Because I’m too crazed and too consumed by the vale of delights that is my day job today, I just can’t get an even remotely substantive post up just yet.
But still, there are moments of joy to be had, as that attending perusal of this gem:
Benjamin Brafman, one of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers, argued that “there is a very, very defensible case and he should be entitled to bail,” asking that his client be allowed to post $1 million bail….He added that his client was not trying to flee when he was arrested on an Air France plane that was about to take off from Kennedy International Airport on Saturday.
Nope, no thought of escape there. Just an advance in another direction. (Corrected attribution thanks to Ploeg @2 below).
Give credit to Mr. Brafman. When you got nothing…at least he tried. (Bail was denied, BTW.)
Image: Adolphe Yvon, Marshall Ney supporting the Rear Guard During the Retreat from Moscow, before 1893.
Emma
Someone in the comments at LGM says his defense will be that he was having lunch with his daughter at the time.
ploeg
Advancing in another direction — wasn’t that Marine Gen. Oliver Smith?
aimai
I think its possible to believe both that he did it, and that he wasn’t trying to flee. It seems more and more like this was a pretty standard custom for this guy and I doubt if it ever occured to him that he’d get pulled over for attempted rape. He certainly has gotten away with it in the past and he almost definitely had the ticket already booked before he tried the rape.
Still, it takes chutzpah to assert that your client isn’t a flight risk.
aimai
aimai
@Emma:
How can that be? He either had already checked out of the hotel or he hadn’t. If he hadn’t, how did he leave his phone in the hotel room, return to the hotel and check out?
aimai
Larkspur
I don’t know. I think chutzpah may be dead.
beltane
@Emma: Is this what they call it now? “Lunch with daughter” has never before sounded so dirty.
Let’s not make fun of the lawyer too much. He had no choice but to say something along those lines, otherwise the defendant might as well hire Orly Taitz.
Emma
Aimai: I know. It doesn’t make sense. AND it could be one of those things that just float upwards out of the ooze. As someone said, that one won’t be easy to disprove. We’ll see.
Beltane: Ugh.
Steve
If his defense is that he didn’t do it, and he was flying home on a ticket that he had all along, then there’s nothing particularly strange about his lawyer saying that he wasn’t trying to flee. In his version of events, which I’m not saying I believe, I don’t even know that he would have had a reason to think the cops were looking for him.
But it’s poor optics, as they say, for your client to get arrested while on a plane seeking to leave the country. Particularly if he’s traveling to another country that happens to not have an extradition treaty with the US!
Gin & Tonic
@aimai: Reports in the NYT are that he actually didn’t leave the phone in his room, he thought he did. He called the hotel from the airport trying to track down the missing phone, and they told him they had it, on instructions from the cops, and he in turn told them he was at the airport, which is how the cops tracked him down.
BGinCHI
Didn’t George Costanza get fired for something like this?
OK, seriously, what the fuck? Head of the IMF stays in a 3K a night suite? Attacks a maid?
Oh, wait, these are the same folks who are for “fiscal austerity,” so it makes perfect sense.
Just like Paul Ryan who wants to be rich and fuck everyone whether they consent or not.
Assholes.
jonas
I think Brafman’s point was that DSK was on a flight that he had booked much earlier and thus it was not a hastily-arranged, last-minute attempt to flee. He’s probably done this before, knowing that the poor, third-world laborers he usually attacks won’t say anything for fear of losing their jobs. He guessed wrong this time.
That said, it does appear he is going to claim that he was having lunch with his daughter at Columbia University at the time and that this crazy woman just made the whole thing up. That had better be one damn good alibi, because the hotel staff can probably figure out exactly when the maid was sent to go clean the room, how long she was up there, etc., what her state was when she came running back. Furthermore, she claims she saw him in the buff, meaning she could probably describe certain, shall we say, distinguishing characteristics of the gentleman that some crazy hotel cleaning lady wouldn’t ordinarily know.
Roger Moore
@aimai:
So it’s his standard practice to abandon all his stuff in his hotel room when he leaves the country?
Maude
@aimai:
He could board an Air France plane anytime he wanted. He had an arrangement with the airline for a first class seat. So, he shows up and gets on the plane. Nice to be rich and powerful, huh?
