PDA

View Full Version : Dominique Strauss Kahn & the Hotel Maid



ZippyTheChimp
May 26th, 2011, 10:26 PM
Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former director of the IMF, is under house-arrest at a townhouse on Franklin St. I walked down the street on my way home today; the media is camped out across the street, typing away on laptops.

Maybe one of them dug up this photo of DSK at a G-20 meeting in 2009.


DSK meets Michelle Obama

http://obamadiary.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/a_560x400.jpg?w=560&h=400

No caption necessary.

Although, MC Hammer comes to mind.

stache
May 26th, 2011, 10:47 PM
I love Michelle's expression here. Like, "You have got to be kidding me". :p

lofter1
May 27th, 2011, 12:12 AM
"Barack Blocks the Pass"

stache
May 27th, 2011, 03:12 AM
This reminds me of Pepe le Pew -


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEdBndu0YUM

Ninjahedge
May 27th, 2011, 08:07 AM
Although, MC Hammer comes to mind.

Doo-do-do-do
Doo-do
Dee-do.....


Where's his parachute pants?


Hooooo! Ho! Ho!

ZippyTheChimp
May 27th, 2011, 08:54 AM
Pepe le Pew. Ha.

Send it to The Post. They'd run with it.

Ninjahedge
May 27th, 2011, 09:45 AM
I second that.


Dooo ett!

Doo eeet NAHW! [/Arnold]

stache
May 27th, 2011, 10:32 AM
Well, except I don't want to support the Post in any way shape or form. If you want to, feel free.

Ninjahedge
May 27th, 2011, 11:19 AM
What's wrong with supporting the Post?


/me looks around innocently......

lofter1
May 27th, 2011, 11:47 AM
http://s3.amazonaws.com/files.posterous.com/krstv/160PB9b0UXzdaalitfgauc2VADsWWlpzLGkpbaszfbOvQJJUK7 mUZ7LCfqTH/Capture_dcran_2011-05-26_12.39.png.scaled.500.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJFZ AE65UYRT34AOQ&Expires=1306511483&Signature=MqrJwq2Xs5%2BOjOcgDPdogK33dsY%3D

stache
May 27th, 2011, 12:01 PM
blank stare? :confused:

Ninjahedge
May 27th, 2011, 12:36 PM
Who you staring at?

:confused:

ZippyTheChimp
July 2nd, 2011, 10:54 AM
Above posts were moved from the Obama Presidency thread. The DSK story now has the legs to warrant its own thread.

ZippyTheChimp
July 2nd, 2011, 10:59 AM
July 1, 2011


Strauss-Kahn Accuser’s Call Alarmed Prosecutors

By JIM DWYER and MICHAEL WILSON

Twenty-eight hours after a housekeeper at the Sofitel New York said she was sexually assaulted by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, she spoke by phone to a boyfriend in an immigration jail in Arizona.

Investigators with the Manhattan district attorney’s office learned the call had been recorded and had it translated from a “unique dialect of Fulani,” a language from the woman’s native country, Guinea, according to a well-placed law enforcement official.

When the conversation was translated — a job completed only this Wednesday — investigators were alarmed: “She says words to the effect of, ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing,’ ” the official said.

It was another ground-shifting revelation in a continuing series of troubling statements, fabrications and associations that unraveled the case and upended prosecutors’ view of the woman. Once, in the hours after she said she was attacked on May 14, she’d been a “very pious, devout Muslim woman, shattered by this experience,” the official said — a seemingly ideal witness.

Little by little, her credibility as a witness crumbled — she had lied about her immigration, about being gang raped in Guinea, about her experiences in her homeland and about her finances, according to two law enforcement officials. She had been linked to people suspected of crimes. She changed her account of what she did immediately after the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Sit-downs with prosecutors became tense, even angry. Initially composed, she later collapsed in tears and got down on the floor during questioning. She became unavailable to investigators from the district attorney’s office for days at a time.

Now the phone call raised yet another problem: it seemed as if she hoped to profit from whatever occurred in Suite 2806.

The story of the woman’s six-week journey from seemingly credible victim, in the eyes of prosecutors, to a deeply unreliable witness, is drawn from interviews with law enforcement officials, statements from the woman’s lawyer and a letter from prosecutors to Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s defense team released in court on Friday. Some of the events were confirmed by both law enforcement officials and the women’s lawyer; others rely solely on law enforcement officials. In the end, it was the prosecutors’ assessment of the housekeeper’s credibility that led them to downgrade their confidence in the case and agree on Friday that Mr. Strauss-Kahn could be freed from house arrest.

In the beginning, her relationship with prosecutors was strong. Her account seemed solid. Over time, the well-placed official said, they discovered that she was capable of telling multiple, inconsistent versions of what appeared to be important episodes in her life. After the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn, she asked her supervisor at Sofitel, “Can any guest at the hotel do anything they want with us?” her lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson, said during a sidewalk press conference on Friday defending her.

The supervisor called security, and officers, finding semen on the floor and wall, called the police, setting off the quick chain of events that led to police officers escorting Mr. Strauss-Kahn off an Air France plane set to depart Kennedy International Airport.

Suspicions of the woman’s associations arose relatively quickly: within a week of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s arrest, the authorities learned of a recorded conversation between the subject of a drug investigation and another man, who said his companion was the woman involved in the Strauss-Kahn matter, according to another law enforcement official.

Prosecutors and investigators interviewed the woman at length.

Her immigration history was a focus. At first, she told them what she told immigration officials seven years ago in her accounts of how she fled Guinea and her application for asylum on Dec. 30, 2004. She described soldiers destroying the home where she lived with her husband, and said they were both beaten because of their opposition to the regime. She said her husband died in jail.

But then, in a subsequent interview with Manhattan prosecutors, she said the story was false, one she had been urged to tell by a man who gave it to her on a cassette recording to memorize. She had listened to the recording repeatedly.

The housekeeper also told investigators that she had been gang raped in Guinea. She cried and became “markedly distraught when recounting the incident,” according to a letter to the defense from prosecutors released Friday. But she later admitted that that, too, was a lie, once again one she had told to help her application for asylum. She said she was indeed raped in Guinea, but not in the way she had described.

Her lawyer, Mr. Thompson, said she was desperate to leave Guinea, and had been encouraged to embellish her application for asylum.

The boyfriend in the Arizona detention center was another issue. He had been arrested while bartering counterfeit designer clothing from Manhattan’s Chinatown for marijuana in the Southwest, the well-placed law enforcement official said. Her lawyer said she did not know the man was “a drug dealer.”

Meanwhile, as the interviews continued, the relationship grew more strained. During a meeting at the district attorney’s office on June 9, the woman wept as she was questioned closely after Mr. Thompson had left for another engagement. Her 15-year-old daughter, who was waiting outside, noticed that her mother was upset and called a relative to alert Mr. Thompson. The lawyer called the prosecutors and demanded an end to the questioning. He said on Friday that the daughter heard them shout, “Get out! Get out! Get out of here!” at her mother. The authorities say there was no shouting.

At another meeting, the woman threw herself to the floor in response to questions, the well-placed official said.

Then, for some 10 days, prosecutors were unable to get Mr. Thompson to bring her in; the lawyer said she was being treated for a shoulder injury that she suffered in the attack, an injury she had not reported earlier.

The final meeting occurred on Tuesday in the seventh-floor offices of the district attorney at 1 Hogan Place. It began at 11 a.m. and lasted five or six hours, except for a short lunch break, around an oval table in a conference room in the offices of the Public Integrity Unit.

