Postscript on Dominique Strauss-Kahn and His Accuser
The decline in sexual assault reports after such high-profile cases strikes me as a myth, one similar to the long-debunked but persistent claim of increased domestic violence incidents on Super Bowl Sunday. But even if such a decline were verified, would these “experts” suggest that prosecutors charge and juries convict even people so manifestly innocent as were the Duke lacrosse players so as to avoid a chilling effect on the reporting of sexual assaults?
One writer who apparently thinks so is Hadley Freeman of the U.K.’s Guardian, who in the dismissal of charges against Strauss-Kahn sees a miscarriage of justice. “Maybe one day, in the pitiless light of hindsight,” she writes, “it will become clear why a woman’s false statements about her immigration status, made years ago, were deemed more pertinent to an accusation of attempted rape than the vaginal bruising she allegedly incurred during the encounter itself.”
But among other inaccuracies in the piece, Freeman’s reference to “vaginal bruising” misstates the evidence. From the motion to dismiss:
During her initial examination, the examiner noted no visible injuries to the complainant and documented that she had no trauma to her body or oral cavity. The only physical finding that the examiner noticed was “redness,” which was observed during the gynecological examination. The examiner could not say to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that this “redness” was a direct result of the incident, nor that it was even an injury or a bruise. The examiner stated that this finding could be attributed to the incident described by the complainant, but could be attributed to a host of other causes.
An opinion was solicited from a second expert on sexual assault, who “opined that although it was possible for the redness to have been caused by the defendant’s grabbing the complainant in the manner she had described, it was not likely caused by such an act.”
There is no doubt that there was a sexual encounter between Strauss-Kahn and Diallo in suite 2806 of the Sofitel hotel on May 14, 2011. Forensic evidence to that effect is unambiguous. And, contrary to the claims of those who say the authorities didn’t believe Diallo’s allegations against a prominent man, everything police and prosecutors did from the moment she reported the incident and through the indictment and subsequent investigation indicates they believed her, the lowly immigrant hotel maid, over the protestations of the rich and powerful accused. Only when Diallo was revealed to be a liar regarding so many aspects of the incident and her own background did prosecutors reach the only possible conclusion: that the charges could not be sustained on her testimony and therefore should be dismissed.
Strauss-Kahn’s supporters on both sides of the Atlantic take the decision as a vindication, as though there is no shame in a married man’s admitting to the briefest of sexual assignations with the help, one that involved, even seen in the light most favorable to him, no more romance or courtship than one sees in a pair of rutting animals.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn may not be a criminal, but he is no gentleman, either. Maybe that doesn’t matter in France, but it matters here in America. Or at least it used to. And if it doesn’t anymore, what a shame that is.
Why doesn’t DSK simply offer the OJ defense: “We wuz just rasslin’”?
We will have a good assessment of the moral fiber of the French people if after reading the details of this case they elect this “politican” to further leadership positions. He is a good example of the morality of all too many elected representatives and not only in France.
I think stupid DSK thought he was getting a freebie…and she thought she was getting some serious $$$$$$.
It is truly a shame that justice did not prevail in this case. In my opinion, a number of events occurred before DSK was arrested. 1)Hotel security would have vetted the varasity of the maid’s complaint before subjecting the 5 star hotel to the onslaught of the press coverage. 2) NYPD detectives would have vetted the maid’s story. 3)NYPD detectives would have checked with the NYPD brass before making the arrest for fear of creating an international incident.
In other words, before the arrest was made the perp passed the smell test.
I don’t doubt one bit that the maid was sexually attacked. The fact that she has a checkered past is immaterial. Justice was denigned.
Oh, what a crock.
Diallo was, and is, a prostitute and a known perjurer. Perjurers lie, by definition – that’s what a perjurer is. If you automatically believe a known perjurer just because she’s a woman, then that makes you both a sexist and a fool.
OK, I get the picture. She propositions every hotel guest she encounters, right? And no one has ever mentioned it to her boss, so she just kept right on doing it. For years. And when DSK took her up on her offer, as so many have before, it suddenly occurred to her that she could blackmail him.
Got it.
@Hardnox: It’s not just that she has a checkered past. It’s the particular details that are relevant here. First, she insisted that she had been raped back in her home country, and said this in a very emotional way. Later on, she admitted that she had lied about it. Conclusion: she can tell a good story. There’s no particular reason to believe her, so why do you believe her?
Next, she gave an account of what she did after the assault, and told it to the grand jury. She later admitted she lied about it.
There’s no good reason to believe her.
Nor is there any good reason to believe him.
We’ll never know what really happened.
By the way, your name reminds me of someone else, Amanda Knox. Do you think she belongs in jail or not?
I suspect that a lot of money changed hands- and she agreed to not insist on the charges. Her various stories had been vetted long ago and found not to be as ‘inconsistent’ as we are now being told. He bought his ‘non prosecution’.
Undoubtedly Diallo (or her handlers) made those charges in the first place as a way of extracting money.
I think we all know what to call somebody who has sex and then expects to be paid.
