This explains why what she said prior to the alleged assault matters:
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.
This case is over.
Keith G
Tell that to Cacti.
eastriver
They did have sex. But how consensual? He’s not going to jail. But should she? Or will the whole thing just go away?
Quiddity
So, what impact will this have on Ben Stein reputation? * He was criticized, correctly in my view, for his completely theoretical defense of Dominique Strauss-Kahn. But what often matters is not your arguments but how your conclusions comport with reality, and in this case it looks as if Stein’s characterization of both parties – DSK=good; maid=bad – was not too far off the mark.
* not Ben Stein’s reputation at this blog, but with the wider set of media analysts.
ErinSiobhan
One way or the other, somebody has been horribly wronged. We just don’t know which one.
Linda Featheringill
You’re right. Case is over. However, DSK just might be a little less aggressive in his courtship of the ladies from now on.
jpe
Agreed; put a fork in this one. At the same time, I don’t think the DA’s office acted unreasonably. Ex ante, they had a decent case and a suspect that was leaving the country and would never come back. There’s been some chatter about Vance fucking up horribly, but I think his office acted reasonably here.
soonergrunt
And yet if the accused/defendant weren’t some rich and powerful man capable of mounting a thorough, aggressive defense with private investigators and high-powered attorneys (in other words, if he were like most male readers of this blog,) the prosecutors most likely would have continued their case against him all the while insisting that they had more than enough good evidence to convict, and the problems with this “witness” would never come out in public at all and possibly not even in the courtroom.
Guster
Just wondering: who recorded the phone call?
nwithers
@8 From what I was reading in the MSNBC article, the phone call was to a boyfriend/husband who was in jail. I imagine that all phone calls in a prison, not to a lawyer, are automatically recorded as a standard procedure.
Emma
Surprise. Another rich man with a history of sexual misbehavior is found innocent.
toujoursdan
Um… He hasn’t been found innocent. It hasn’t gone to trial.
Guster
Ah! Thanks, nwithers. That just struck me as so strange. But apparently not strange at all.
Lawguy
Well, among other things there is no complete transcript, or at least not one at the link. The translation may also be an issue.
Still, unless there is absolutely rock hard forensic evidence, which I doubt, her testimony is simply not going to be believed when you put it together with all her lies about other things, so I guess you are probably right.
Keith G
Emma, you seem to want Strauss-Kahn punished by the state of New York. What do you want him punished for?
Wag
Being a powerful white male does not make one a rapist
Being a woman of color does not make one a heroine
Innocent until proven guilty
Chet
Really? You don’t think there’s a translation issue here? Where maybe what she said was “he’s got a lot of money, but don’t worry, I know what I’m doing”?
soonergrunt
@ Wag, #15: good luck with that. Logic won’t get you anywhere with this crowd. There’s a white male to crucify. That he happens to be rich is just icing on the cake.
Lawguy
Does anybody know why she admitted to lying on her assylum application? Or why she admitted to lying about the rape in Africa? Is her husband still alive?
Generally speaking if you’ve got a lawyer with you, you don’t suddenly start to admit to crimes that are years away and have nothing to do with the one currently under discussion. On the other hand, if you’ve got a lawyer, you don’t normally go into interviews with the prosecution without that lawyer at your side.
The more I think about this the stranger it sounds.
dpcap
Lawguy @ 18
Totally. It’s so weird how every thing against her suddenly appeared so conveniently. She makes an easy person to destroy, what with being a poor immigrant from a third world country. They can make up any story about her and the public will fall for it hook line and sinker.
Marc
People, if you’re not willing to grant the possibility of innocence to a man accused of rape under these circumstances there is something deeply wrong with you.
Read the letter that the prosecution sent to the defense. It’s under two pages. Just read it before commenting, period.
Because in it she details that she made up a convincing performance involving a claim of gang rape, and then told investigators the entire thing was a lie. She repeatedly lied to the investigators. Why did she admit these things? Because they caught her up in a series of inconsistencies when they were asking her about it.
The day after the investigation she was recorded talking about advantages to her from pressing the case. She lied about the timeline of what she did after the alleged assault. You can add in the “powerful enemies” part if you’re so inclined – this guy was fighting the bankers and politicians working for austerity
If this doesn’t fit the pattern of a false accusation, what does? Would you trust someone like this if they accused your friend of anything?
Marc
@17: It certainly comes across that way to me. I’m stunned that people will still defend this case in light of these bombshells, or pretend that this is a case of rich man’s justice.
If you want rape accusations to be treated properly then you should want false accusations to be harshly punished. You should be willing to accept that women sometimes lie about things.
If you adopt an uncritical accusation = guilt approach on rape charges you’re empowering the authorities to destroy anyone they don’t like with trumped-up charges.
Feminists defending the indefensible discredit their ideology as well – equal rights for all does not imply that accusation = truth.
Look, most folks accused of crimes are guilty and this includes rape charges. But most is not the same as all, and a society where you can’t accept the possibility that an accused person is not guilty is not a healthy one.
Joey Maloney
Apparently her lawyer held a press conference yesterday where he spent about fifteen minutes going through DSK’s alleged actions in painstaking and lurid detail. That, more than anything else, says to me the case is over. If her lawyer thought there was a chance this would go to trial there’s no way the DA would want him to spill what would be some of the most powerful, emotional testimony in the case, and no way the guy would have done it if he were still on good, cooperative terms with the DA.
scottinnj
Three
thoughts
– I don’t know all the facts here – that is why we try these things before 12 jurors to sort out all the facts. It’s not perfect but that is how the system works.
– With caveat above about not knowing all facts in this case, it seems you can get away with a rape if your victim is of any less virtue than Caesar’s wife.