It was devastating. In recent weeks, investigators collected bank records showing deposits of thousands of dollars in Arizona, Georgia, New York and Pennsylvania to an account in her name.

The woman had repeatedly said that the Sofitel was her only source of income.

Now, investigators confronted her with the bank records.

The woman, silent, turned to Mr. Thompson, seemingly pleading for direction on how to respond. He seemed startled.

“He was speechless,” the well-placed official said.

The district attorney’s office said the woman had lied about her income to maintain her public housing, and had claimed a friend’s child as her own dependant to increase her tax refund.

At the same meeting, the woman gave a new version of what she had done immediately after the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. In testimony before the grand jury in May, she said she had fled Suite 2806 to an area in the main hallway and waited until she saw Mr. Strauss-Kahn leave in an elevator. She has said that her supervisor arrived a short time later, and that she told her supervisor what had happened.

On Tuesday, the well-placed official said, she told investigators new details, stating, “I forgot to tell you this.”

In fact, she said, she left Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s room and entered another room — her lawyer said it was Suite 2820 — and cleaned it, and then returned to Suite 2806 and cleaned it until her supervisor arrived.

“She did not know what to do,” her lawyer said. “She did not want to lose her job. She knew that her supervisor was going to be coming upstairs momentarily. So, she went into another room.”

And yet, even this version was not corroborated by card-key data obtained by investigators on Friday, which indicated that the housekeeper went to the other room only after she had finished Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s room.

Some within the district attorney’s office suggested that the rush to bring the case to a grand jury may have contributed to its current, weakened state.

Early on, there appeared to be disagreement in the office over how to proceed — whether to agree to a bail package for Mr. Strauss-Kahn and take more time to investigate before seeking his indictment, or whether to try to keep him locked up and quickly take the case to the grand jury for an indictment, according to three people involved in the case.

The office chose to seek a quick indictment, but a Manhattan judge let Mr. Strauss-Kahn out on bail anyway.

Mr. Thompson said that the housekeeper’s account of what took place in Suite 2806 is the only one that matters, and said that in the jail recording, she recounted a version of the encounter that matched what she had told the police.

“It’s a fact that the victim here has made some mistakes, but that doesn’t mean she’s not a rape victim,” Mr. Thompson said Friday.

The woman has been crushed that her inconsistent statements have been brought to light, Mr. Thompson said. “I will go to my grave knowing what this man did to me,” she told him on Friday, he said.

John Eligon and William K. Rashbaum contributed reporting.

© 2011 The New York Times Company

ZippyTheChimp
July 2nd, 2011, 11:12 AM
a “unique dialect of Fulani,”

I can visualize a roomful of codebreakers working through the night.

MidtownGuy
July 2nd, 2011, 12:52 PM
The story has seemed strange to me from the beginning. Now I'm more confused because they say they did find semen. So something happened in that room. Maybe she offered a blow job, intending to entrap him and later say it was forced? It's all so bizarre.

stache
July 2nd, 2011, 06:45 PM
This guy felt guilty enough to try to make a run for it back to France. On the other hand this maid needs to be deported pronto. People that come here and abuse our system make me sick.

eddhead
July 2nd, 2011, 08:43 PM
The story has seemed strange to me from the beginning. Now I'm more confused because they say they did find semen. So something happened in that room. Maybe she offered a blow job, intending to entrap him and later say it was forced? It's all so bizarre.

Straus-Khan has never denied getting oral sex, but he insisted it was consensual. As to his running out, it may be important to note that he was caught on a plane he had made reservations for in advance.

If he is guilty, it would be a shame if he got away with it because of her plans to blackmail him. I hope that is not what is happening.

stache
July 2nd, 2011, 08:52 PM
Do you know when the reservation was made? It seems odd that he would be flying on a commercial airline.

eddhead
July 2nd, 2011, 09:53 PM
^^

I don't know. His attorneys claimed it had been for some time. I do not think this necessarily exonerates him though. What a mess.

lofter1
July 2nd, 2011, 10:51 PM
Seems that DSK may not have needed a reservation. From the NY Post (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/imf_boss_strauss_kahn_arrested_in_Kbd7uAi594vbej3o ORXfcJ), back at the time of his arrest (May 15):

... Strauss-Kahn got dressed and headed off to JFK for a flight to Paris.

When he was approached on the plane by Port Authority cops, he said, "What is this about?" sources said. He was taken off the aircraft without handcuffs.

Two law-enforcement sources said Strauss-Kahn was trying to flee authorities. Police said he left his cellphone and other personal items in the room.

"It looked like he got out of there in a hurry," Browne said.

Strauss-Kahn, who had a meeting planned for today with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin, has an arrangement with Air France that allows him to get on any flight and sit in first class, the sources said. He was traveling alone.


However, a report from an internet site ( Inner City Press (http://www.innercitypress.com/imf3dsk051811.html) ) three days later (May 18) includes what is supposedly correspondence from the IMF that somewhat contradicts the info above about DSK's flight plans:

Strauss-Kahn Air France Upgrades & Sofitel Discounts Afoul of IMF Policy
By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

[...]

One of two IMF belated responses to Inner City Press on May 18:



From: Murray, William [at] imf.org
Date: Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:59 AM
Subject: Air France
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com

The IMF has contracts with various intercontinental air carriers due to heavy travel requirements from Washington. Air France is among the carriers.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn's flight, which was booked before he left Washington, was a business class seat. He was apparently upgraded by the airline. This is not unusual given he is the head of the International Monetary Fund.

Ninjahedge
July 3rd, 2011, 11:12 AM
Possible scenarios:

1. He did force himself on her, just as said.

2. She entrapped him, the sex was consentual, he was ignorant.

3. She entrapped him, the sex was consentual, but the lady did not keep her mouth shut (no pun) and DSK somehow got the word of what she was planning to do (maybe she confronted him the in the hotel room, or when leaving, to her plans so he high-tailed it out of there).

I think, in light of the latest evidence, the third is very likely.

I don't think anybodies hands are clean in this one....sadly.

stache
July 3rd, 2011, 07:57 PM
If that's the case he wasn't thinking rationally. He could have accused her of blackmail to hotel management and she would have been suspended pending investigation. I'm not clear how a guy could rape someone in the mouth, unless he was a lot larger than the victim or the victim was tied up.

Ninjahedge
July 5th, 2011, 08:57 AM
Like I said, it does not sound like we have gotten the real story yet.....

eddhead
July 5th, 2011, 11:31 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/nyregion/housekeeper-detailed-strauss-kahn-attack-in-hospital-notes.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

By JOHN ELIGON (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/john_eligon/index.html?inline=nyt-per)As soon as she entered Room 2806 of the Sofitel New York, a hotel housekeeper said, a naked Dominique Strauss-Kahn (http://nyti.ms/meNllU) pushed her to the bed and, as she sat, began to sexually assault her. She freed herself, only to have him pull her toward the bathroom. After she fell to the ground, she said, he forced her again into a sexual act.

Versions of this narrative have been told in court and in various criminal documents since Mr. Strauss-Kahn, the former managing director of the International Monetary Fund (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/i/international_monetary_fund/index.html?inline=nyt-org), was arrested in May on sexual assault charges.

But this is the most direct account of the housekeeper’s version of events to be offered so far. It comes from a report prepared by a counselor at St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center, where the housekeeper was treated just hours after she said she was attacked, and where she related for one of the first times what happened in the hotel suite.