Do you have any reason for believing this? Saying that “her various stories had been vetted long ago and found not to be as ‘inconsistent’ as we are now being told” doesn’t make any sense, given what I read in the motion for dismissal. Here are the three versions:
Version 1: She left room 2806 and went to the far end of the 28th floor hallway and remained there until her supervisor came along.
Version 2: She admitted she lied about version 1 and said instead that she had immediately gone to room 2820 and cleaned it. She then went back to 2806 and cleaned that as well.
Version 3: After being confronted with card-swipe evidence that she had not remained in room 2820 long enough to clean it, she claimed that she left 2806 and went around the corner. After seeing DSK leave, she then went briefly to 2820, long enough to get some supplies, and then apparently went back to 2806. She also denied having given version 2.
If these are true – and you’ve given no reasons for believing otherwise – then they are inconsistent.
But let’s suppose that money did change hands and that these reasons aren’t true. Why bother with three versions when two would do very nicely? Who is going to believe that a rape took place given that (in version 2) she went and did some cleaning afterward? Two versions would be all that they’d need for a dismissal.
Let’s see your reasons, please.
The first reports from the police were that her story was consistent; and that her reports of where she was, the rooms she entered, were accurate, as referenced by the electronic entrances.
Her story was consistent over several days until DSK’s defense lawyers came on the scene and then, began, first, the reports about her past – which is, of course, irrelevant to this situation. And then, the ‘several versions of what happened’ emerged – totally different from the first version, which she apparently stuck to and which the police described as ‘consistent’.
Therefore, I don’t believe the ‘Three Tales’. As you point out, why bother with any of them? If she was genuinely attacked, then, only one tale need be told. If she was after money and was NOT attacked, then only one tale need be told.
Since it is a fact that a sexual encounter took place, then, we have to ask: was it an attack, or, for money? In both cases, only one tale need be told. Therefore, I suggest these Three Tales are diversionary and meant to put up a cloud cover for DSK’s exoneration from the ‘attack’ charge. But not from the sexual encounter charge. This leaves me to conclude that money was exchanged.
“Her story was consistent over several days until DSK’s defense lawyers came on the scene ” You mean that it seemed consistent until someone with an interest in checking it out checked it out. Her statements are inconsistent according to the PROSECUTION, and at least one of them directly conflicted with evidence. So why are you insisting that, what, the prosecution made up two extra stories and claimed she told them? Why would they do that? There were three different stories because she couldn’t keep her story straight and/or realised that the first verson and later the second could be debunked.
Oh and when the ONLY evidence is somebodies word, yes it’s relevant how they behaved in the past. It’s called credibility or lack thereof.
Of course DSK is no gentleman. He’s a socialist, fercryinoutloud. What does anybody expect?
LMAO
The fact that the man received warm applause from the IMF speaks volumes about the character and corrupt nature of the IMF, , whether guilty of sexual assault or not.
When it was learned that DSK bedded a young woman — and her mother — and that the mother reported that he was not a gentleman and quite rough, my opinion of DSK changed to “Stud!”
Let’s not rule out the “Honey Trap” possibility where in DSK was targeted by either French or other agencies for the sole purpose of discrediting him since he’s an active political power in France.
conservatives tend to pay for sex, maybe they are not getting it at home or theyre sick in the head.
So the American authorities have known of the repeated false clame of the rape.
They deliberately have ruined DSK`s image.
Everything seems to have worked out great – a pair of creeps have been exposed for what they are. DSK is no longer enjoying a salary subsidized by the US taxpayer, and the US asylum system has been shown to be a crock.
Jack Dunphy may be a rapist: we just don’t know for sure.
Good point. I’m not a DSK fan, not my kind of guy, but this idea of “we’ll never know” to forever smear someone is unfair.
This isn’t the first incident and at least one other woman has said she raped him. It’s at least possible and I believe probable that he’s a rapist. I don’t believe the woman in this case was raped though.
Now then…when a person of some protected minority class abuses the civil rights advantage conferred upon them by law, shouldn’t that abuse be considered at least a misdemeanor offense, subject to special punishment, i.e. ‘hate’ crime?
Restitution made to the accused, loser AND their attorney cough up for ALL legal costs incurred. Works for me.
FYI: bruising is often missing at the time of the first examination, and may only appear two or three days later. So when one of my patients came into the ER, we often told her to get photos retaken two days later, when the reddened areas were now purple bruising.
Two, one doubts that a hard working maid walked into a room,, saw a naked old man and swooned in lust at the sight. Does anyone really believe this?
Three: One of the problems that Filipino activists face is trying to protect our OFW from sexual abuse. Alas, in too many countries, it is assumed that the help is supposed to give free sex to the men in the family. The woman assumes if she doesn’t say yes, she will lose her job. Often her job is the only source of income for her extended family, so she “consents”…
What’s wrong with this picture of “consent”?
Four: This case was not dropped because he was innocent, it was dropped because he got away with blaming the victim.
Five: The best case scenerio for StraussKahn was that she saw him and suggested the sex. This is what the “wink wink” expose by his hitmen hinted: i.e. that she was a hooker.
IF so, why didn’t he pay her?
Cheapskate. Serves him right if he catches HIV.