– A legal question – if her past history can be brought up in a court, can his? My legal knowledge is based only a few Law and Order episodes.
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
Could you provide a link? I haven’t seen this in any of the stories?
As for consensual or not, no one will ever know but those two.
Oh, and it would be appropriate now for all the BJ commenters who condemned this dude as having violently raped this woman without, you know, having any way of knowing that to be true, to post their apologies and explain their need to leap to conclusions based on hysterical media reports and sensational headlines…and a completely bogus accuser.
soonergrunt
@ Marc, #20 But this is Balloon-Juice, where people we don’t like are guilty, particularly if they are white males, and especially if they are rich.
Just google “site: balloon-juice Roethlisberger” and see what you get.
WyldPirate
Two things appear to be wrong here.
First, the evidence seems pretty clear that the woman was a grifter and a liar out to scam some money at the expense of someone else. Not unlike a lot of the banksters.
Secondly, soonergrunt touched on the other issue. Strauss-Kahn or whatever the fuck his name is is likely a reprehensible pig but a loaded pig who could afford good lawyers. A normal person would have been steamrolled by the prosecution in their zeal to throw them under the jail.
Two legal systems in America. If you have the money, the laws usually don’t apply to you. Everyone else is fucked and gets the full weight of what passes as “justice” in America.
harlana
It is foolish and irresponsible to “try and convict” this man at this stage. There were no witnesses so unless a rape kit was done (I’m not aware of one), it is pretty much her word against his unless other evidence to the contrary indicates otherwise.
With all his power and money, will he get a better defense than the average person? you betcha. In this way, our legal system is deeply flawed. Unfortunately, it is what it is. However, that is no reason to wrongly convict someone. And let’s face it, do prosecutors want to lose face with such a high-profile defendant? I don’t think so. It still doesn’t mean he is guilty or innocent, that is a separate issue,(maybe he is, but we don’t have all the evidence, just the pieces the press is allowed to share).
Constance
Okay, she’s not so great and from what I read about him after the alleged attack he’s not someone I would want to leave in a room with a beautiful granddaughter.
And further, I have a real problem with the IMF and World Bank folks who stay in $2,500 a night hotels, eat $300 dinners in the best of restaurants. WTF do these people know about real life that helps them make the decisions that destroy millions of lives.
Greek austerity won’t hurt these guys but what is it doing to ordinary people?
Maybe this really was a fix to keep him from running for the French presidency (one theory I read early on). Whatever it was, I keep thinking, “What goes around comes around.”
I realize I’m being vindictive. I’ll go do penance on my recumbent bike.
magurakurin
@soonergrunt
You are a stand up guy, and I mean that sincerely, but in this case I think you are being a bit unfair to the “crowd.” Certainly there are some who fit your description, but as this has unfolded, it seems to me that the majority of the posters have been taking a fairly open mind. And with this latest information, a lot of folks are saying pretty loud and clear, “innocent until proven guilty.” (see previous thread below)
From what I can see of this case from far, far away, it seems to me that the system is more or less working, however imperfectly that may be. He was arrested and detained so he couldn’t flee when there appeared to be sufficient evidence to warrant a trial. But now as the investigation continues, it appears that this may not be the case.
Maybe he raped her, maybe he didn’t. Only those two, really know for sure. But he definitely, fucked her and whether or not she wanted him too, again, only they know. For her part, if she was raped and he gets off, that sucks fucking badly; however, if the criminal justice system is going to be geared toward protecting the innocent, then guilty people are going to walk from time to time. That’s inevitable, if shitty. And arguably better than the reverse, innocent people in jail(but I suppose arguments can be and are made to the contrary.)
For his part, he may not have raped her, but he certainly banged her on his hotel bed on the way out the door, and that’s fairly seedy and shady in of itself. So, he may well be innocent of rape, but any hits he takes to his reputation are, in many ways, still his fault. He could have satisfied his urge in far more discreet, if still illegal ways(high class prostitution) or he could have jacked off(like the rest of us.) He chose to fuck(by his account) a maid in a hotel and opened himself up for a lot of bad shit.
WyldPirate
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
Oh fuck no, Tim. Nah-gunna-happen. Expect the It’s-OK-if-Obama-does-it crickets to continue to sing as well.
And a disclaimer–I was jumping up and down laughing as Obama excoriated the Congress the other day for being foot-dragging fuck-ups. Bout time he hammered their sorry, do-nothing, obstructionst asses. More of that please, Mr. Obama.
snoey
Lawguy @18
All that might be on the phone tapes – she may have mistakenly believed that her dialect of Fulani wouldn’t be translated.
harlana
And no, prosecutors can’t just make up shit. They could be severely punished by the courts and disbarred for doing so. This case is not being tried in some podunk county in backwoods America where the sheriff is the prosecution’s only witness. Show me evidence that the prosecution has a history of corruption and I will eat my words.
Valdivia
@29 magurakurin
I am pretty much where you are.
@harlana
there was a rape kit. on the strength of that this thing started rolling.
El Tiburon
Will someone explain thisnis good for John McCain and or breitbart?
Xantar
WyldPirate @30
I was wondering when you’d bring up Obama. I was beginning to despair that maybe you had figured out that this thread has absolutely nothing to do with him.
MattF
Well, OK. I assumed Kahn was guilty and now it looks like I was wrong.
An item to note– I can see now that from the grifter’s point of view, Kahn looked like a perfect victim for a sexual exploit: politically powerful but vulnerable, well past his prime but unwilling to admit it.
Marc
@29: The prosecution has revealed a pretty devastating set of facts. It does bother me to see people still basically treating this as “the guy got off” as opposed to “hmmm…maybe he was actually innocent.” If what we’ve learned doesn’t inspire that emotion, what would?