Must have been something when the long arm of the law reached in and snagged him.
Upper West
If Brafman can get P-Diddy (then Puffy) off, this guy has a good chance.
Steve
@BGinCHI: I think George’s relationship with the cleaning lady was consensual.
Ash Can
Sounds like this Brafman fellow has a future in the GOP, if he feels so inclined.
Svensker
He wasn’t fleeing. He was just heading home after raping the help. What’s the big deal?
piratedan
@Roger Moore: well after all, we live in a disposable economy with hot and cold running menial labor, that may or may not be here illegally.
Culture of Truth
I believe they claim the flight was booked in advance, which given who he is, is possible.
JPL
Was P-Diddy denied bail?
I think the lawyer that has a difficult job is Blago’s who spent the morning trying to define what fuckem meant. link
scav
Well, in a sense he’s got good [ahem] company. “Bad Judgement” is the defense put up by the lawyers for two cops in Chicago. Sexual assault again, go figure.
Mnemosyne
You could probably make a decent case that the guy wasn’t trying to flee, but given how easily he can travel internationally, he practically has “flight risk” printed on his forehead.
LM
I read he’d scheduled or planned to take this flight already–he’d have missed an appointment with Angela Merkel otherwise. So I’m not sure boarding a plane’s evidence of anything.
According to his lawyer, he rushed from the hotel because he was late for his lunch date. Then he phoned the hotel from lunch to ask that someone be dispatched to meet him at the airport with his phone. But for that, the flight would have left with him onboard before the police could locate him.
I have no idea what the facts mean, but I think our press is so damn lazy that its dribs and drabs paint half a picture at best.
Culture of Truth
Obama reveals assets of $11 million. Must be another one of those new socialists.
JonF
Barring the lawyers paying off the maid, he’s going down. They have DNA evidence, a positive rape kit and she picked him out of the lineup. And the daughter of a political ally is filing a rape charge against him in france.
Gin & Tonic
@LM:
Of course, if he hadn’t taken the time to sexually assault the maid, he might have been on time for lunch. Just a conjecture, of course.
Culture of Truth
If the maid is an recent immigrant from Africa, as I have read, it would support an interpretation that he thought he could abuse her and get away with it.
Comrade Colette Collaboratrice
@Gin & Tonic: Would it be irresponsible to speculate?
Anonymous37
Well, when you have the time, I’d literally pay money to see your comment on this (but I hope you’ll do it for free).
Calouste
@Mnemosyne:
If he was really trying to flee, he wouldn’t have waited to get the flight that was about 12 hours after the incident alledgely happened. It’s not like if you’re the IMF head honcho you don’t have the cash/connections/status/platinum-iridium-titanium frequent flyer card to swap flights at any moment’s notice.
beltane
@Culture of Truth: That’s how I see it, too. He probably thought raping the immigrant help was just part of the day’s routine. It was probably far from his mind as he boarded the plane to France. Yes, he is a flight risk, and yes he looks guilty as hell, but it’s not hard to see how Mr. Brafman could claim make this claim with a straight face. This is what lawyers do.
Tom Levenson
@Anonymous37: I’m actually still weighing a comment on McArdle’s disastrous lesson in cake bakery, but I can’t quite decide if I’m cruel enough to do so.
As for this, Taibi eats McArdle’s lunch well enough without any help, I think, which is another way of saying that McArdle seems to think securities law allows broker dealers to do whatever they want whenever they want – which is true in practice, but not in theory.
Tom Levenson
@beltane: FWIW — I do agree with the general strand of thought that says he wasn’t fleeing so much as translocating…
…but being arrested on a flight bound for one’s non-extradition-treaty home is not exactly reassuring in a bail hearing, which is the point, I think.
Gin & Tonic
@Calouste: There aren’t JFK-Paris flights on Air France every 20 minutes. The incident happened around noon, he was taken off the flight around 4:30. I’m certain that was the first available flight.
Mnemosyne
@Calouste:
That’s kind of what I’m saying — I find it plausible that he wasn’t making an active attempt to flee, but I don’t see how his lawyer can claim that he’s not a flight risk since he can pretty much hop on any flight he wants at any point and take off to a country where he can’t be extradited.