The report, which has been provided to prosecutors and defense lawyers, provides a counselor’s notes of the graphic story told by the 32-year-old Guinean housekeeper, whose credibility has since been called into serious question (http://nyti.ms/iiexiY) by prosecutors because of lies they say she told during her immigration (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/i/immigration_and_refugees/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) application and at other times.

While prosecutors now express severe doubts about the strength of their case, this account is suggestive of a serious sexual assault, which led prosecutors to charge Mr. Strauss-Kahn with attempted rape and sexual abuse.

There are a couple of sentences in the report, however, that the defense could focus on, most notably one that could be interpreted as the housekeeper’s saying that after the alleged attack, she observed Mr. Strauss-Kahn, 62, getting dressed — something that would run counter to her later version of what happened.

Although the Manhattan district attorney’s office agreed last week to release Mr. Strauss-Kahn from house arrest, prosecutors said they still believed that there was evidence of a forcible sexual attack.

Most of their problems with the case, they said, had to do not with the woman’s account of the attack, but rather with inconsistencies in her life story — lies she told on her asylum application and tax returns; deposits that were made to a bank account in her name; and a conversation she had with a man in federal custody in Arizona.

The one major discrepancy that prosecutors have pointed out in the woman’s version of the attack is that in her grand jury testimony, she said she waited in the hallway for Mr. Strauss-Kahn to leave after the attack. But she has since told investigators that she cleaned a nearby room after the attack, according to the prosecution.

The account given to the rape counselor stands out for its detail.

According to the counselor’s notes, the woman said a room service attendant had told her that no one was in the suite. As soon as the housekeeper walked in, she told the counselor, a man, “naked, with ‘white hair,’ ” locked the door behind her and pushed her onto the bed.
He “put his penis into her mouth briefly,” the report said. She told him to stop and tried to get away, according to the report, but he pulled her toward the bathroom. He put his hands under her clothes and touched her crotch area, the report said. After she fell to the carpeted floor, according to the report, Mr. Strauss-Kahn again forced her to perform oral sex, grabbing her by the hair and controlling her head with force.
The woman’s lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson, has since said the housekeeper suffered bruising to her vagina during the episode.

She spit onto the carpet once the sexual encounter was over, according to the report. Then, the report said, the patient “reports he got dressed” and “left the room, and that he said nothing to her during the incident.”

Those sentences raise the question of exactly where the woman was when Mr. Strauss-Kahn got dressed. If she was in the room, it would not be consistent with the two versions she has told investigators, both of which have her fleeing the room after the attack. It also raises the question of what communication they had with each other if Mr. Strauss-Kahn did not speak.

The lawyer William W. Taylor III, who along with Benjamin Brafman is representing Mr. Strauss-Kahn, declined to comment.

The report continues that the woman washed out her mouth with water. The woman also told her supervisor that there was blood on the bedsheets but that it did not belong to her, the report said. The woman was interviewed by Special Victims Squad detectives at the hospital and called her daughter, the report said.

Daniel R. Alonso, the chief assistant to the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., also declined to comment.
But in interviews over the weekend, prosecutors in the office have maintained that they have done what they are supposed to do, given the evidence they had at each step of the case.

“We’re doing our job,” said Joan Illuzzi-Orbon, the lead prosecutor on the Strauss-Kahn case. “We don’t get paid by indictment. We don’t get paid by convictions. We get paid to do the right thing.”

stache
July 5th, 2011, 12:44 PM
So if you're grabbing someone by the head, that means the victim's hands are free to push back or (duh) grab on to his nuts and squeeze like hell.

lofter1
July 5th, 2011, 01:02 PM
I know it's somewhat counter-intuitive to think that forced oral sex is easy to pull off or even probable (think of the possible danger to the guy doing the forcing), but I'm hoping you're not claiming that it's impossible for a person of greater strength, greater desire, greater power to do such a thing.

Ninjahedge
July 5th, 2011, 01:02 PM
Stache, I agree, but the thing we need to keep in mind is that if you are someone who is afraid of their own safety, you do not attack an aggressor if something worse could happen....


It does not make complete sense, but I can see an argument being made for it.

The only thing that questions her credibility is not, in my mind, he lying on her Visa/other applications. There are many that will say anything to get into the States. The thing(s) that get(s) me are (is) her connections. The BF with the drug deal? It is one thing to lie about abuse to get you on better soil, it is another to keep bed with thieves once you do.

eddhead
July 5th, 2011, 01:27 PM
I do not think that the "inconsistenties in her life story" necessarily negate the possibility that she was sexually assaulted. We just don't know enough about the physical evidence or lack thereof.

ZippyTheChimp
July 5th, 2011, 01:39 PM
Strauss-Kahn accuser files libel lawsuit against NY Post over prostitute claim

By Associated Press, Updated: Tuesday, July 5, 12:52 PM

NEW YORK — The New York City hotel maid at the center of the Dominique Strauss-Kahn sex assault case has filed a libel lawsuit against the New York Post after it called her a prostitute.

The woman’s lawyer, Kenneth Thompson, filed the claim Tuesday in Bronx state Supreme Court. A series of Post articles over the weekend said the 32-year-old was a “prostitute,” and “hooker” and that she “traded sex for money.”

The lawsuit says that the statements are false.

The Post didn’t immediately comment.

Strauss-Kahn was released without bail Friday after prosecutors said new information about the woman’s life had forced them to reconsider the case. They say she lied about details surrounding how she came to the U.S.

The woman maintains the sexual assault occurred.


Copyright 2011 The Associated Press.

Ninjahedge
July 5th, 2011, 01:45 PM
That's a tough one....

I do not like the way the Post reports some things (and they are definitely libelous sometimes), but I am not too sure that this will really help anybody in the end.....

It is at least some comfort that this woman has learned the way things operate in the States..... or maybe she is being coached... :hmm:

ZippyTheChimp
July 5th, 2011, 01:47 PM
And...

July 5th, 2011


DSK facing divided French sentiment amidst new attempted rape accusations

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former managing director of the International Monetary Fund, faces new challenges this week with French writer Tristane Banon accusing him of attempted rape in a 2003 incident. Strauss-Kahn has filed countercharges against Banon for "false declarations,"' a lawyer for DSK told CNN Monday.

This news comes amidst reports that the Manhattan DA's case against Strauss-Kahn seems to be crumbling due to credibility issues with the hotel maid who has accused him of rape.

© 2010 Cable News Network

Ninjahedge
July 5th, 2011, 03:23 PM
Can he save the world financial market from jail?


Can we get him a laptop or somethnig?

mariab
July 5th, 2011, 05:01 PM
They have to keep bringing this up & not let it pass. She was planning something, even if she started planning it spur of the moment in his room. This is very damning evidence for her. At first I thought it was rape, but in light of all these things, especially this phone call, I don't.


Twenty-eight hours after a housekeeper at the Sofitel New York said she was sexually assaulted by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, she spoke by phone to a boyfriend in an immigration jail in Arizona.

Investigators with the Manhattan district attorney’s office learned the call had been recorded and had it translated from a “unique dialect of Fulani,” a language from the woman’s native country, Guinea, according to a well-placed law enforcement official.

When the conversation was translated — a job completed only this Wednesday — investigators were alarmed: “She says words to the effect of, ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing,’ ” the official said.

ZippyTheChimp
July 6th, 2011, 01:04 AM
July 5, 2011


Still a Case for Trying Strauss-Kahn

By JIM DWYER

What is so wrong with the original plan to hold a trial for Dominique Strauss-Kahn to decide if he committed an act of sexual violence against a hotel housekeeper?

