Van Der Sloot is a dead man.

[AlBell]

You realize how open ended that question is ?
* maybe he buried her somewhere nobody looked at
* maybe he put her in a carpet and threw her at a waste depony nobody checked
* maybe he put her in an industrial metal barrel and dumped that at sea
* maybe he threw her to pigs to eat
* maybe he burned her corpse somewhere and then took the half burned rest into a hole
* maybe he burned her and then took the rest into the ocean
* maybe ...

Wanna continue me citing the hundreds of way this could have been done ?

Sold her to a white slaver who had a boat is my favorite ...

 

[kcoh]

Years later, Van Der Sloot is still alive. So please stop the myth about how evil jails in south america are.

I am not sure if I have heard that myth before.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

It is open ended, but I just wondered what some had theorized in the past. If we go by what Joran says, he threw her body in the ocean.

I recall a theory of Van Der Sloot's father possibly helping him dispose of the body. I always thought of that as a realistic probability.

 

[ABC10]

Its an awful place, but no doubt Van Der Sloot is paying for protection, extra food and just about anything he wants. I imagine cash is king there.

 

[MontagK505]

I can see where you're coming from here, and I agree no system is perfect, but in the UK the reporting restrictions come into play as soon as an arrest is made and charges are likely. To me, this makes more sense than allowing media reports then limiting your jury selection to the terminally uninformed.

I suspect the US already has laws that limit press freedoms in criminal cases. Can the American media name a rape victim, for example, or a child involved as a witness? Any step away from freedom of speech should be taken with care, but IMHO, this one would be a step in the right direction.

ETA: Once again, I hope this doesn't come across as a nose-thumb about our system being better than your system. I think the UK could learn a lot from America's libel laws and separation of church and state, but sub judace is something I feel we Brits have got right (or at least mostly right).

Having sat on 3 jury's. I will state that sitting in a jury box and listening to testimony and seeing evidence presented first hand is totally different than the sensationalist poop that the news media presents. I also keep in mind that a trial is not a popularity contest.