Shoemaker-Levy 9
I have to echo what some others are observing, that it is not at all obvious, based on the paltry few facts we in the general public know, that he was fleeing, so I’m not sure what the point here is.
To give this story a more salacious angle than it already has, though, check out this conspiratorial take.
LM
@Mnemosyne:
He’d need his passport, wouldn’t he? And they’ve confiscated it.
Culture of Truth
I don’t know about France, but a New York city jury is likely to find a distraught maid, African immigrant, living the Bronx, married with children, more credible than the jet-setting French head of the IMF
Steve
@JonF:
As long as we’re just going to make up evidence, why not say he confessed while you’re at it? Gee, yeah, the cops have DNA evidence – just not evidence that has been linked to the defendant, at this point. But hey, it’s evidence!
BGinCHI
@Shoemaker-Levy 9: Wow. OK, I take back my assertions above until we know more. That’s a really interesting “conspiracy” take.
GregB
He’s obviously guilty, he’s French. Can we get on to the more important part of this story where we start renaming anything with the word French in it and start calling for war against the cheese eating surrender monkeys?
Calouste
@Gin & Tonic:
I see I misremembered something I read. I though he was pulled off the plane at 1 AM, but that was actually the time reported for his first court hearing.
But he wasn’t exactly stuck to Air France or going to Paris if he really wanted to flee, so there would have been flights available to him every 20 minutes or better.
Warren Terra
A video has been released of him applying for the Presidency of the IMF.
scav
He’s been bleating earlier that he was expecting something like this, but the 2002 attack/accusation is looking pretty firm and I’m pretty sure I read she talked about it on TV (where the name was bleeped out) before this as well so that doesn’t look manufactured without Obama’s Birthomatic Time Machine.
Stefan
He’d need his passport, wouldn’t he? And they’ve confiscated it.
You need your passport to get on a commercial flight. But a private jet, or a chartered boat off the coast, not so much.
geg6
@JonF:
Dude’s toast. Everything I’ve read makes it sound like an open and shut case. DNA, eye witnesses, previous behavior. What a fucking idiot and tool.
@Steve:
And if that DNA turns out to be his (as I have no doubt it will), I’m sure you’ll have another excuse for him. Undoubtedly, it will be some version of she was asking for it.
jwb
@Shoemaker-Levy 9: I actually had this thought as well, and when it broke I thought immediately of Spitzer. Strauss-Kahn is a creep, obviously, and I’m not about to defend him, but as with Spitzer this is a rather too convenient result for some very powerful people. Also certain salacious details in the account strike me as peculiar.
Warren Terra
@Shoemaker-Levy 9:
Um, yeah. The conspiratorial take you linked lost me with:
That was the third sentence, and it (and the subsequent elaboration) displayed an appalling ignorance about Spitzer’s behaviour. Someone might want to inform the writer that Spitzer wasn’t nailed over an isolated event.
The rest of his rant amounts to “isn’t it suspicious that when important people with powerful enemies fnck up their lives a lot of attention is paid to their fnck-up?”. To which the answer is: no.
Ann B. Nonymous
@Mnemosyne:
I can’t be the first person to think this would be an excellent use of Seal Team 6.
The Dangerman
IMF Head Busted For MILF Head (yo, French Dude, M doesn’t stand for Maid); FILM at 11.
Stefan
I don’t see how his lawyer can claim that he’s not a flight risk since he can pretty much hop on any flight he wants at any point and take off to a country where he can’t be extradited.
His lawyer can certainly claim it, since it’s his job to advocate for his client, and the DA can claim otherwise. It’s then up to the judge to weigh the claims and decide, which she has done.
beltane
@Tom Levenson: In the real world you are 100% correct. I am just stating that any attorney who admits to a judge that his client is a flight risk really deserves to be disbarred. Even in situations involving a police chase, defense counsel will always, always claim their client is not a flight risk. Yes, it takes chutzpah to go into criminal law.
Anonymous37
Tom Levenson 31:
Fair enough, although I’m petty enough to want to see as many people pile on to McMegan for her stupidity.