After all, it’s not as if the case against Mr. Strauss-Kahn, the former head of the International Monetary Fund, has simply dissolved with the discovery that the woman who accused him has lied about her past, and had shady connections and a bank account with irregular cash deposits.

To begin with, there is evidence in the case that other people can provide, notably, crime lab results that show the semen of Mr. Strauss-Kahn was found on her clothing.

But that is only the beginning.

In the moments after the encounter between Mr. Strauss-Kahn and the housekeeper, four employees at the Sofitel New York each spoke to her, one after the other, and each was convinced that she was “shook up” and “in distress,” according to a person involved with that part of the investigation. “You had two former police officers who didn’t think she was making it up,” the person said.

Hotel records show the housekeeper had never before cleaned a room that Mr. Strauss-Kahn occupied during any of his visits. On the morning of May 14, records of her card-key entries show that she spent about an hour cleaning Room 2820, which was around the corner from the rooms occupied by Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Just after 12 p.m., a room service employee knocked on his door several times, got no answer, then entered to collect a room service wagon.

The housekeeper was told by the room service worker that there was no one in the suite, and she used her card key to enter at 12:06.

This would appear to undercut any theory that the housekeeper had chosen Mr. Strauss-Kahn because of his prominence.

During the next 20 minutes, the housekeeper and Mr. Strauss-Kahn had the encounter that is the subject of the criminal charges.

The housekeeper’s key was next used at 12:26 — when she returned to Room 2820, the same room that she had already cleaned. But she did not stay there long. Her supervisor arrived on the floor, she was met by the housekeeper, and the card-key records show that they then went into 2806, the Strauss-Kahn suite, also at 12:26. (The card-key records are accurate to the minute, not to the second.)

By then, Mr. Strauss-Kahn was on his way to the front desk, where he was seen checking out about 12:28. Hotel video turned over to the authorities shows him with toothpaste residue on his lips, and then entering a yellow cab.

His lawyers maintain that whatever happened between Mr. Strauss-Kahn and the housekeeper did not involve force or criminal behavior. They have also said that videotape of him at lunch, just after he left the hotel, would show a calm demeanor. With last week’s revelations about the housekeeper, the lawyers for Mr. Strauss-Kahn have said the case should be dismissed.

There is little question that the police and Manhattan prosecutors had probable cause to arrest Mr. Strauss-Kahn: they believed a crime had been committed, and he had been involved.

Prosecutors do not have to abandon criminal cases simply over problems with witnesses’ backgrounds, said Bruce Green, a law professor at Fordham and an authority on legal ethics.

“If you think the case is still tryable, that the jury will understand that although the person has not been truthful about things in the past, you can proceed,” Mr. Green said.

With a jury trial, 12 people would decide the most important questions, which do not include who will run for president of France next year or if Cyrus R. Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney, messed things up. Bringing charges and then dropping them is not a dishonorable act. Letting criminals get away with ugly crimes is another story.

In the end, the only thing that matters is if Mr. Strauss-Kahn assaulted the housekeeper. His lawyers say he is innocent, a status he maintains until a jury finds otherwise. The housekeeper insists that she was the victim of a crime, said her lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson. He disputes the translation of a taped phone call, made the day after the encounter, that the authorities believe shows her to be thinking about exploiting Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s wealth.

“She wants to testify to the world what Mr. Strauss-Kahn did to her, and she is willing to be hammered on cross-examination,” Mr. Thompson said. “You don’t have to come over on the Mayflower to be the victim of a crime.”

E-mail: Twitter: @jimdwyernyt

© 2011 The New York Times Company



By then, Mr. Strauss-Kahn was on his way to the front desk, where he was seen checking out about 12:28. Hotel video turned over to the authorities shows him with toothpaste residue on his lips, and then entering a yellow cab.Someone needs to get this uploaded on YouTube.

lofter1
July 6th, 2011, 01:57 AM
How do they know it's toothpaste?

stache
July 6th, 2011, 02:57 AM
Trust lofter to print what I was thinking. Maybe he got a snowball.

[QUOTE=ZippyTheChimp

“She is willing to be hammered on cross-examination,” Mr. Thompson said. [/QUOTE]

Seems like she's been hammered enough. :p

ZippyTheChimp
July 6th, 2011, 07:20 AM
How do they know it's toothpaste?He was in pajamas and holding a toothbrush?

ZippyTheChimp
July 6th, 2011, 08:07 AM
July 3, 2011


What Strauss-Kahn and His Accuser Risked

Amy Davidson

When Dominique Strauss-Kahn was first accused of raping a hotel housekeeper, who said that he had attacked her when she walked into his suite to clean it, one of the questions people asked was why he would risk such a thing. Didn’t a man in his position have a great deal to lose? He did; so, as it turned out, did she, to the extent that she may be facing criminal charges, even as he has been released on his own recognizance, though the case is still pending for now. Whatever calculation Strauss-Kahn made when he decided to engage in what all sides agree was a sexual encounter of some sort between strangers, it seems that he knew more than she did about the danger and its management. (He had pleaded not guilty, but his defense was expected to be that there had been consensual sex.) Strauss-Kahn also may have known something that the woman knew just as well or better, something that may have taken the D.A.’s office longer than it should have to figure out: people have complicated lives.

Whatever happened in that suite, the housekeeper was, as we now know, a risk-taker. As the Times first reported, the prosecution learned that she hadn’t told the truth to them, or to immigration authorities, or to either, about the life she had in Guinea, including an allegation that soldiers raped her (she now says the circumstances of the rape were different). At some point, she seems to have weighed the hazard, or just deprivation, of staying in Africa against the risk of lying on an asylum application; and then, when she was interviewed by prosecutors, the risk of sticking to a false story against telling a new one. What upset the prosecutors, apparently, was that she lied to their faces. But either option would have hurt her on the witness stand. (Strauss-Kahn’s team had investigators checking her background.) Once she lied to get out of Guinea, was she no longer credible as a rape victim in this country? And how vulnerable does that mean any imperfect woman is?

Once she got to the Bronx, as a single mother, she also took risks that don’t, from the outside, look like smart ones: claiming a friend’s child as a dependent on her own tax returns; understating her income to keep public housing; depositing or allowing others to deposit questionable amounts of cash into her bank account; paying bills to multiple cell-phone companies. (One might think about one’s own participation in cash economies—paying nannies, for example—and how the things we each are least proud of in our own lives would sound in court.) The person in Strauss-Kahn’s life with money is his wife, Anne Sinclair, and her wealth, inherited from a grandfather who dealt in Picassos, has done much to shield him from danger. His accuser was reportedly involved with a man who is now in an immigration prison in Arizona, after being picked up for trafficking marijuana. If she ever saw him as a protector, he isn’t one now.

The prosecutors were particularly shaken by the Arizona prison’s recording of a phone call the woman made to the man a day after the incident—and perhaps they were right to be. “A well-placed law enforcement official" told the Times that in it “She says words to the effect of, ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing’ ” But I’d reserve judgment on that one, at least in terms of the truth of what happened in the hotel suite. First, her lawyer said that in the same call she repeated her story; second, I’m not sure that what a woman would say to calm down an allegedly criminal boyfriend is all that dispositive; and the conversation was in what the official told the Times was a “unique dialect of Fulani,” obscure enough that it had taken prosecutor until this week to get a translation. Anyone who followed the wildly conflicting linguistic testimony in the Forest Hills Bukaharan-dentist-murder case—and anyone who didn’t should read Janet Malcolm’s great account—will remember how tricky those dialects can be in court.