“One of the problems that Filipino activists face is trying to protect our OFW from sexual abuse. Alas, in too many countries, it is assumed that the help is supposed to give free sex to the men in the family.”
For a country whose majority women (and men via gay sex) have engaged in prostitution at least once in their lives, you can’t really blame this perception. And in the middle east if the price is right, there’s no problem, only when there’s no pay when it becomes a problem.
He did not “get away with blaming the victim” he got away with pointing out that the “victim” was a lying snake whose word had the credibility of, well IMF economic forecasts. And she is. The fact that she commented that she “knew what she was doing” and that the guy was rich is a big give away. This was a setup and anyone with any sense knows it. Don’t try to pretend you know different.
Stupidest article yet, why don’t you cover social media/twitter/smart phone crimes, like flash mob violence spreading across the country. Police officers and analyst need to start sleuthing inside social sites.
Vance, while eagering to accuse DSK in the beginning, had to release him, because of no proof of a rape and or of a attempt of rapt. Point final.
How many American guis get a free blow-job in five stars hotels?
They won’t tell their wife, unless someone acccuses them of a rape attempt !
DSK was a VIP, the staff knew who he was, and evidently the maid too. Why did she entered into his room before he hadn’t check out? why was she alone to clean a $3000 room?
Like Braftman said, there are quite a few enignas that need to be investigated !
The first thing I read that questioned her story much at all was in the New York press, I think it may have been the Post (and therefore somewhat suspect, but hey). The article quoted people familiar with the hotel business and the union in New York City, and then gave as their opinion that no woman just goes to the union, gets hired, and gets assigned to this hotel to work as a maid…not because she’s a good maid, anyway. If she was just a maid, she’d have been sent to a motel by the airport (the union decides where you work; you don’t get to just go and apply on your own). The suggestion was that she had other skills which would make her employment at a hotel for wealthy people worthwhile. She could clean rooms occasionally, and provide “other services” when required.
If the above is true, then what DSK’s lawyers said towards the end of things makes perfect sense. He’s French, he maybe doesn’t get every nuance of English, and some guy at the hotel tells him they have a maid who’s “accomodating.” The maid appears, they have illicit fun together, she then asks for payment, and he says “No, I am DSK, the ladies, they love me! I never have to pay for it! I’m a babe magnet.” She goes away pissed off, cleans a room, thinks about it, and says to herself “I’ll get that French bastard, thinking he can get away with not paying me!” and goes and cries rape, getting the guy arrested.
All of this is conjecture, of course, but it does plausibly explain what happened, how, and why. It seems likely that this guy is more or less a grown-up kid, just wandering around in life, taking what he wants, from women, etc. He appears very spoiled and self-indulgent, and from what I can see so far his behavior hasn’t cost him much, at least in his native France. I read a bit ago that whenever he’s accused of impropriety in France, his typical reply is “Yes, I am Jewish. So what?” as if every accusation of impropriety was essentiallly anti-Semitic at its core. He’s now got this French journalist to contend with, but apparently the woman’s mother had just concluded an affair with the guy, and DSK has bragged about bedding both the mother and daughter…not something you would do if you raped one of them. Then again, I wouldn’t have raped either of them, and maybe he thought he’d gotten away with it…
The “daughter” (Mme Tristane Banon) does not accuse DSK of rape; she accuses him of attempted rape.
As for French attitudes towards the situation, it varies, but even within his Socialist Party, there are plenty of people asking how what he did could ever be considered “consensual”, even if it did not meet the legal definition of a crime.
The English-speaking cultures tend to see the French as particularly promiscuous; this is not true. The French, on average, have fewer lovers than the English over a life time. There is a certain part of the cultural elite who are very laissez-faire, but this does not reflect “la France travailliste”. You may recall the case of Frederic Mitterand, the openly homosexual culture minister who had, before entering politics, penned a little-read auto-biography in which he spoke of sleeping with “young boys” in Thailand. It didn’t raise an eyebrows amongst his peers but, when it hit the tabloids, there was an absolute furore. (He then furiously tried to back-pedal, saying that they weren’t young at all, quite the contrary, but few seemed convinced.)
Don’t tar the French with the attitudes of France’s elite. Think about how America is portrayed by Hollywood, and see how that lines up with your life…
I’m not French, I’m Australian, but I have a great interest in the people of France.
The French aren’t more pervert than any other population, they are just less hypocrit on sex
I just came back from my doctor’s office, and he told me not to eat anything that’s white, ie white bread, white salt, white sugar, white rice, basically she said anything white is no good for me. Isn’t this reverse racism?
I think “Michael Price” is DSK himself or DSK’s gay lover.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/topsecretamerica/
The program examines the history of the secret side of America’s “war on terror.” From the creation of black site prisons abroad and super-secret facilities here in America, to targeted killings and covert wars waged by special forces, and the creation of a multibillion-dollar terrorism-industrial complex, FRONTLINE and Dana Priest ask how a decade of fighting terrorism has reshaped the country and whether it has made us any safer.
Cool thanks a lot Jane!!! I shave my nuts everyday with my Gillete Glide for just 3.00 bucks.