I don’t like to weigh in on criminal matters when they arise because we never have the relevant information; we always have a case that makes the defendant look terrible. But the sheer *certainty* of a lot of folks here about the automatic guilt of someone accused of rapes is absolutely real and absolutely depressing.
harlana
Valdivia: thanks for correcting me on that, evidence that could be in her favor but I wonder why it is not being treated as such, I have not seen where evidence of rape has been found, anyway, I thought she just accused him of forcing her into oral sex or something. I’m confused, obviously. Does rape kit show consensual sex? (No trauma but his DNA?)
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
This is the mildly neurotic, guilt-laden, Puritan-based, American mindset when it comes to sex. Someone, somewhere allegedly had sex. They must therefore suffer.
Also, it seems sexist to assume that the maid has no agency in the matter, ie. “he fucked her.” Maybe she fucked him. Maybe she wanted to do the deed. Women have sex drives too, you know. Women like fucking from time to time. Why do you assume she is some passive female receptacle of his dominant, manly…schlong?
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
OMG. This seems a tad naive.
Valdivia
@38 it’s confusing. But I think this is why there is a strong suspicion that he did rape her, because of what they found in the kit. But–when you have a witness with credibility issues I think it’s easy to make the evidence look like part of consensual but rough sex to the eyes of the jury. You can tell a story that jives with the forensic evidence but tells a markedly different story because of the ‘shady’ character of the witness.
soonergrunt
@ Magurakurin, #29 ,
DSK certainly isn’t the poster child for ideal defendant, either. If he’d kept it zipped, he most likely wouldn’t be in this situation. And I agree with you that the prosecutors have done the things they were supposed to do. When they had the initial accusation, that appeared to reasonable people to be well-founded they secured the accused from his apparent ability to flee the jurisdiction (the lesson of Roman Polanski having been learned), and when they realized that their case isn’t what they thought it would be, they’ve adjusted accordingly.
That, however is the exception to the rule, and the prosecutors wouldn’t have done the right thing unless they pretty much had to. They’re interested in getting convictions, not in doing justice most of the time. The vast majority of men accused of this crime under similar circumstances would be incarcerated (bail would be possible for some but not affordable) and they would never find out about their accuser’s shady past of making false rape claims for personal gain. Since the accuser’s past is irrelevant as a legal matter in almost every western jurisdiction, it would never be exposed to the jury even if the Defense knew about it, so these things only come out when they are publicly known (like in high profile cases that attract press interest.) They would, if they had a decent lawyer, most likely plead to a lesser crime knowing that most people consider the accusation to equal guilt and you either do a little time or a lot and your innocence is totally fucking irrelevant. It’s only if the truth about the accuser becomes publicly known that they manage to avoid prison. In any event, they find their name stained essentially forever in their community, as there will always be people who believe that “he must have done something and they just couldn’t prove it.
harlana
Trollenschlongen: I was going to agree with you until you insulted me for expressing an opinion about what the COURT requires, so blow it out your ass. :)
harlana
soonergrunt: Only thing is I get the impression the European community does not view this in the same light as we do, that, hey he’s just doing the typical male thing, women expect to get groped on elevators, etc. Am I being “naive” about that? Anyone want to chime in, is this just a press meme about their attitudes, I mean in general, towards dirty old men?
Cranky Observer
Only in New York City could the DA’s office identify and then find a translator for an obscure dialect in a small and remote nation.
Cranky
Cranky Observer
> And no, prosecutors can’t just make up
> shit. They could be severely punished
> by the courts and disbarred for doing so.
Could you link me to 10-15 cases where this has happened in the US in, oh, the last 10 years? Cause I haven’t heard of any. While you are working on that, you might want to read some of Justice Scalia’s recent opinions.
Cranky
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
let me first hope that the advanced and sophisticated state of new york has an open records law the equal of backwards ass, faux news on the tv in every public place including government waiting rooms, georgia.
if so, then we will, if we choose, be able to play along with the prosecutors, and know what they know when they knew it.
as far as what the prosecutors say from here, now its a fine line, they can’t say the case is b.s. (if it is) because dsm would have one hell of a suit for what he has been through, if all he did was have sex with a willing partner. i mean how do you calculate the man’s losses?
and since there isn’t a trial by which dsk can mount a defense, there are always going to be questions about his side, and it does him no good, moving forward, to put on his case, for public edification.
i hope the prosecution was thorough, and the decision was clear.
soonergrunt
@ Harlana, #43
I haven’t followed the European press on this case, but generally the European attitude during the whole Roman Polanski thing a while back was that the Americans are a bunch of vindictive sex-hating puritans and after all, it’s not like he killed her. This was not the view held by everyone over there, but I do remember the French Culture Minister (what the fuck is a culture minister, anyway) saying things like “this is the face of America that scares us” when referring to the expectation that a guy who admitted raping a thirteen-year-old actually be punished for his crime.
Davis X. Machina
Jack McCoy must be pissed.
Suffern ACE
@Marc-37.
Oh don’t get too depressed. it’s pretty much a sign that us non-criminal types have trouble imagining why someone would make a false rape accusation against someone, especially against someone like DSK, who would give us an instant and absolute power imbalance problem. Also, we like to think that we’d be better criminals if we plotted something like this. Nefarious honest people, like most of the people out there.