Here is something else that the New York Post found very suspicious: “The woman also had ‘a lot of her expenses—hair braiding, salon expenses—paid for by men not related to her,’ the source said.” The source, “close to the defense investigation,” called the woman a prostitute—an angle the Post has pushed. (Caption Sunday: “The infamous Sofitel maid/hooker.”) Indeed, the Post has gone further, allowing defense sources to suggest that prostitution is a recognized aspect of a maid’s profession, and that the hotel workers’ union is a sort of institutional procuress that sent her to the Sofitel because she was an “earner.” (The union strongly denies it.) That insults thousands of other women who work hard cleaning up after hotel guests.

But the Post’s story may be a look at what the defense had planned before it knew how little work it would have to do to discredit her. Its challenge was explaining why the housekeeper would decide to engage in consensual sex with Strauss-Kahn, whom she had just met pushing a cleaning cart, and not, say, while he was charming guests at a party in Paris. To review: the woman was found by her supervisor, apparently distraught, with what forensic tests showed was Strauss-Kahn’s semen on her clothes. One new discrepancy is that there was a longer interval than she’d told a grand jury between that point and whatever had happened—she had even begun cleaning another suite. Was she, as her lawyer suggests, simply in shock—fearing for her job? The Post’s defense source has another scenario: that she was processing a “humiliating exchange” in which she had oral sex with Strauss-Kahn, who then “refused to pay” for her services:



“There was an expectation of money after the fact, but he was dismissive,” the source said.

And not gently, the source said—D.S.K. brushed off the maid’s request as he turned his back and got dressed.


This may be pure fantasy. (There were also indications of a physical struggle.) But if, for the sake of argument, it is the gospel truth, what picture would we be left with? Is the image of a wealthy man deciding that there was little risk in not paying a prostitute or, for that matter, in using one, all that attractive? For a man whose own side is telling reporters that he did what Eliot Spitzer did—except that Spitzer paid what he owed—Strauss-Kahn has looked awfully pleased with himself since being released from house arrest. (He and Sinclair took in an exhibit at MOMA today.) Observers, and I’d include myself, have erred in assuming this case was simpler than it is. Still, the word “vindication,” which has been thrown around quite a bit, is a deeply odd one. After the woman was called a liar by the prosecutor’s office, Bernard-Henri Lévy, Strauss-Kahn’s philosopher friend, was out proclaiming victory. In his earlier defense of Strauss-Kahn, Levy relied on notions of privilege that remain unattractive, and also cheaply disparaged a French journalist who has said for years that Strauss-Kahn attacked her, and for whom no one has yet come up with a boyfriend in a prison in Arizona. According to the Guardian, Lévy told Le Parisien that Strauss-Kahn had been “lynched” by the “friends of minorities” in the U.S. He said that because the victim was “poor and immigrant” she had been presumed innocent, and because Strauss-Kahn was “powerful” he had been presumed guilty.

Friends of minorities? Is it simply that Lévy misjudges, rather profoundly, the precarious positions in which poor and powerless woman in America—or in Guinea, or anywhere—can find themselves? He does seem very worried about the risks to powerful men; but perhaps he needn’t be.

Amy Davidson is a senior editor at The New Yorker.

The New Yorker © 2011 Condé Nast Digital



What prostitute doesn't ask for payment in advance?

stache
July 6th, 2011, 11:11 AM
This whole story just stinks of filth.

eddhead
July 28th, 2011, 09:52 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/nyregion/strauss-kahns-accuser-was-misquoted-lawyer-says.html?hp=&pagewanted=print


By JIM DWYER (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/d/jim_dwyer/index.html?inline=nyt-per), JOHN ELIGON and ANAHAD O'CONNOR

A lawyer for the hotel housekeeper who accused Dominique Strauss-Kahn (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/dominique_strausskahn/index.html) of sexually assaulting her in May said Wednesday that taped conversations, two of them made a day after the encounter, prove that his client had no intention of exploiting the charges against Mr. Strauss-Kahn to make money.

The lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson, and the housekeeper, Nafissatou Diallo (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/d/nafissatou_diallo/index.html), spent much of the day at the district attorney’s office in Manhattan, where they listened to a recording of conversations Ms. Diallo had with a fellow African immigrant in an Arizona jail after she said she was attacked. Law enforcement officials told Mr. Thompson and The New York Times (http://nyti.ms/oWBGeL) last month that Ms. Diallo could be heard saying on the tape “words to the effect of: ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing.’ ”

But after listening to the recording on Wednesday, Mr. Thompson told reporters at a news conference that Ms. Diallo’s statements had been mischaracterized. He said that at no point did she raise the issue of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s wealth or status in the way that prosecutors had described it. Rather, he said, the man she was speaking with, who initiated the calls to Ms. Diallo, remarked during one conversation that Ms. Diallo could stand to gain money from the case, but she quickly dismissed the idea and said it was a matter for her lawyer.

Of even greater importance, Mr. Thompson said, during the first of the calls, her description of the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn was consistent with what she told investigators a day earlier. In sexual-assault cases, people who hear an early account of an attack are called “outcry witnesses,” and are often used to buttress the credibility of a person making an accusation.

“She told the guy that someone tried to rape her at her job,” Mr. Thompson said in an interview after his news conference. “She said: ‘I didn’t know who he was. We fought each other. Because he wasn’t able to take off my clothes, he put his penis in my mouth. He touched me. They took me to the hospital, and they arrested him.’ ”

In a statement Wednesday, Erin M. Duggan, a spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., said: “This is a pending criminal case. We will have no comment on evidence, or on any meetings between prosecutors and witnesses, civil attorneys or defense counsel.”

According to Mr. Thompson, Ms. Diallo said during her first conversation with the man in jail that her attacker was a powerful person, but that she was now with the government, presumably a reference to protection provided by investigators.
“The first call that the guy in prison made to Nafi Diallo corroborates that Dominique Strauss-Kahn violently attacked her and tried to rape her,” Mr. Thompson said.

It was during the second call that the subject of money came up, the lawyer said.

“The guy in jail called back several hours later, expressing concern, ‘Are you O.K.,’ and she says she is,” Mr. Thompson said. “During the second conversation, she said, ‘People from France keep calling me and saying he’s rich and powerful.’ ”

The man then expressed concern about her, the lawyer said, asking whether she was safe.

“She told him she was in Manhattan, that a lawyer was coming to see her — it was not me,” Mr. Thompson said. “She said, ‘Don’t worry, I know what I’m doing.’ ”

At some point, the man told Ms. Diallo that by moving forward with the case, “you’ll get a lot of money,” Mr. Thompson said. But he insisted that Ms. Diallo made it clear that was not her intention.

“She said, ‘Stop, stop.’ He’s going on and on on the phone about it, she didn’t want to deal with that. She said, ‘Please stop. Wait, wait. The lawyer will get it.’ Meaning, the lawyer would deal with it.”

But prosecutors did not see it that way. Mr. Thompson said that in a phone conversation late on the afternoon of June 30, he was told by a senior prosecutor that the conversations created “big problems” for the case, and that the prosecutor mischaracterized Ms. Diallo’s statements as implying that she intended to exploit the charges for money.

“It is a fact that what they told me and what they told you was not accurate,” Mr. Thompson said. “Ms. Diallo never said, ‘I am going to get this guy’s money’ or anything about scheming to get his money.”

