A lawyer for van der Sloot in New York, Joe Tacopina, cautioned against a rush to judgment.

“Joran van der Sloot has been falsely accused of murder once before. The fact is he wears a bull’s-eye on his back now and he is a quote-unquote usual suspect when it comes to allegations of foul play,” Tacopina said.

So the guy who was the main suspect in the disappearance of Natalie Holloway in Aruba finds himself the main suspect in a murder in Lima, and his lawyer thinks it’s because he has a bull’s eye on his back because of the international attention of the prior case? I might buy that, if it was in the same country/city, and if it wasn’t for the known facts that he was seen leaving a casino with the murder victim, seen entering his hotel with her, seen leaving without her a few hours later and…

Flores, who had been seen with van der Sloot early Sunday, was found Wednesday lying face down on the floor of the suspect’s hotel room in Lima, with her neck broken.

See, in my world, being the last person to be seen with someone alive is a small red flag. Not any kind of huge proof of murderous guilt, certainly someone who should be looked at a little more closely than other people. Being the last person seen with someone when they were still alive, and then their very dead body being found in that person’s hotel room … five years to the day after someone else disappeared after being last seen alive with them? I’d say it’s a little more than idle suspicion and wild speculation to think this guy might have had something to do with both cases. What are the chances of it happening to the same guy twice?

He is either the most unluckiest young man alive or he’s a murderer. You will have to forgive me for being just a wee bit judgmental about it, but the facts are not stacking in this guy’s favor at all, and no one can really be THAT unlucky, can they?

Let’s just say I’d never want to be alone in a room with him.