Davis X. Machina
@ Cranky Observer:
Three words: Men in Black. They have everything in New York.
nancydarling
All of this reminds me of what the powerful can do, have done in the past, and will do again. Remember, if you are old enough, what the FBI and COINTELPRO did to Jean Seberg and her husband, Romain Gary. Go read COINTELPRO’s wiki page. I’m not saying this is what is going on in this case. I am saying we don’t know and probably never will. DSK did admit to having sex with her, consensual or not. Beyond that, we can’t know which, if any, of the stories are true. We can’t even trust that the DA’s office is truthful. I have been fooled enough times to cast a jaundiced eye on much of what I read and see.
Geeno
DSK can’t win a wrongful arrest case, the facts at the time clearly justified the DAs actions.
Davis X. Machina
French Socia1ists were no less backwards in privatizing things than their more conservative brethren, and Straus-Kahn led the charge.
The Forces of Big Money putting a hit out on DSK makes about as much sense as their going after Daschle, Gephardt, or Bayh, in their present incarnations
(There will be a dupe post, due to boner-pill-name embargo…you may delete PRN)
Felonious Wench
There are times this country can seriously piss me off, but some things can make me smile. This is one of them.
Cacti
Your hero is safe and will soon be free to move onto his next target.
lamh34
Yeah, this maid story does seem to be crumbling, and lucky for Mr DKS, it fell he has big money and lawyers and it fell apart before he was wrongly convicted.
But plz spare me the “rich white male rape persecution” bullshit please. Talk to me when all the poor black males WRONGLY CONVICTED, not just accused for allegedly raping a white woman who have lost 20 or more years of their lives and livelihood based on even less evidence than what the DA had to rightly arrest and charge DKS with til the maid’s story fell apart.
This is good news for Mr DKS and innocent man has sorta been cleared…but there are a innocent men charged with the same alleged crime as Mr DKS. I have more sympathy for them…sorry.
McGeorge Bundy
Sarkozy is known in France as something of a political dirty trickster. The Beck-minded (in a way) among us won’t be able to help themselves but wonder.
Chris
@ Harlana –
I perused the French Yahoo News comments section at the time of the actual accusation. It’s not a scientific sample, but the consensus was that he was being treated appropriately by a different justice system. There was anger from quite a few people at the perp walk, but that’s just different judicial standards (they felt it detracted from the presumption-of-innocence principle). And yes, there was an undercurrent of “bitch must’ve asked for it,” but not from most posters, and no more than I would’ve seen here.
On the other hand, yes, it’s true that the French have a different approach to sex and politics (that is sex not rape), which tends to come down to “don’t ask don’t tell,” as opposed to the American tradition of schizophrenically digging up every possible detail about politicians’ sex lives, then fainting at the first mention of a boob or pecker. That, I don’t mind so much.
Cacti
So, how does that square with admitted rapist Roman Polanski living freely in their midst for decades? Or Strauss-Kahn’s subordinate at the IMF saying she felt coerced into an affair with him, and barely anyone raised an eyebrow?
Sounds a lot more like “boys will be boys, wink wink” than “don’t ask/don’t tell”.
Chris
I don’t know: I didn’t follow Polanski. All I know is what I read in the reactions to DSK, which was generally not at all wink-wink-nudge-nudge. Since the public would have far more reason to be attached to him than to Polanski, I suspect most of them weren’t huge fans of the Polanski things, even if a couple of ministers and journalists were.
Raven Rant
I notice that the fact that DSK lied to police doesn’t destroy his credibility. His defense quickly morphed from, “I have an alibi, I wasn’t even there,” to “It was consensual,” to “She’s a scumbag.”
I guess only cloistered nuns with medical proof of virginity should bother to report rape anymore.
harlana
Cranky Observer: I think you just proved my point for me, thanks :)
eemom
nah. Couldn’t possibly be that simple.
Felonious Wench
@29
Yep. And I don’t think we ever will.
Curious…many of you are saying her history makes her unreliable as an accuser, OK, I don’t disagree. But at the same time, no one is saying much about how HIS history and reputation should be treated when judging HIS credibility as well. We can’t point to either one of them and say “Gee, this is out of the blue. This person has never shown this kind of behavior before.”
Unreliable word against unreliable word. No evidence of anything other than a sexual encounter between them. The prosecution did the right thing by coming forward. There’s not a strong case here.
Joel
What a turnaround… I guess that’s why we have a trial system, right?
trollhattan
My sense is/was at the time the DA pressed the accelerator pedal because he wanted to file charges before Strauss-Kahn left the country and possibly pull a “Polanski.” In doing so he prevented his office from conducting a thorough enough investigation to uncover these thorny details before us now. The press took it from there and Strauss-Kahn basically was convicted in the court of public opinion.
Who will publish the first book?
dmbeaster
All of these posts on this over the last few days demonstrates why we have the innocent until proven guilty standard.
As a practical matter, this is an unreasonable assumption. Most of the time, those arrested have committed some version of the crime for which they are accused. So logic suggests it is reasonable to assume that they are probably guilty. (Although part of the reason that is true is because we have a lot of checks on unfair arrests and prosecutions, which happen but are uncommon).
The problem is, given the way humans are about beliefs that they form in their heads, good luck on trying to then get someone to look at the evidence fairly once at trial. And this is the point about pre-trial publicity; people who have already formed impressions typically see the evidence to reconfirm that belief.
So the presumption of innocence exists to insure a fair trial pursuant to the high standard we require for government to incarcerate people. A lot of people here have gotten invested in the reasonable assumption that DSK was probably guilty, and do not like having to abandon that belief.
Cacti
Let’s not kid ourselves, it’s male privilege with a healthy dose of white privilege.
boss bitch
WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR FUCKING PROBLEM WYLDPIRATE?! this story doesn’t have any goddamn thing to do with Obama. Did he ever rape anyone or accused of raping anyone? Shut the fuck up! Your obsession with him is disturbing. get some fucking help.