Mr. Thompson was not given copies of the recordings, and described them based on notes he took during an extended meeting with prosecutors, in which he listened to the recordings with a Fulani interpreter hired by the district attorney’s office. The calls were recorded at an immigration (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/i/immigration_and_refugees/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) detention center where the man was incarcerated.

The meeting with Mr. Thompson came just days after Ms. Diallo broke her silence and granted interviews (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/nyregion/housekeeper-details-strauss-kahn-encounter.html) to Newsweek and ABC News. In the interviews, she disputed the account in The Times of what she said to the man in the Arizona jail, saying, as Mr. Thompson argued on Wednesday, that it was in relation to getting a lawyer.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn resigned as managing director of the International Monetary Fund after his arrest.

Prosecutors are still deciding whether to proceed with the case.

Lawyers for Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Ms. Diallo had discussions in mid-June regarding sharing facts about the case and exploring a potential resolution.

The discussions did not include substantive talk about the case and ended without any agreement, according to a lawyer briefed on the discussions who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because the conversations were private.

But a different person briefed on the matter said that Mr. Thompson had sought a monetary settlement.

Mr. Thompson plainly denied that assertion. “At no point in time did I ever convey a monetary settlement demand to Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers,” he said later.

One of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers, William W. Taylor III, called Mr. Thompson’s statement “extraordinarily misleading.” But Mr. Taylor declined to elaborate.

The talks apparently broke down because the parties could not agree on whether to use mediation, the lawyer briefed on the discussions said.
Mr. Thompson has said that Ms. Diallo intends to file a lawsuit against Mr. Strauss-Kahn.

Colin Moynihan contributed reporting.

eddhead
August 22nd, 2011, 09:55 AM
I can't help but think that he did it. Either way, Vance really blew this one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/nyregion/strauss-kahn-prosecution-said-to-be-ending.html?hp=&pagewanted=print
[/URL]




August 22, 2011

Strauss-Kahn Case Is Said to Be Set for DismissalBy WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM, JOHN ELIGON and JIM DWYERThree months after authorizing [URL="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/dominique_strausskahn/index.html?inline=nyt-per"]Dominique Strauss-Kahn (http://www.nytimes.com/)’s swift indictment after his arrest on sexual assault charges, the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr. (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/v/cyrus_r_vance_jr/index.html?inline=nyt-per), has decided to ask a judge to dismiss the case, a person briefed on the matter said on Sunday.
Mr. Vance’s decision will end one of the most closely watched prosecutions in New York in decades with no determination on whether the encounter between Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who was then the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, and a hotel housekeeper who went to clean his suite was criminal or consensual, several law enforcement officials have said.

While there has been widespread speculation (http://nyti.ms/rhjEhE) that Mr. Vance would drop the case, it is nonetheless an extraordinary turn of events, for both Mr. Strauss-Kahn, 62, an enormously powerful international banker and a leading candidate (http://nyti.ms/oaeRId) for the French presidency before his arrest, and his accuser, Nafissatou Diallo (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/d/nafissatou_diallo/index.html?inline=nyt-per), a 33-year-old immigrant from Guinea.

Her credibility as a witness began to crumble after prosecutors discovered what they characterized as a series of lies she had told, though none bore directly on her version of the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who was led out of a police building in handcuffs in May and held under house arrest until his bail conditions were relaxed last month, would be free to return to France after a judge, responding to a motion from the district attorney, formally dismissed the seven-count indictment.

The outcome would leave Ms. Diallo with no recourse to pursue criminal charges against the Frenchman. But she has filed a civil lawsuit (http://nyti.ms/mXzoD3) seeking unspecified monetary damages from Mr. Strauss-Kahn for what the suit called a “violent and sadistic attack” that humiliated and degraded her.
Mr. Vance’s office has readied a motion known as a dismissal on recommendation, which one person briefed on the matter said would detail the reasons he and his aides believe that the case cannot be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Mr. Vance’s decision in the highly charged case, which ultimately became a credibility contest of sorts between Ms. Diallo and Mr. Strauss-Kahn, was said to have grown out of prosecutors’ assessment that her repeated lies, including multiple denials that she had given any consideration to Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s money, would open her to withering cross-examination. A day after the encounter, she and a friend who was in jail had a recorded telephone conversation about Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s wealth, a fact that the investigators would not learn until six weeks later, after Ms. Diallo had been asked repeatedly about the subject.

She is the only witness who could testify to the central allegation in the case: that Mr. Strauss-Kahn forced her to perform oral sex.
One law enforcement official involved in the investigation said no single problematic detail about Ms. Diallo’s background, or even all of them put together, had undermined the prosecution’s faith in its ability to present a viable case. Indeed, the official noted, it is common for witnesses and complainants who testify to be vulnerable to attacks on their credibility, either because their accounts have varied, or because they have self-interested motives for giving evidence, like avoiding jail or, occasionally, winning civil settlements.

In the Strauss-Kahn case, the official said, prosecutors came to believe that Ms. Diallo seemed unwilling to take responsibility for telling the truth.

“We deal with witnesses with these kinds of problems every day,” the official said. “With her, we had to drag the details of the lies out of her over weeks. It might have been different if she had let all the air out in a day or two. Every time she was confronted with her lies, she would blame someone else — someone told her to say this for asylum, someone else took advantage of her bank accounts, someone else did the taxes.”

Besides their legal and ethical responsibilities to disclose Ms. Diallo’s untruths, members of the prosecution team could have been called in a criminal trial to testify about her untrue statements to them — possibly transforming prosecutors into witnesses for the defense.
Asking a jury to believe Ms. Diallo beyond a reasonable doubt had become untenable, according to a senior official involved in the case.
“We couldn’t tell the jury that she kept lying to us but that they should believe her,” the senior official said.

But Mr. Vance’s decision will probably draw fire on several fronts, including from black leaders and women’s groups who have urged him to allow a jury to weigh the facts and render a decision.

Ms. Diallo’s lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/21/nyregion/prosecutors-schedule-meeting-with-strauss-kahn-accuser.html), acknowledged that his client may have credibility issues, but he said that other evidence weighed the case in her favor, including other hotel workers who saw Ms. Diallo in a distraught state shortly after she said she was attacked.

“You must also consider the overwhelming physical evidence that Mr. Vance and his prosecutors pointed to just weeks ago,” Mr. Thompson said. “Forensic evidence does not lie.” Even one of the controversial phone conversations with her friend in jail corroborated her account of the attack, Mr. Thompson said. Ms. Diallo described the assault to her friend just as she had the previous day to detectives and prosecutors, according to Mr. Thompson.

Law enforcement officials have said, however, that though the forensic evidence in the case shows that a sexual encounter occurred, it does not prove that it was forcible.

Some critics have contended that Mr. Vance’s office is to blame for some of the problems that arose in the case. They pointed to the prosecutors’ decision, shortly after Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s arrest, to reject an agreement under which Mr. Strauss-Kahn would be freed on bail — a decision that forced them to move swiftly to seek an indictment from a grand jury rather than take more time to investigate details of the case.
The more deliberative course, these critics say, would have given prosecutors a chance to learn more about the housekeeper and perhaps avoid their early pronouncements that she was a powerful and “unwavering” witness.

Since Mr. Strauss-Kahn was taken into custody (http://nyti.ms/nefKeE) hours after the May 14 incident at the Sofitel New York, the case has played out in an almost carnival-like atmosphere, with legions of representatives of foreign news outlets camped out in front of the courthouse in Lower Manhattan. The drama has dominated the headlines (http://nyti.ms/qcQTK5) in France, where his arrest and star turn in handcuffs before the cameras sparked outrage (http://nyti.ms/ropD7o).

