<p>She has recanted parts of her story, as well as having lied about rape in the past. Not to mention her numerous lies and omissions. Her credibility as a victim is gone.</p>
<p>The case is shot but DSK could still be dragged through the media if she chooses to go down the trial route. Keep in mind that the current debacle has given him enough breathing room to actually be able to go back to France and run for President. (In France a strong majority still support him).</p>
<p>Because of that I agree with Dershowitz. He will try to cut a deal with her and spare himself any public trial. Regarding the alleged victim I have no sympathy for her now. After she reaps her windfall I hope she gets deported. She deserves it.</p>
<p>It’s not her choice on the trial - it’s the prosecution’s choice on whether or not to proceed.</p>
<p>It appears that there are also political considerations for the DA’s office. Cyrus Vance apparently was already on shaky ground and this dragging this case on may not be good for his career (this was in a few of the articles).</p>
<p>It would be rather strange if he is elected President - I imagine that this case could color future judicial relations between the two countries. It has already soured France’s opinion of our judicial system. I think that Vance’s trying of this case in the media was a mistake.</p>
<p>I don’t think that the AV can cut a deal at this point now that information about negotiations has gone public. She would risk prosecution.</p>
<p>Sorry, I should have been more specific. I meant the civil trial. (I know the DA has no choice but to follow through when he thinks a crime has been committed.)</p>
<p>The more I think about it the more it looks like it was in fact consensual sex. At the time the maid did not know who DSK was, but eventually (After cleaning a few rooms and probably talking to somebody) she found out and then cried rape.</p>
<p>Also, french people aren’t as obsessed about sexual indiscretions as their US counterparts are though. In the US a politician having sex with one of his underlings is always invariably a giant scandal. In France, it rarely creates any kind of wave.</p>
<p>This is very reminiscent of the Duke Lacrosse Rape trial tbh. Complete rush to judgment without doing any actual back-stopping of the “victim”.</p>
<p>I wasn’t referring so much on the sexual nature of the alleged crime as the parading of the accused in front of the media - in effect trying the case in the media so as to influence the jury pool and give the prosecutors media time. It could be Martha Stewart, Wall St bankers or Whitey Bulger.</p>
<p>It’s ok. I mean, it’s not like the guy lost his job, had his name defamed in the media, and had millions of people question his character and make jokes about him. Oh wait, that’s exactly what happened. </p>
<p>Some people may lament that this may deter other women from coming forward claiming to be raped. I lament the attitude that people presume a women who alleges rape is telling the truth and that the man who had sex must be guilty of rape. That is precisely what happened here and it also happened in the Duke lacrosse case. Unless a rape is witnessed by others or there is some strong forensic evidence of rape, proof of rape depends on who is telling the truth. Too often people assume the woman is telling the truth when she actually may be a big fat liar.</p>
<p>I remember hearing when this case first hit that the woman had immediately told her co-workers, who insisted that the hotel security call the police. I also recall hearing that her story hung together, she remained consistent in the details, and she was extremely credible. Those things lead me to believe that DSK was a slimeball.</p>
<p>Gawd – doesn’t anyone tell the truth anymore?</p>
<p>But the time frame never really worked for an immediate reporting… DSK’s lunch date with his daughter makes a lot more sense if the incident with the maid had happened earlier. One possibility is that DSK either offered money for sex, or else that the maid initiated the offer of sex for money after hearing talk in among the staff that DSK had been making suggestive comments to other hotel staff. </p>
<p>The interesting contrast between this case and the Duke lacrosse class is the very different conduct by the prosecuting attorneys. Here the prosecutor was diligent in its own investigation, and promptly notified the defense counsel and the court when it became apparent that the woman’s story wouldn’t stand up.</p>
<p>I’d note that this is really not a case of a woman required to have a pristene background for a rape to be prosecuted. This is a classic he said/she said situation in a context where it was clear that a defense of consensual sex would be raised, and the prosecutor determined that the woman:</p>
<p>So you have he-said/she-said – with she being someone who has repeatedly lied to the government and lied for financial benefit.</p>
<p>As to why a woman who is able to manage payments on 5 different cell phones and has all sorts of money cycling through her bank account would take a job as a hotel maid at a classy hotel… well, there is one very good answer to that, but it doesn’t help the prosecution in any way.</p>
<p>With respect to the supposed gang rape, I read one news account that said the prosecutors asked her about it and she recounted the details of the gang rape to them in a tearful fashion. She later told the prosecutors her earlier account was untrue. If the woman was willing to lie to prosecutors, I fail to see how they can proceed with this case at all. They should drop all charges immediately.</p>
<p>So, if a woman makes a charge of sexual assault then the man she accuses must be charged and tried if he can not absolutely prove his innocence. </p>
<p>In interviews in connection with the investigation of this case, the complainant admitted that the above factual information, which she provided in connection with her asylum application, was false. She stated that she fabricated the statement with the assistance of a male who provided her with a cassette recording of the facts contained in the statement that she eventually submitted. She memorized these facts by listening to the recording repeatedly. In several interviews with prosecutors, she reiterated these falsehoods when questioned about her history and background, and stated that she did so in order to remain consistent with the statement that she had submitted as part of her application.</p>
<p>It would be an interesting twist indeed if DSK sued the DA and co based on the fact they trashed his chances at becoming the next French President.</p>
<p>Mr. Thompson said prosecutors still have “pieces of evidence that show that Dominique Strauss-Kahn sexually assaulted the victim,” including photographs of vaginal bruising taken at the hospital, spots in the room that she said contained his DNA, and proof that he left the hotel so quickly that he still had toothpaste smeared across his face. </p>
<p>Law-enforcement officials have said they have found no conclusive evidence of injury. Mr. Brafman, Strauss-Kahn’s lawyer said that “we vigorously disagree with the substance” of Mr. Thompson’s statements, but declined to comment further. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t be surprised if someone else physically assaulted her (She seems to run with that crowd) and she tried to pass on the blame of that to DSK. It would be impossibly hard to prove that DSK didn’t do it tbh.</p>
<p>Bawaahaa haaa. In his inimitable style, Charles Krautheimer just summed up the developments in the case:</p>
<p>“The evidence now suggests that the sex may have been “consensual”. Perhaps even “transactional”, as it were. But, not “felonious”… One has to be careful how one speaks about these things on television.”</p>
<p>Thompson took a throng of reporters outside court through the details of the incident from his client’s perspective, saying Strauss-Kahn bruised her genitals, tore a ligament in her shoulder and ripped her stockings.</p>