Seriously.
Keith G
@Cacti
Oh Kiddo. Once again jumping to unsupported conclusions are ya? I have no opinion about DSK other than to realize that reports of past behavior indicate that this man may well be a pig, but that is not what is at issue in NYC.
It is possible that Mr. Pig crossed paths with a serial grifter and his little pig just about cost him everything. But that is just speculation on my part. Maybe we will eventually know the truth.
I am adding in edit that as revolting as his behavior has been reported to be, it is what can be believed in NYC the is important now.
Cacti
By pig, do you mean sexual predator?
Mnemosyne
Yep. This doesn’t seem to be a case of her having made something up out of whole cloth — he admits he was there, he admits he had sex with her, they have the DNA to prove it. It’s perfectly plausible to me that he’s an asshole who could have coerced her into sex and that she’s an asshole who could have tried to profit from that coercion. And because they both acted like assholes afterwards, he walks. It sucks, but it’s fair.
And, as I said in the thread below, in a spirit of sisterhood I would love to punch this woman in the neck. Repeatedly. She just made it infinitely harder for other marginal rape victims (ie prostitutes and other “bad” victims) to get their cases prosecuted.
Corner Stone
The white privilege in this thread…it just makes me sick.
Larkspur
We don’t know what happened in that hotel room. We’re never going to know what happened. Even if we had a damn video of the event, we’re still not going to know for sure what the motivations, reactions, and intentions were.
We still have to deal with such events, so we assemble the evidence and build a case. The victim’s credibility is a reasonable and important aspect – not necessarily to what happened, but to what can be proved to have happened. Those are different things.
The state has to be able to prove its case. In the end, it’s the prosecutor’s judgment call. Sometimes the call sucks. From the little I know about this situation, it sounds like a reasonable call.
Mnemosyne
Some people seem a little confused about the rules for bringing up an alleged victim’s past in court. You can’t claim that the mere fact that she has had sex before — even if she’s had sex lots of times before — as prima facie evidence that it must have been consensual. You have to bring in real evidence like, say, that she lied to police and prosecutors.
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
Could you elaborate and be specific please?
Where, exactly, do you see male privilege in this sordid affair?
Where, exactly, do you see white privilege in this sordid affair?
DSK may or may not be a complete pig; I have no idea. But was it his privilege as a white male in this story to be dragged off a previously scheduled flight, thrown in jail, pilloried and humiliated in the hysterical MSM, released on gazillion dollar bail to house arrest with armed guards, publicly accused of heinous crimes by an epically unreliable accuser, only to see the prosecution fall completely apart?
Again, could you be specific?
Thanks!
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
Not that there isn’t such a thing, and not that it doesn’t lead to a lot of unfair bullshit but in this particular case, yeah…nah.
I wish my white male gay privilege was more privileg-er. I don’t seem to catch any of these awesome white guy breaks.
Corner Stone
Tim, I,
Isn’t it obvious? I thought it was obvious.
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
I’d love to know how she plans to prove sexual assault nine years after the fact.
Also, too, and furthermore: This is my problem with some “sexual assault” laws. Did he hold her down and try to fuck her, or did he touch her knee inappropriately and rudely? Sexual assault has become so widely defined as to approach meaninglessness.
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
Well, naturally, OF COURSE, it’s obvious…I mean, look, just look at it. Can’t you see it too? I thought everyone could.
Cacti
My comment was specific to the BJ commentariat.
The male privilege from the fact of numerous commenters attacking the credibility and character of the accuser, while ignoring that the accused has changed his story 4-5 times along the way, and he has been accused of similar behavior previously by a subordinate at the IMF, and the goddaughter of his second wife.
The white privilege from the willingness of some to concoct conspiracy theories out of thin air, where the African chamber maid must have been a thrall for his political rivals in a scheme to bring down Monsieur Strauss-Kahn.
Mnemosyne
@ Tim
Weird how you manage to insist that rape and sexual assault are no big deal and women should stop whining about it every single time the subject comes up. No male privilege here, no sirree.
Corner Stone
Well, yes. In fact, it’s so obvious I can’t believe I was only one of two to invoke The Moral Scold(tm) provision of BJ.
It’s SO OBVIOUS that I expect a badly formatted and hyperbolic screed of drama victim proportions at any time.
One with false assumptions, bald faced lies and generally outrageously bad sourcing issues.
Cacti
Strauss-Kahn lured the then 21-year-old trainee journalist to the property under the promise of an interview, and then started to rip her clothes off, it is claimed.
‘I kicked him, I called him a rapist, he didn’t seem to care,’ said Ms Banon in earlier interviews, in which she also described Strauss-Kahn as acting like a ‘rutting chimpanzee’.
Women.
They just can’t be trusted to know the difference between having their knee brushed and having someone try to have sex with them against their will.
Tonal Crow
@Marc:
Source?
Tonal Crow
@dmbeaster:
Citation to peer-reviewed consensus supporting this idea?
A lot of checks? Like what?
kth
If I were on a jury and had voted to convict and imprison DSK, based upon what I had read in the press, then an apology would indeed be in order. But forming a non-binding personal opinion based upon a preponderance of the evidence at the time? Fuck you, I’m not apologizing for that.
Marc
Cacti: bullshit. The only privilege I see here is that claimed by people like you, namely to shout down anything that takes away from the accusation=guilt line about rape. This woman admitted to lying about rape in the past. She lied about what she did after the alleged assault. She talked the next day on the phone about how to profit from this. She repeatedly lied about numerous matters to the prosecutors. These are admissions from the prosecution in a public record.
There is a decent case here that DSK is the victim and that she simply lied about the assault.