From his first court hearing, Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers indicated that a sexual encounter did take place (http://nyti.ms/odiPig) in the suite but suggested that whatever occurred was consensual.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn, a leading figure in the Socialist Party who stepped down (http://nyti.ms/nsj95P) from his post at the I.M.F. because of his arrest, was charged with (http://nyti.ms/pjbsxI) attempted rape, sexual abuse, criminal sexual act, unlawful imprisonment and forcible touching.

Prosecutors were initially successful in getting a judge to order him held without bail, saying their case was strong and corroborated by physical evidence. They also said the housekeeper had given a compelling and unwavering account of what happened inside the hotel room.
A State Supreme Court justice eventually granted Mr. Strauss-Kahn bail (http://nyti.ms/r9Rv8F) on $1 million cash and $5 million bond. But he was held under extraordinary conditions in which he remained under house arrest in a town house in TriBeCa (http://nyti.ms/nKvnMJ), monitored by an armed guard. He could leave the town house only under limited circumstances.

Those bail restrictions were lifted in a stunning reversal by prosecutors on July 1 (http://nyti.ms/obFUHU), about six weeks after the encounter.

At a court hearing, the district attorney’s office revealed (http://nyti.ms/qgd9dw) that it had uncovered several facts damaging to the housekeeper’s credibility. Ms. Diallo had lied in her asylum application to immigration (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/i/immigration_and_refugees/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) authorities and falsely told prosecutors she had been gang raped in her native country, according to a letter filed by prosecutors. She also was untruthful in her tax returns, the letter said.

Another area was not aired in court, but was discussed with Ms. Diallo’s lawyer before then. On June 29, when prosecutors’ confidence in Ms. Diallo had already eroded, they received summary translations of phone conversations that she had with a man in immigration detention on May 15, the day after her encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. By then, Ms. Diallo had told the authorities on several occasions that she had never given consideration to possible compensation from a man as wealthy as Mr. Strauss-Kahn.

On the night of June 30, Mr. Thompson said that he was called by Mr. Vance’s chief assistant, Daniel R. Alonso, and was informed that the case had serious problems, specifying the phone conversation (http://nyti.ms/pKBCnV) with the man in detention.

Mr. Thompson indicated that Mr. Alonso “stated the victim said ‘words to the effect’ that ‘this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing.’ ”
Mr. Thompson has vehemently disputed the prosecutors’ interpretation of the recorded conversation, in which the two spoke in Fulani, a language of Guinea.

Later, when he listened to the tape with a translator, Mr. Thompson said the prosecutors had mischaracterized its contents (http://nyti.ms/qivhFT). The district attorney’s office later had several translations from Fulani prepared, and these produced different texts that covered the same subject. The official involved in the investigation said there could be “no question as to the substance of the conversation.”
While prosecutors might have wanted Ms. Diallo to hold off on filing a civil suit, they had no objection to her seeking damages for injuries she might have suffered at the hands of Mr. Strauss-Kahn. But the phone call, the official said, signified another episode of Ms. Diallo’s not being forthright.

During the month of June, as it became apparent to prosecutors that the case was crumbling, lawyers for Ms. Diallo and Mr. Strauss-Kahn, had some discussions about a payment that would settle any civil claims, and presumably also protect Mr. Strauss-Kahn from criminal prosecution.
In late July, in a rare move for a woman who said she was sexually assaulted, Ms. Diallo went public, giving interviews to Newsweek magazine (http://bit.ly/nFBbiS) and ABC News (http://abcn.ws/pHL9Ld).



http://wirednewyork.com/adx/bin/clientside/61ffac06Q2F0dNUca0pmUa.wmQ2BqdpaQ5DQ51q3Q25d2UA2Q2 5eeUQ3CAUQ7B3WQ7B http://up.nytimes.com/?d=0//&t=&s=2&ui=31080447&r=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2enytimes%2ecom%2f2011%2f08%2f2 2%2fnyregion%2fstrauss%2dkahn%2dprosecution%2dsaid %2dto%2dbe%2dending%2ehtml%3fpagewanted%3d2%26hp&u=www%2enytimes%2ecom%2f2011%2f08%2f22%2fnyregion% 2fstrauss%2dkahn%2dprosecution%2dsaid%2dto%2dbe%2d ending%2ehtml%3fhp%3d%26pagewanted%3dprint

BBMW
August 22nd, 2011, 11:43 AM
I agree that he probably did do it. I don't know if Vance blew it, or the victim, seeing dollar signs sprouting from her misfortune, just made the case unwinnable for the prosecution by destroying her own credibility.

eddhead
August 22nd, 2011, 01:04 PM
Well either way Vance blew it. He may or may not have been too timid at the end, but he was definitely too aggressive in the begining. He came out looking foolish.

BBMW
August 22nd, 2011, 01:46 PM
He can't control what his witnesses do. She decided to try to profit from this case. As soon as she did that, the case was doomed, because it was largely based on her credibility. Now she won't likely make very much. Ironically, if she didn't play with her story, and didn't talk about trying to make money off the case, she probably would have.

Ninjahedge
August 22nd, 2011, 04:06 PM
BBMW, it is unclear whether she was trying to profit from this, or was simply aware that she could if it was done correctly.

Needless to say, it was NOT done correctly. I feel bad for her, but morally confused all in all...... She did not deserve to have the entire case thrown out, but that does not mean that he had the right to do what he did to her either.....

BBMW
August 22nd, 2011, 05:06 PM
^
Deserve? No (maybe, depending on what she actually did/said).
Made inevitable? Yes.
Was that Cy Vance's Fault (going back to the original issue)? No.

eddhead
August 22nd, 2011, 07:15 PM
I don't have time to post the article here, but the Times just ran a story (last 2 hours or so) indicating that her attorney is petitioning to have Vance removed from the case.

BTW it is not at all clear to me that her intent was to 'try to profit' from the case. Her credibility 'issues' seem to stem to events not connected with the alleged attack.

EDIT: Cy Vance mishandled this from the onset beginning with holding him over without bail and pushing for a quick trial.

BBMW
August 22nd, 2011, 10:41 PM
He was on a plane, about to leave the country. Generally, if a suspect is about to go abroad, they arrest them. What are the chances the French would have extradited him, if he was indicted here after he left.

If he were a US citizen, who did not give an indication he was about to flee the country, it might have been investigated quietly before they lowered tghe boom. They didn't have the opportunity to do that.

eddhead
October 13th, 2011, 01:08 PM
This guy's a pig.

October 13, 2011

French Prosecutor Drops Strauss-Kahn Case


By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS[/h]PARIS (AP) — The Paris prosecutor's office on Thursday dropped its investigation into a writer's claim that Dominique Strauss-Kahn tried to rape her, though it said the former IMF chief admitted to behavior that could qualify as sexual assault.

In a dramatic legal twist for the high-profile Strauss-Kahn, the prosecutor said it couldn't put Strauss-Kahn on trial for the lesser sexual assault charge because the incident occurred too long ago. The statute of limitations on that charge is three years; on attempted rape it's 10 years.
During questioning into the French case, Strauss-Kahn admitted to what prosecutors described in a statement as sexual assault against writer Tristane Banon, during a 2003 interview for a book she was writing.