BGinCHI
@The Dangerman: Your work here is done.
aimai
@Warren Terra:
Well, I have to go along with the notion that when important people fuck up continuously in the same way but are never caught/held accountable one does wonder why they eventually get caught when they get caught. Sometimes–in this case I think–its just a question of fucking up/fucking someone over one last time when no one is in a position to stop the avanlanche from starting. In Spitzer’s case its pretty clear that powerful people wanted to build a case against him. As for Assange, who also comes to mind, I’m guessing its a bit of both: (some) people can get away with a whole lot of abuse of unimportant men/women/servants for a long time before time and circumstance trip them up.
aimai
Steve
@geg6:
Wow, you’re a major league asshole, aren’t ya? When someone says “the guy is going down, the cops have DNA evidence,” generally people would take that to mean they have DNA evidence against the guy, not merely that they collected some unidentified DNA. Not to mention, when someone says the cops have a “positive rape kit” most people would probably take that to mean there’s forensic evidence that the victim was raped, which is sort of an odd thing to say when rape isn’t even alleged.
We have a presumption of innocence in this country for a reason, but honestly, I don’t even care whether you want to jump to the conclusion that the guy is guilty. It’s a free country, we all get to have an opinion. I only posted because someone was going so far as to misstate the evidence.
Keith
@Shoemaker-Levy 9: Interesting. In a related vein, another individual giving Strauss-Kahn’s case some “gloss” is none other Douglas Schoen, yes, that Schoen from Fox. Mr. Schoen is wipping out the Kleenex to bemoan the damge to Strauss-Kahn’s chances to become France’s potential future president.
The piece is titled “The The Dominique Strauss-Kahn I Know” and includes this at the lead-in:
and then at the end:
Who knew Fox could care so deeply, and in a highly personal manner, about France, or any individual Frenchman for that matter.
Oh, and Doug doesn’t quite buy the conspiracy theory honey-trap – no matter the deep and curiously impersonal relationship Doug has with a Frenchman on whom Schoen felt he, and France could bank.
eemom
Reminds me of the Napoleon scene in the old MAD magazine “snappy answers” series:
Are we retreating from Moscow, Mon General?
No, we are advancing on Paris, Mon Idiot.
jwb
@Warren Terra: The point isn’t that Spitzer’s behavior was isolated, it was that he was set up. I have no idea whether Strauss-Kahn was set up. But as with Spitzer, he would certainly have been easy to set up given his past behavior. Now, there are lots of problems with this particular case actually being a set up, but there are also some odd details.
cyd
Actually, during the latest crisis the IMF has been one of the few Very Serious organizations not pushing for austerity.
dirk
The commenters here seem to have this open and shut.
Good pre-emptive sociopaths tag.
scav
@Keith:
Better still, an actual Socialíst Frenchman! I may just die happy from the contradictions.
Brachiator
@aimai:
Spitzer pretty much built the case against himself. He was prosecuting people for banging hookers while he himself was banging hookers. And in the small world of escorts who cater to politicians and businessmen, everybody knew who he was.
Ultimately Spitzer was undone as much by his own arrogance as by anyone being out to get him.
JPL
@dirk: Steve mentioned earlier that we are to be presumed innocent before trial and both of your comments are right. This story is fascinating though because it does seem like a scene from Law and Order. I for one will apologize if evidence comes out vindicating him.
IMO, and this is only conjecture, the maid is being offered a lot of money to disappear.
Culture of Truth
Breaking: Trump Will Not Seek Presidency of IMF
Warren Terra
@Steve: Steve, the claim is that they have a good DNA sample, although I’d guess they haven’t yet tested it for identity. Assuming that’s true, it has the potential to prove his innocence, and get him a groveling apology. But it has the potential to bury him, especially if he hasn’t been claiming a consensual encounter. Also, keep in mind that the same physical examination that would recover a DNA sample might provide evidence of assault.
While you’re right that he may be innocent, the claim that there’s a good, testable DNA sample does change things. It makes this less of a he-said-she-said situation, because it dramatically increases the amount of definitive truth available. It’s less likely she would come forward with a false accusation and a good DNA sample than a false accusation and no DNA sample, because if the DNA is someone else’s her credibility is shot.
We also don’t know what other evidence might be available: how quickly the maid reported the alleged assault; what other sorts of witness corroboration might exist; what CCTV cameras might have to say about who was where when (in the lobby or corridors, for example); what record is kept of key-card swipes at the hotel; what GPS, cell tower, and wireless network data might have recorded about the locations of the suspect’s cell phone, PDA, notebook; etcetera.
