Transcript: Heated Battle in Holloway Lawsuit

This is a partial transcript from "On the Record," April 11, 2006. It has been edited for clarity.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, HOST: Natalee Holloway's family is suing Paul and Joran van der Sloot in New York. Last month the van der Sloot's lawyer asked a judge to dismiss the case. And today, the lawyer for Natalee's family responded so what's the score at this point?

Let's bring back the legal panel. Gentlemen and Gloria as well, today was the filing by John Q. Kelly and one of the attachments I have right here which is interesting it is a letter that is signed and stamped by Karin Janssen who is the chief prosecutor.

And what Karin Janssen was attaching this letter to the pleading for was to support having the civil case remain in the United States not removed to Aruba. And let me quote from the letter.

It says, "Answering your questions on transferring the lawsuit from New York to Aruba, I would hereby like to point out that if the lawsuit would be transferred to Aruba this would result in a renewed media attention and media representatives traveling to Aruba.

From my experiences during the last 10 months I can say with certainty that this renewed media attention will have a negative effect on the ongoing investigation. I foresee that possible witnesses will be discouraged to come forward to share important information. Therefore, in my opinion, it would be better to settle the pending civil proceedings in the New York court."

Bernie, your thoughts on Karin Janssen's support that the case stay right here in New York?

BERNIE GRIMM, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, putting nausea aside for a moment as one of my thoughts how in the world can she say "I foresee that possible witnesses will be discouraged to come forward and share important information"? Oh my gosh, I guess there's eyewitnesses out there that she's waiting now a year to bring forward and she'll bring them forward on the anniversary of Natalee's disappearance.

I mean not to be disrespectful, but this is a surreal thing — the whole movie, the lawsuit, her statement. She wants the heat out of Aruba and into New York. I mean she just can't handle the heat anymore.

VAN SUSTEREN: Jim?

JIM HAMMER, FORMER ASST. SAN FRANCISCO DA: Well, I guess I'm going to stick up for the Aruban prosecutor. Listen, hers has been the silent voice recently, Greta, and I've been wondering really what's been going on.

I read this letter a little bit differently. I think her new co-prosecutor is John Q. Kelly and I think the most intriguing thing in this entire lawsuit is the allegation, that's all it is, that Joran van der Sloot had three prior victims that he plied with drugs and sexually assaulted.

I don't know if it's true but if Kelly can produce that evidence in a New York court, I'll tell you, you have a serial rapist or serial sexual assault and you got your prime suspect. If I'm a prosecutor there and stymied, I want that case to go forward and Kelly to have a crack at it.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, funny you should mention that. Let me bring out another affidavit that's attached and this is actually a lengthy pleading about 100 pages long. This is the affidavit that Helen Lejuez filed also attached to the pleading that John Q. Kelly submitted to the court in trying to keep the case in New York and not be sent back to Aruba.

And what Helen Lejuez says is that a Jane Doe, she doesn't identify the person, came forward and said that essentially she had an experience with Joran similar to Natalee's meaning a sexual assault, a drug in a drink possibly. That's the allegation.

HAMMER: Exactly.

VAN SUSTEREN: And that this Jane Doe would not come forward, according to Helen LeJeuz's affidavit, if the case were in Aruba but that she "might if it were in New York." Gloria, this one's yours. What do you think?

GLORIA ALLRED, VICTIMS' RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Well, first of all I think this is a weak argument and I'll tell you why, Greta, for two reasons. One, Helen, of course, is the attorney representing Natalee Holloway's mother in Aruba and this is her declaration. It isn't the declaration of the Jane Doe, the alleged sexual assault victim and I would like to have seen that.

Secondly, even the attorney says in her declaration that the Jane Doe and her family might be prepared to testify in New York and not in Aruba. Well, she doesn't say that she will testify in New York, only that she might be prepared to testify in New York, doesn't feel safe testifying in Aruba.

What if she says that she'll only testify in France or the Bahamas or Hawaii? That cannot be the reason that the New York court decides to have that case heard there. I just think it's a weak argument.

VAN SUSTEREN: And not only that, I might add that the "might" seems to be coming from Helen Lejuez. It doesn't even look like the "might" is coming — it sounds like it's Helen Lejuez' opinion she might come forward in New York. I don't get the sense from reading this that it was actually this Ms. Doe who's not identified.

Ted, also attached to this pleading as to why this case should stay in New York according to Natalee's family is about a dozen or so affidavits from college students saying "I'm never going back to Aruba." If you do the case in New York, meaning the college students who went on the trip with her, "We'll testify in New York but not Aruba." Go ahead.

TED WILLIAMS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well this — Greta, it's a weak argument, as Gloria has just represented specifically dealing with forum non conveniens. Listen, I saw those affidavits. There are people who are largely in the United States that gave those affidavits for the most part.

But guess what? The witnesses that we really want to testify in this case are Joran and the Satish brothers and those people are in Aruba. Now, Joran is the plaintiff in the lawsuit.

HAMMER: They're going to take the Fifth anyhow Ted.

WILLIAMS: What?

HAMMER: They're going to take the Fifth anyhow aren't they?

WILLIAMS: Yes, yes you're right.

VAN SUSTEREN: Yes, because they got — wait a second Ted. They got service in the United States so it's a little bit different. That's a little different argument.

WILLIAMS: Well, the fact about it is, Greta, no matter how you look at it the majority of the witnesses necessary for this case are in Aruba. This is a weak argument. This case is going by the wayside. It is not going to be in the states.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, well tomorrow night I hope to get a law professor on who makes a living studying this stuff and he's going to tell all of us whether or not...

HAMMER: Prove us wrong again, Greta.

VAN SUSTEREN: I have no idea. All I'm going to say is that someone who makes a living studying this stuff and knows and ins and outs hopefully will tell us whether this case, this civil case stays in New York or not, panel thank you very much.

Content and Programming Copyright 2006 FOX News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2006 Voxant, Inc. (www.voxant.com), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon FOX News Network, LLC'S and Voxant, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.