There is someone here who’s blind to their own prejudices, agreed. You’ll find it easiest to see her in a mirror.
Lawguy
I’ve read the letter from the prosecutor and the Times articles and I still do not see anything that shows how they got the information about the alleged victim’s lies.
Oh and thanks to whoever wrote above and pointed out that DKS at first lied himself, and that he has a history of this kind of activity.
ShadeTail
Felonious Wench:
What does this have to do with the matter at hand? When the system is “innocent until proven guilty”, then the credibility of the accuser is far more important than the credibility of the accused. The man sure sounds like an animal to me, and I would definitely refuse to be alone with him, but his own lack of credibility doesn’t in any way revive the case against him.
The new evidence shows that the accuser lied in multiple significant ways. Even if the man she accuses is worthless scum, the case still dies.
ABL
i love that you can’t stop thinking about me, corner stone. you have become a hilarious parody of your own stupidity.
Mnemosyne
It doesn’t have anything to do with the legal matter at hand. It’s more of an argument against people like Marc above who gloss over DSK’s own lies so they can insist the guy is totally innocent of anything whatsoever.
It’s that pesky difference between being legally innocent and being factually innocent. We can say for sure that he’s legally innocent, because the case has collapsed, but people will continue to argue that DSK must also be factually innocent if the case collapsed.
You know, the same way they insist that OJ Simpson must be factually innocent because he was acquitted.
CaseyL
Reading how many people can read the news story excerpted above, and especially this:
… and still go on about white man’s privilege and he’s guilty anyway and we’ll never know what really happened and so on and so forth makes me understand how there can be people who to this day still think Tawana Brawley was indeed raped.
IOW: Dumb-as-fuck allegiance to one’s ideology in the face of all evidence to the contrary isn’t only found among GOP/RW thugs. We have our own. Yippee.
dmbeaster
The collapse of the case says nothing about his innocence, whether you call it legal or factual. It just says that the prosecution doesn’t think it can satisfy its burden of proof, and will opt not to continue the case. That is what a prosecutor is supposed to do when the evidence falls apart as the prosecution prepares for trial. It appears here that the prosecutor has made the right call and should not continue – the evidence has taken huge hits to proving a case.
There is still plenty of reason to suspect something bad happened, and that DSK is a scumbag. You typically do not have consensual sex on the drop of a hat between a hotel guest and a cleaning maid. Some of the other evidence concerning DSK, just like her prior sexual history, would never be admissible (his prior douche-baggery or alleged sexual assaults). Yet we consider it in developing our sense of what might have happened, and what we chose to believe about DSK.
Lawguy at 90:
It’s a Brady letter, for God’s sake. Its disclosure mandated by law of potentially exculpatory evidence developed by the prosecutor. There is no duty of disclosure, and would be no letter, if the defense generated it and fed it to the prosecution to induce them to drop the case. Perhaps you can think that some anonymous tipster funded by DSK dropped the info into the prosecutor’s lap, but far more likely it reflects diligence by police detectives thoroughly checking out what will be a high profile case turning on victim credibility. There is no reason for DSK to be circuitous in bringing this info out for his potential defense.
Tonal Crow at 87:
I have read that the rate of felony arrest leading to felony conviction nationwide is 56%. This does not include felony arrest plea-bargained to some other disposition other than felony conviction. I believe the data is at the Bureau of Justice Statistics maintained by the Justice Department but I could not find it after a quick search.
mythago
Cranky Observer @46: Mike Nifong. Remember him?
Quiddity @3: it wasn’t simply that the defense was “theoretical” but it was looneytunes.
Lawguy
Believe me I understand how discovery works in criminal cases, since I get at least 3 or 4 a week from the prosecutor.
My point is how did they get this information and how reliable is it.
eclecticbrotha
It sounds like someone suffering the post-traumatic stress of being raped. I’m not feeling that “words to the effect of…” bullshit from an unnamed official, either. Was the translation garbled? Was the unnamed official (never seen THAT before) giving their interpretaion of what was translated? Someone in the D.A.s office seems to be leaking a ton of bullshit to the press in order to sabotage this case.
By the way. References in this thread to Tawana Brawley is not the type of dogwhistle we usually accuse Republicans of, right? Right?
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
@67 wikileaks, or maybe assange goes solo.
Corner Stone
@ABL
And I find it hilarious that this so perfectly describes your writing style that you felt compelled to respond.
Corner Stone
@electricbrotha
I only saw the one reference, though I confess I only skimmed the thread. But what about Tawana, specifically?
Gopher2b
She should go to jail. Period.
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
Links please?
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
Lord, you’re a willful idiot. And I”m sorry you feel that way about women. I asked a question. You provided an answer. What is your fucking problem?
Of course now, nine years later, how will she prove this?
Why do you object to questions being asked? Isn’t that how one gets closer to the truth of any matter?
Atticus Dogsbody
@ Lawguy: My point is how did they get this information and how reliable is it.
Did you bother to read the blockquote or the link that came with this post? If you conduct cases in the same manner, I weep for your clients.
Mnemosyne
@ Tim:
Sure, here you go:
And, hey, remember what a fucking whiner Lara Logan was for complaining about getting groped by a crowd? That was one of your classics.
Mnemosyne
Also, before I head out to dinner, I find it fascinating how many people are obsessed with the actions of Tawana Brawley or Crystal Mangum or this woman and yet never seem to have heard of Cathleen Crowell and Gary Dotson, even though the consequences for Dotson were far, far worse than those for the falsely accused men in all three of the above cases combined.
It’s almost like the first three women have something in common that makes them memorable when women who did much more harm are forgotten. Hmmm. What could it be? Such a puzzle.