But, yes, it’s looking like his alibi is just a bit thin, and there might be a mountain of circumstantial evidence. And he’s entitled to a presumption of innocence in court, not in society. OJ Simpson was found not guilty in court, but that doesn’t mean you’ll shake his hand, after all. This guy is working to develop the impoverished parts of the world and tipped to lead the Socia|ist party, and he’s staying in a $3000/night suite? A political ally’s daughter said he raped her a decade ago? I think I’ll hold off on giving him the benefit of the doubt.
eemom
what is the evidence that Spitzer was set up?
because I really kind of hate the lefty love he gets. The guy was a fucking hypocrite and megalomaniac who thought he was above the law. Fuck him.
scav
@dirk: Depends what you want open or shut. Whatever the outcome of this particular case, pragmatically we are dealing with a situation where his immediate political hopes to replace Sarko are pretty much shut. France questions itself over Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s ‘open secret’
Shoemaker-Levy 9
By the way, I am not endorsing the more conspiratorial aspects of the article I linked to, just thought it would fit in to the BJ comment section ethos.
Culture of Truth
If this really was like Law & Order, the judge rolled her eyes at Brafman, said “your client can run the IMF from Rikers. Bail denied. NEXT!”
Roger Moore
@jwb:
If Spitzer’s behavior wasn’t isolated, then what happened to him isn’t really getting set up; it’s getting caught in a sting.
Stefan
Head of the IMF stays in a 3K a night suite? Attacks a maid? Oh, wait, these are the same folks who are for “fiscal austerity,” so it makes perfect sense.
I think you’re confusing the World Bank, which advocates for austerity, with the IMF, which does not. Strauss-Kahn is a socialist, and has used his position as head of the IMF to push for policies which have been generally beneficial to the world’s poor and working classes.
WaterGirl
@Culture of Truth: Well done!
Stefan
I think you’re confusing the World Bank, which advocates for austerity, with the IMF, which does not. Strauss-Kahn is a soshulist (misspelled due to moderation), and has used his position as head of the IMF to push for policies which have been generally beneficial to the world’s poor and working classes.
Corner Stone
@aimai:
That’s an incredibly stupid thing to say. You have no idea how many people all around you, every day, are gritting their teeth and getting paid for anonymous sexual encounters.
I have some serious news for you: people of all sexual orientations get paid to have forced sex everyday. There are literally millions of other people out there being forced to have sex with people for money.
What the fuck? Do you not even read the newspaper?
John
@BGinCHI:
Well, there is a difference in that Paul Ryan wants to fuck older people, but not the oldest people…
Warren Terra
@John:
Given that his first target is Medicaid, and the biggest function of Medicaid is to assist impoverished families, it could be said that he mostly wants to fnck children …
Valdivia
OMG conspiracy theories and linking this to Spitzer? Really?
Spitzer patronized call girls all the time he was caught, maybe someone leaked it but there was no ‘set up’ And it was consensual. DSK attempted to rape someone, and apparently has done it before, how was this set up? The poor african woman was paid to say this? Gawd.
Culture of Truth
Actually this reminds me less of Spitzer and more of Kobe Bryant, who was acquitted.
Apropos of that, DSK’s wife is flying in to be by his side.
Stefan
That’s an incredibly stupid thing to say. You have no idea how many people all around you, every day, are gritting their teeth and getting paid for anonymous sexual encounters. I have some serious news for you: people of all sexual orientations get paid to have forced sex everyday. There are literally millions of other people out there being forced to have sex with people for money.
What does this have to do with Spitzer? There was no question of force. It was a prostitution scandal, and the escort in question wasn’t forced into it.
The reason that questions arose about how Spitzer was brought down was that he was found out not due to the fact that the police were investigating the prostitution ring and just happened upon him, but the fact that they started investigating supposedly suspicious small-scale money transfers by Spitzer. Justice never really gave has a convincing account of exactly why they were looking into Spitzer’s payments in the first place, and the suspicion is that it didn’t have anything to do with investigating a prostitution ring, but rather was a politically-motivated fishing expedition into a sitting Democratic governor’s finances by the Bush DOJ — so not really the investigation of a crime, but rather an attempt to target and build a case against an individual.
