Share This Page

Holloway suspect reportedly going to be a father

| Monday, Oct. 8, 2012, 9:54 p.m.

LIMA, Peru — A newspaper reported on Monday that Joran van der Sloot, a Dutch man who is serving a 28-year-sentence for murdering a young Peruvian woman, says he is going to be a father. His attorney said the inmate does have a conjugal visitor, though he could not confirm she that is pregnant.

The Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf said Van der Sloot, a suspect in the 2005 disappearance of U.S. teenager Natalee Holloway, himself told it in a telephone call on Saturday that “a test has proved” the pregnancy.

Van der Sloot's attorney Maximo Altez, said that a woman named Leidy Figueroa Uceda “is registered as a conjugal visitor of Joran. She is registered in the visitors books of the Piedras Gordas prison in Lima.” He denied, however, that he had told the newspaper he could confirm the pregnancy.

“I told them I didn't know anything in that respect,” he said.

News media in Peru last year identified Figueroa as Van der Sloot's girlfriend, and said they had conceived a son together, but she denied it.

De Telegraaf said Van der Sloot told it that the woman uses the birth control pill but had apparently forgotten to take it and she would not have an abortion due to her Catholic faith.

He said he didn't have DNA proof the child is his, but he believes it to be.

Van der Sloot is a self-described liar, having confessed to killing Holloway and later retracting the confessions.

He is the last person known to have seen her alive.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.