Guests online
2,469
Total visitors
2,655

Forum statistics

Threads
590,307
Messages
17,933,253
Members
228,151
Latest member
ruu
Back
Top