Trollenschlongen (formerly Tim, Interrupted)
Yes, I made a good point and asked a good question, to which you have no answer as per usual, so you fantasize things you imagine me to have said or thought.
But if you’re of a mind to, answer me this: Is a knee touch the equivalent of a violent, forced fuck? Same thing? No difference? Is a raised eyebrow or a wink the equivalent of a knee touch?
Also as per usual, regarding the LL thing, you are misrepresenting my comments, so fuck off. You are intellectually dishonest.
rb
Whoopsie, Tim I, pwnzored again! That’s gotta smart.
rb
Oh come on Mnemosyne, Dotson again? I mean where these poor trash are concerned, ‘wrongly convicted and spent a decade in prison’ has been stretched to the point of meaninglessness! [/timmah!]
IronyAbounds
Discussions about this kind of case always seem to rely on one’s biases. Many people feel that charges of rape are almost always true and the lack of prosecution is always misogyny in action. What is almost always neglected is the rather simple fact that convictions depend on a legal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” and not a preponderance of the evidence, or more likely or not. Rape cases are no different. They too are beyond a reasonable doubt. Given the facts that have come out about this case, can anyone truly believe that DSK committed rape beyond a reasonable doubt? If you think rape cases should have a different standard for conviction, then try and change the law in your state. Otherwise, give prosecutors a break if they choose not to pursue cases that are simply unwinnable.
Tde
Yes, po black wimmins can’t get no justice!
Corner Stone
@Tde
Are you sure about that? Could you pick up the mike and explain further?
Myles
Being a powerful white male does not make one a rapist
Being a woman of color does not make one a heroine
Innocent until proven guilty
So true.
Not!ABL
oh honey… it’s as if you really are unaware of how one-note your attempts to insult me are. keep trying. you’ll get there some day.
Lupin
A few notes about the Polanski case I saw mentioned above.
Polanski only pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse section 261.5 of the California penal code. Even today, if convicted of violating 261.5, a misdemeanor or a felony, one will NOT be required to register as a sexual offender.
Despite the fact that Polanski pleaded guilty, according to law, he was not “convicted”, because sentence wasn’t imposed.
Regarding extradition, there IS a treaty between France and the United States, but according to it, each country does not extradite its own citizens, but instead tries them in their own jurisdiction (i.e.: a French citizen will be tried in France; a US citizen will be tried in the US). (Recently two French citizens were tried and convicted in France for sex crimes committed in Thailand, for example, so it does work.)
Despite the fact that Polanski wasn’t convicted in California, the California DA had the option to file a criminal complaint against him in France by supplying an affidavit establishing the commission of the offense. That means not just probable cause, but a prima facie case.
(A prima facie case in this case would have meant submitting evidence to the French magistrate that would have indicated that a properly instructed jury in California would have returned a verdict of guilty.)
Assuming that the DA could have proved unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under 16 (as per French Law), and presented such a prima facie case, consisting of more than hearsay, there is no doubt in my mind that Polanski would have been convicted and sentenced to no less than 5 years’ jail time in France, under the then-existing laws.
The victim also had the option to do this, but did not.
Why the California DA chose to not pursue the case at the time remains a mystery.
Since then, the Statute of Limitations has ran out, so under French Law since charges were not filed in a timely fashion, Polanski can no longer be tried for anything.
I’m all in favor of cutting off the balls of Polanski, DSK and Albert of Monaco, but in Polanski’s case the US’s judicial system is entirely to blame for the screw-up.
mythago
Innocent until proven guilty
Except in accusations of perjury leveled against a woman for making a rape allegation. Then, we presume the bitch is lying until proven innocent.
I am dead curious as to how Trollwhatshisface thinks a knee brush leads to getting semen on someone’s clothes. I mean, there’s premature ejaculation, but that seems excessive.
soonergrunt
Biurny Peguero is perhaps the only person to commit a false accusation and actually be held to account for it. Three years in jail is still less time incarcerated than her victim, William McCaffrey suffered, but it’s something.
Of course, McCaffrey is a white male and Peguero is an hispanic woman, so he probably deserved it for something he did anyway. Dotson is a white male too, so yeah. Those bastards, being all white and male. Fuckers deserved it! /cacti
Chet
I read the news story – the whole thing – as well as the quote you blockquoted, and I still think DSK is a rapist and that she’s telling the truth, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to do so. Frankly, the quote doesn’t prove anything close to what you think it does. Even if taken literally at face value, it’s not obviously an admission that it’s a scam for money. (Didn’t we learn that she’s already refused the hush money, through her family?) But it can’t be taken literally at face value:
1) The source is anonymous;
2) Even by the source’s admission, it’s not literally what she was translated as saying (“words to the effect of”);
3) It was translated from an obscure language by whatever translator the DA’s office was able to find. Accuracy?
Frankly, it’s not unreasonable for the genuine rape victim of a wealthy and powerful man to recognize concerns that he’s a very dangerous person to accuse. The statement is just as easily a recognition of the danger of accusing DSK of rape as it is an admission that it’s all a scam for money. Especially since she doesn’t actually, you know, ever admit on tape that it’s a scam for money. Why wouldn’t a rape victim try to assure her boyfriend that pursuing the charges of rape against the guy who raped her would be a good thing?
And there’s still the serious injuries sustained by both parties that have no other explanation. The notion that this is a he-said-she-said case is absurd – there’s abundant physical evidence that rape, and not just sex, occurred.
Chet
And I’d just like to point out that secret anonymous “evidence” that, taken out of context, seems to make the accuser look like a slut who was begging for it or a blackmailer out for money is a pretty bog-standard development when rich and powerful men commit rape.