"For lack of sufficient elements of evidence, prosecution cannot be undertaken on the charge of attempted rape," the prosecutor's office said. However, it said, "facts that could be qualified as sexual assault have been acknowledged."

Strauss-Kahn's lawyer, Henri Leclerc, told The Associated Press that the ex-IMF chief admitted that he tried to kiss Banon without her consent and she refused.

"He admitted no assault, no violence of any kind," Leclerc said. He said he didn't understand how the prosecutor could have interpreted the attempted kiss as sexual assault.

Under French law, sexual assault is an attack that does not involve an attempt to penetrate the victim.

The announcement marked a victory for Strauss-Kahn but revived questions about his behavior toward women. The suave economist saw his reputation and French presidential ambitions dashed when he was jailed in New York on charges he tried to rape a hotel maid earlier this year. Prosecutors later dropped that case, too.

Strauss-Kahn, considered a top contender for France's presidency before his New York arrest, called Banon's attempted rape claim imaginary and slanderous.

Banon has said that Strauss-Kahn invited her to an empty apartment for the book interview, and they ended up tussling on the floor, with the politician trying to open her jeans and bra and putting his fingers in her mouth and underwear.

Banon's lawyer, David Koubbi, called Strauss-Kahn an "untried sexual assailant" and that even though the investigation was dropped, Strauss-Kahn still faces "a legitimate suspicion about his behavior toward women."

Koubbi said that other women had told him they were also victims of Strauss-Kahn's sexual behavior but were afraid to testify.

Banon filed her complaint in France in July, after doubts about the New York maid's credibility emerged.

Banon has defended her decision not to file charges against Strauss-Kahn at the time of the alleged incident. In 2003, she was 23 years old and Strauss-Kahn was an eminence grise of France's Socialist party, and her own mother advised her against filing a complaint.

The New York maid, Nafissatou Diallo, has filed a civil suit. Banon has said she would do likewise if Paris prosecutors decided not to go forward with a criminal case.

One of Diallo's lawyers, Douglas Wigdor, said the French prosecutors were swayed by the New York prosecutor's decision to drop the U.S. case.
"We have supported and believe that Ms. Banon was sexually assaulted by Mr. Strauss-Kahn and are pleased that the prosecutors in Paris, as has been reported, have found evidence supporting a sexual assault," he said in a statement.

The Associated Press does not generally name accusers in sexual assault cases unless they agree to be named or identify themselves publicly, as Banon and Diallo have done.
___

Ninjahedge
October 13th, 2011, 01:40 PM
/me confused.....

Somehow "Sexual Assault" is that much less serious than rape? It is kind of a broad brush they are painting with there. And the fact that if you pretty much do everything but "go for the gold" you cannot be convicted after 3y? (As compared to 10y for the other....).

I thought the incident occurred fairly recently.....

eddhead
October 13th, 2011, 03:03 PM
According to the article,
Under French law, sexual assault is an attack that does not involve an attempt to penetrate the victim.

I agree it is weird. I wonder if it is different in the US?

Ninjahedge
October 13th, 2011, 03:04 PM
In the US, if you THINK hard enough about it, it could be an offense.

eddhead
February 21st, 2012, 06:38 PM
He could easily not have known, because as you can imagine, at these kinds of parties you’re not always dressed, and I challenge you to distinguish a naked prostitute from any other naked woman,” Mr. Leclerc told a French radio station, Europe 1, in December.


LOL... Now THAT'S funny



February 21, 2012

French Police Detain Strauss-Kahn for Questioning
By MAÏA de la BAUME
PARIS — Police officials in the northern French city of Lille detained Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former managing director of the International Monetary Fund, on Tuesday in connection with an investigation into an alleged prostitution ring operating in France and Belgium.


Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who was once considered the likely Socialist Party presidential candidate to oppose the incumbent, Nicolas Sarkozy this year, appeared voluntarily for questioning in connection with accusations of complicity in activities related to prostitution in Paris and Washington and embezzlement to pay for them, French news reports said.


Mr. Strauss-Kahn was taken into custody under a French judicial mechanism that allows detention for questioning without charge for 24 hours and that may be extended for a further 24 hours. A source close to the investigation said it was expected a judge would authorize the extension of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s detention, which began at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, for at least an additional 24 hours.


Mr. Strauss-Kahn resigned from the I.M.F. in May after he was indicted on attempted rape and other charges involving a housekeeper at a New York hotel. The case was dismissed after the housekeeper’s reliability as a witness collapsed.


Mr. Strauss-Kahn volunteered to be questioned after his name was linked to the case in Lille last year. He has denied complicity in prostitution and made no comment to reporters as he arrived at a police station on Tuesday.


The police are investigating alleged orgies paid for by two businessmen in 2010 and 2011 in Paris and Washington. Investigating magistrates suspect that the women were paid by a French company that employed one of the men involved in the alleged prostitution ring.


Magistrates are investigating whether Mr. Strauss-Kahn was aware that women who entertained him were prostitutes. One of his lawyers, Henri Leclerc, has ridiculed the idea.

“He could easily not have known, because as you can imagine, at these kinds of parties you’re not always dressed, and I challenge you to distinguish a naked prostitute from any other naked woman,” Mr. Leclerc told a French radio station, Europe 1, in December.


Prosecutors are also seeking to determine whether Mr. Strauss-Kahn knew that some of the escorts may have been paid with embezzled funds. Prostitution is legal in France but it is unlawful to profit from vice or use embezzled funds to pay prostitutes.


Eight people, including a prominent lawyer and a local police official in Lille, have been charged in the investigation, including three executives from the Carlton Hotel in the city.


After the charges of sexual misconduct against Mr. Strauss-Kahn were dismissed in New York in August, he faced accusations of sexual impropriety by a French writer, Tristane Banon, but that case was also dropped.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/world/europe/french-police-detain-strauss-kahn-for-questioning.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

ZippyTheChimp
March 27th, 2012, 12:16 AM
DSK Charged with 'Aggravated Pimping'

By Stephanie Rabiner, Esq. at FindLaw.com
Mon Mar 26, 2012 11:19pm EDT

French authorities have charged DSK with aggravated pimping.

Wait, what? Confused? Let's rewind. Former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, now known as DSK, rose to fame in May, when a U.S. hotel maid accused him of sexual assault. New York prosecutors soon dropped the charges, but scandal followed the disgraced leader back home to France.

French authorities have now charged DSK with aggravated pimping, claiming to have unearthed information that ties him to a high-profile prostitution ring in the city of Lille.

Now that that's all cleared up, what is aggravated pimping?

This blogger isn't 100% sure, as she has no background in French law. However, authorities believe DSK was involved with a prostitution ring that illegally paid women with corporate funds. If French law is anything like U.S. law, this could be considered an aggravating circumstance, making the pimping a slightly different, more serious crime.

In fact, most states have a crime called "aggravated promotion of prostitution" -- a much stuffier term for the crime of aggravated pimping. It's considered worse than just being a pimp and receiving money through another's prostitution. It's pimping accompanied by aggravating circumstances.

In Texas, for example, aggravated pimping involves owning, investing in or controlling an "enterprise that uses two or more prostitutes." In Montana, it involves the prostitution of a child, a spouse or someone under the pimp's legal care. In Maine, the crime includes the use of drugs or threats to compel an individual to become or remain a prostitute.

So it appears that, when the French accuse DSK of aggravated pimping, they're accusing him of being a hardcore pimp. Or at least being slightly worse than your average pimp.

© 2012 Thomson Reuters