Brachiator
None of this means much of anything yet. What we have is a news report and some info about what evidence was supposedly collected by law enforcement. As of yet, no prosecutor has reviewed the evidence or made a decision about whether to proceed with the case. There has been no trial and no defense attorney has reviewed anything, cross examined anyone.
Even the accusation of earlier misconduct does not mean much of anything legally.
And no, I am not dismissing the awfulness of the charge. But all the speculation here, no matter how vehement, don’t mean squat.
MikeJ
Where are all the Bradly Manning fans telling us that not using the word “alleged” in front of “self-entitled scumbag” in a blog comment about him is violating his civil rights?
drkrick
@Culture of Truth: Bryant wasn’t aquitted, the charges were dropped. His accuser/victim withdrew cooperation from the prosecution after what folks of a certain persuasion might describe as a campaign of pressure to make her do just that.
Omnes Omnibus
What do the people who are attacking the lawyer think the man was supposed to say? “Your honor, my client did it and would like to start serving his lengthy jail sentence now,” or words to that effect? Legally, there was no reason not to ask for his client to be released. The purpose of holding someone or asking for bail is to ensure that the person show up for trial. If you can make any kind of argument that your client will do so, you pretty much have to do it. I know everyone has convicted him in their own minds (I am pretty sure he did it), but the guy is as entitled to an aggressive legal defense as any other defendant. Further, a decent alibi is enough to create reasonable doubt. The daughter’s word probably isn’t enough, but if DSK can show evidence that he was somewhere else at the time the maid says the assault occurred, he could be found not guilty.
ETA: FWIW I also think OJ did it but the criminal jury nevertheless came to the correct verdict.
Culture of Truth
@drkrick: Thanks for the correction. That case demonstrate the difficulties of he said/she said charges such as these. Difficulties for the prosecution as well as victim.
MattR
@Corner Stone:
What does any of this have to do with the Spitzer case or aimai’s comment?
@Brachiator:
I agree with the rest of your comment, but especially wanted to point out these first two sentences. It is kinda surprising and sad to see how quickly people are jumping on unconfirmed details published by a media with a proven track record of being more concerned with being first than with being accurate (as well as just repeating what they are told instead of doing research to determine the validity andor plausibility).
Tom Levenson
@Omnes Omnibus: Don’t think anyone was attacking the lawyer. Certainly, I wasn’t and amn’t. Admiring, rather. It takes the kind of moxie I’d want in my mouthpiece to stand there on his/her hind legs and say that no, despite the fact that my client was sitting on an airplane that would remove him effectively forever from the jurisdiction of this class, he isn’t a flight risk.
That’s his job. He did it. More power to him. I defend my constitutional right to snicker, however.
Brachiator
@Stefan:
Uh, no. The money involved was not small scale. And Spitzer’s name easily came up because he was a prominent and frequent focker.
Spitzer may have had enemies, but he was begging to get caught, and made it easy too easy.
@drkrick:
This was a sad and troubling case, but people who claim that they “know” that pressure was applied are just making shit up.
Tim O
Like Jim Rome says, “If you ain’t cheatin’ you ain’t trying!”
Brachiator
@MattR:
Yeah; however, people misunderstand what the media’s role is. They are not prosecutors or defense attorneys. If the media had access to all the physical evidence and published what they believed was guilt or innocence, they would be taking the place of the justice system.
The accuracy, validity and plausibility of the reporting is separate from whatever happens if there is a trial.
And while I can enjoy a good snicker over this guy’s predicament, there is a variation on a recent theme here. There are people who think that they need to see a photo of a dead bin Laden to determine for themselves “what really happened.” This is nonsense. Equally nonsensical is that reading about an arrest can let anyone come to a conclusion about someone’s guilt or innocence.
And I guess we could call it Godwin’s Corollary, but the Duke rape case should caution anyone about jumping to conclusions based on hearing just one side of an arrest or even just the prosecution’s case.
Omnes Omnibus
@Tom Levenson: Snicker away, but pay your legal bills promptly.