Cacti
@soonergrunt:
I know, brah. Elite white politicians just can’t get a fair shake in the world today. Nor white men in general. Now hop on your rascal scooter and head to the Glenn Beck rally.
Tde
Speaking of Glenn Beck,would you agree that one of his most contemptible qualities is his refusal to adjust his opinions to reality?
Tde
Chet
I don’t know what words she said, and neither do you. “Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing” is, at best, a paraphrase of a translation by an anonymous source.
On the other hand, there’s nothing ambiguous about vaginal bruising, defensive injuries, a smashed-up hotel room, and a hasty flight. There’s absolutely nothing in these “revelations” that should cause a reasonable person to conclude that DSK has more credibility than his victim.
Cacti
I always disliked the general right wing failure to acknowledge inconvenient facts that don’t fit the narrative, for instance, a supposedly innocent man…
Whose semen was found on the accuser
Who has a history of sexual assault/misconduct accusations against such disparate persons as the 21-year old goddaughter of his second wife, a middle-aged economist at the IMF, and presently, a 30-something hotel chamber maid…
And whose story morphed from “I wasn’t there” to “I have diplomatic immunity” to “It was consensual” along the way.
Tde
I’m sorry I thought you just posted your interpretation of what she said. Nevermind then.
Indeed especially how they like to impute their own worst qualities to others. That and how they keep yammering on even when the facts have just bent them over and hammered away. Sort of like Sarah palin having a movie about her called The Undefeated. Don’t these people know what a joke they are?
Cacti
Or when they pretend they’ve refudiated inconvenient facts, and declare themselves the winner, when they really just hand-waved them away.
Tde
Exactly
Tonal Crow
@dmbeaster:
Even if true, this does not conclusively support the idea that “Most of the time, those arrested have committed some version of the crime for which they are accused.”
We cannot assume that a person is factually guilty because she is convicted or pleads guilty. Hardly a day passes without a case of wrongful conviction hitting the news. Most people cannot afford useful legal representation (how much has DSK spent on lawyers so far?), and many public defenders’ offices are so overloaded that they can’t provide it either.
In that (usual) scenario, the entire power of the State is lodged against a lone person — who has no idea of her 4th and 5th Amendment rights — in the none-too-gentle custody of people who are legally permitted to lie to her and who very often ignore or cut the edges of the 4th and 5th Amendments without penalty. How often does such an accused say something that her captors will construe as a lie — which they will note is a crime in itself, then use to leverage a “confession” to the original charges? How often will the captors lie, saying, “Well, we found cocaine in your kid’s room. We’ll let that go if you admit your own crime now. Here’s the confession form.”?
Our criminal justice system is, unfortunately, largely rotten, and the mere fact that arrest often means conviction doesn’t mean that the people convicted are factually guilty of the crimes charged.
Tonal Crow
@Corner Stone: She aims, she shoots, she…self-annihilates!
Brachiator
Jesus, you people are still trying a case without knowing the facts, even before the state has made a decision to go ahead with a prosecution.
Even the news reports are incomplete, and could be strategic leaks.
But anything said here about guilt or innocence is meaningless, as is your evaluation of the “evidence.” This makes any stubborn clinging to any stance, about any of the parties involved, flat out stupid.
And yet, you are the same bunch with such a supposed sensitivity to civil liberties that you fall into a Glenn Greenwald swoon at the drop of a wiretap.
You people never learn.
Oh yeh, have a happy Fourth of July.
Tde
The only question now is how long it will be until she releases a porno.
Chet
True, but the only possible outcome of the case we’re trying is that some of us either will have a negative opinion of DSK, his accuser, or possibly both. That’s the only possible “sentence” of a case tried in the comments thread of a blog.
So turn down the histronics, Brachiator. It’s not a violation of anybody’s civil liberties to have bad things thought about them.
Classy. Wow, how could I have ever thought that the rush to pillory DSK’s victim could have anything to do with misogyny? Don’t know what I was thinking.
not a gator
@lamh34
My thoughts exactly. A Black man allegedly rapes a white female, and it’s “Send in the Stormtroopers and arrest somebody, stat!” Now reverse it and it’s “you all need to apologize!”
Really? Apologize for what? DA got involved because of the rape kit. Has the rape kit been questioned? Is the character of the police personnel, evidence handlers in question here? No?
Remember that chick that got raped by Kobe Bryant was tarred as a lying whore in a court of law because she had consensual sex with her boyfriend. Yeah.
If you’re rich and have the right lawyers and sympathetic men in the jury/judgeship, then any woman is common property, donchaknow.
(This is why random Black men get convicted–because white womanhood is the common property of howaito men. No Blacks allowed. And if a Black trangresses this line then the whole community should collectively suffer for this arrogance.)
I especially love the cases where judges decide that a woman is lying because she was wearing “skinny jeans”–you know, the kind made with spandex that you don’t have to unbutton to take off.
Kinda scares me, as the only jeans for sale now seem to be the spandexy kind and apparently wearing them makes me common property too.
Shorter: lay off the misogyny, y’all.
not a gator
I notice that the fact that DSK lied to police doesn’t destroy his credibility. His defense quickly morphed from, “I have an alibi, I wasn’t even there,” to “It was consensual,” to “She’s a scumbag.”
I guess only cloistered nuns with medical proof of virginity should bother to report rape anymore.
Ready your apology–haven’t you heard he’s pure as the driven snow?
And those nuns? They were asking for it. All the bruising just means they liked it.
Tde
NY POST is reporting that she turned tricks at hotel and even while she was in protective custody. So if she was a prostitute, the most DSK should be charged with is theft.
Tonal Crow
Tde: The NY Post “reports” things? Or do you mean in the same manner that Fox “News” “reports” things?