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
i mean, it looks like strauss-kahn is guilty as hell. i suppose its too much to ask for, for that to be the sole theme of the coverage.
the cost of his hotel, the cost of spizer’s hookers, even the fact that assange is taking notes, lets just focus on this one criminal douchebag, and making sure that the best defense money can buy, won’t be enough.
personally dsk, should be sent to guantanimo with ksm, if you figure the american court system, and the media attention that corrupts it, are too busy starfucking to get something like this done…
but even i digress.
Emma
The thing is that, in his day job, he was one of the good guys. If it is true — and there seems to be at least one previous reported incident — it’s one of those “I’m so important and so powerful that I can do whatever I want.” Still, I don’t think he’ll do time anywhere except in a country club.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Steve:
What you said. Innocent until proven guilty appears to have gone out of the window in this internet age.
Tom levenson
@Omnes Omnibus: Amen to that, bro. It’s astonishing how rapidly failure to do so can in the butt bite one.
Mnemosyne
@Brachiator:
The woman’s name and home address were circulated on the internet by Bryant fans and she received multiple death threats. I would consider that “pressure” to drop the case.
300baud
@Litlebritdifrnt:
Because we on the internet are now part of a jury? Because blog commenters now have the power to apply criminal penalties?
I guess I wasn’t aware. I thought we were just talking about things, and therefore weren’t required to stick with the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard.
Mnemosyne
@scav:
That was pretty interesting. So it sounds like the only person surprised by the attack was the maid since his behavior was already an open secret in France.
WaterGirl
@Omnes Omnibus:
i am not sure what you mean by that. You think OJ did it but the jury was correct in finding him innocent because…?
Mnemosyne
@WaterGirl:
The prosecution fucked that case up in a major way, with no small help from the LAPD and LAPD’s crime lab. (The head of the crime lab left blood evidence in his car during an LA summer? WTF?)
Jeffrey Toobin’s The Run of His Life is a blow-by-blow account of how the prosecution shot themselves in the foot. Definitely recommended, if you’re curious.
fasteddie9318
I’m sure it compromises my principles in some way, but I would dearly like to see this man hung from the ceiling by his nuts and have him used as a pinata for a couple of hours.
eemom
@WaterGirl:
There was a “reasonable doubt.”
They didn’t find him “innocent.” The prosecution is required to prove “guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,” and I agree with Omnes, they didn’t succeed in doing that.
Certainly, the outcome would likely have been different were it not for Johnnie Cochran and the rest of OJ’s Cadillac defense team — but all the jury did was apply the law as they were instructed to do to the evidence that was presented to them.
To quote Bob Dylan on a completely opposite case (“Hurricane”): “…couldn’t help but make me feel ashamed to live in a land where justice is a game.”
WaterGirl
@Mnemosyne: Just clicking the link and starting to read about the book started my blood boiling, so maybe i won’t give that a read. :-)
For whatever reason, hearing that verdict was a “where were you when you heard kennedy died” moment for me. i remember coming home from work to watch the verdict, I remember where I sat, where the TV was, the feeling of disbelief when I heard, and the absolute sense that what happened was terribly, terribly wrong. I have no idea why it all upsets me so much.
Edit:
@eemom: Well I didn’t think there was reasonable doubt, but then I wasn’t in the courtroom.
I could have been on the jury, though. I think there were about 3 people in the entire country who didn’t see the high speed chase or know anything about what had happened, and i was one of them. I was on vacation at a house on a lake, with no access to a TV or radio.
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
@WaterGirl:
i will take that on, even if you believe the jury simply refused to convict, as some have speculated, jury nulification.
it could be argued, that there might have been real violence averted, by letting o.j. walk. if o.j. is convicted, no one is talking about the lapd being out of control, nwa was making stuff up, etc…the verdict actually helped the system correct itself, and potentially saved lives.
WaterGirl
@Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal: I have read what you wrote 3 times, and I’m not sure what to think about what you’ve written. I will have to let that percolate for a bit. thanks
eemom
@Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal:
“It could be argued”? It could be FANTASIZED.
That’s just ridiculous, and I hope you know it.
joeshabadoo
@beltane:
chutzpah
I like how you just said that if a lawyer can’t lie for their client they should be disbarred. Chutzpah indeed.
Bloix
#66 = “the claim is that they have a good DNA sample,”
Perhaps there’s been more news today, but the last I read was that the police have a DNA sample “from the room.” That could be as little as a hair from the bedsheets or the bathroom.
drkrick
@Mnemosyne:
Just to be clear, I didn’t mean to imply that Bryant or anyone working at his direction was applying the pressure, although if it came to it I’m sure he would have presented an “energetic” defense. But plenty of people were sufficiently outraged by the idea that any woman would balk at the opportunity to service a professional athlete on demand to act on their own. That’s a matter of public record.
Brachiator
@Mnemosyne:
There was an implication, since corrected by the original poster, that the supposed pressure came from Bryant or his representatives. It is also not necessarily true that the leak of the woman’s personal information, or the death threats, came from Bryant fans. And no one can say definitely why there was a private settlement. My point here is that people need to be careful when they are asserting things as facts. Your speculation may be reasonable in part, but it is still mere speculation.
By the way a Wiki footnote to the case provides background on information that was released and some of the sources, and it is truly despicable. But again, it wasn’t just Bryant fans doing it:
There was a range of people, many of them in the media, who went after this woman for all kinds of vile reasons, including publicity and news scoops, without any concern about how it might affect the outcome of any prosecution. And my speculation is that there may have been media figures who directly or indirectly aided the defense. But this is speculation on my part, not fact.
Stefan
Uh, no. The money involved was not small scale.
According to your own subsequent cite:
Spitzer had at least seven or eight liaisons with women from the agency over six months, and paid more than $15,000. According to published reports, investigators believe Spitzer paid up to $80,000 for prostitutes over a period of several years while he was Attorney General, and later as Governor.
He’s a multi-millionaire. $80K over several years is small scale. Maybe to you it’s not, but to Spitzer it certainly is. Why would a multi-millionaire withdrawing less than $100K in cash over several years send up any red flags for the police to investigate?
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
@eemom:
um, you don’t think, that it was a real possibility? lapd certainly mobilized as if there might be, before the verdict was read. the streets were empty, even the freeways were empty, it seems like most of downtown los angeles was anticipating that the verdict could lead to violence. i don’t think that, qualifies as fantasy.
JonF
@Steve: Yes, it was just random DNA that they’re entering into evidence *rolleyes*
eemom
@Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal:
but you appeared to be suggesting that fear of violence is what prompted the verdict to come out the way it did.
THAT’s fantasy.
Omnes Omnibus
@WaterGirl: As eemom said, if a jury does not convict, it does not mean that they believe that the person was innocent. It just means that the prosecution did not prove that the person was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. When people talk about the presumption of innocence, that is what they mean. FWIW I also think the civil jury in the OJ case was correct. The burden of proof in a civil case is much lower. It is basically an “is it more likely than not that the plaintiff’s story is correct?” standard.
Stefan
Yes, it was just random DNA that they’re entering into evidence
They’re not entering any DNA into evidence yet, because the DNA has yet to be tested. When it gets tested, and if it comes up a positive match, then it becomes evidence linking him to the crime. Until we actually test it and know what it reveals, though, then yes, it’s essentially random DNA.
blackyb
IMF must mean International Maid Focker or
Intrnational Maid Flogger.
What is with this guy? He doubletimed it to the plane to take off so the French would not send him back here. Typical, good at running. So is said of the French. He could have been President. Those who would have voted for him must be of like mind.
blackyb
People everywhere seems consumed with someone elses’ butts as hollywood keeps people unclothed and coming out with these sexual innuendos even in cartoons. It is getting to be quite tiresome. It must be a lack of creativity to have to use the human body over and over to write anything. Consumed, just consusmed even in advertisments. People should be above all this nonsense.
Brachiator
@Stefan:
Because withdrawals over $10,000 typically sends up flags. It doesn’t matter whether the person involved is a multi-millionaire.
Also, Spitzer was caught in part because his voice was identified in a wiretap that targeted the prostitution ring:
Also, once Spitzer had been linked to the ring, then the question of whether he had used campaign funds to pay for prostitutes became an additional reason to further investigate him. That his political enemies sought to bring Spitzer down is not really supported by what is known about the case.
Again, Spitzer was undone in part by the same rules and legal procedures he had used in prosecuting people who used prostitutes.