In case you missed it the prosecutor dropped the

[malaise]

Strauss-Kahn charge.

What a complete mess!

[MadHound]

1. Yep, shows that once again money can buy you "justice".

The essential charges this woman made against DSK weren't what sunk the prosecution's case, it was the "character issues" that were dug up and used against her.

[Arctic Dave]

3. Or buy you dirty tricks.

[Terry_M]

4. Or maybe that there was no actual assault?

Do you have facts proving anything one way or the other? Last detailed article I read, basically suggested it was very uncertain.
Or does our justice system never accuse those that are innocent?

[malaise]

5. +1,000

TO be arrested is to be guilty even when it doesn't make sense

[Me.]

6. And I Read A Detailed Article That Said The Medical Report Said She Was Sexually Assaulted

Of course our justice system always stands by and supports women who say they've been raped.

[sabrina 1]

9. Have a link? Because the only place that

kind of sensational claim appeared, even before the results could have been known, was in Rupert Murdoch's NY Post who appears to have been working with Ray Kelly, NYPD Chief and good friend of Strauss/Kahn's French political opponent, Sarkozy. No medical reports that I have seen or the DA's office according to them, say she was sexually assaulted.

Where did the woman get all that money? And why did she lie to the Grand Jury? About the facts of the 'case'?

They had no case and as the Female Prosecutor said initially, they should have done a much more thorough investigation into this woman in the beginning, and then she was removed from the case, an experienced woman on from the Sex Crimes unit, was not allowed to do her job. I wonder why?

Someone wanted him stopped from goign to Germany and from removing Sarkozy from office. Looks like 'mission accomplished' unless there is, as there should be, a thorough investigation.

[Me.]

11. Don't Have An Immediate Link Bur Will See

I believe ir was posted on DU but not sure. I've also heard the rumors that it was really a political assassination to stop him. I don't know but what has also been reported is that he has a Long history of forcing himself on women and the way women have been treated at the IMF, of which he was the head, was/maybe still is an absolute disgrace. Also here in NYC the DA's office under Vance is building up a reputation for incompetence and shoddy work. It apparently is such a poorly run office that Morgethau who was influential in getting Vance elected will no longer speak to him.

I googled and found this at HuffPo along with a number of orgwe links...

“NEW YORK -- Lawyers for former International Monetary Fund leader Dominique Strauss-Kahn fought back Tuesday after a media report said a medical examination listed "assault" and "rape" as the causes of injuries to a hotel housekeeper who accuses him of sexual assault.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/dominique-strauss-kahn-lawyers-dispute-report_n_928874.html

[sabrina 1]

12. Yes, well as the Huffpo piece says he was upset about 'media'

reports. The only place I saw those sensational reports in the early stages was in the NY Post, Murdoch's tabloid. And the Sarkozy supporter's blog which was so badly written and so completely without anything to back up most of what was there, that it made me curious enough to do some research.

As far as his reputation, he had a reputation as a 'lady's man' in France, not something unusual there, Sarkozy eg, had a similar reputation. One woman had made allegations in France, although when you went to the original video she was laughing about it at the time. That woman is the same woman who surfaced when all this happened, and is apparently connected to some of his rightwing opponents. He denies her allegations and is currently suing her.

The rest was simply 'hearsay'. He did have an affair with a colleague at the IMF. An AFFAIR. While improper, there were no charges of force, until all this happened when she claimed she felt pressured because of who he was after a while. However, that was not her claim at the time.

He was definitely targeted even before this happened, and a weakness for women, which he did predict might be used against him just months before, was used.

As for the maid, she has told so many lies, seems to not be the 'poor working immigrant with no money' she claimed to be, since apparently she has multiple accounts where deposits have been made in her name and which she claims she knew nothing about. She also had many phones but did not reveal any of this to prosecutors. She lied to get into the country, lied about another rape which she was 'coached' on, how to behave, cry etc.

But most importantly from the prosecutor's pov, she lied to the Grand Jury about the incident itself. Anyone who followed the initial story as it came out was struck by the problems in the timeline. I, eg, wrote it all down but kept coming up with inexplicable missing times no matter which story I followed. I thought it was me. However, now that they have finally checked her electronic key, those problem times have been explained. She lied about when she was in the room, what she did before and after etc. There is no way they could win a case like this.

Vance did lose a case recently and this won't help him probably. However, it is the right thing to do to drop it now considering the multiple problems and huge doubts about the woman's story. He SHOULD have revealed what he knew while DSK was in jail, eg. It is reprehensible that it was not until they knew the Defense's own investigators were finding out for themselves just how duplicitous this woman was, that they finally admitted they basically had no case.

However, the delay in telling the police covered two important dates. The IMF getting a new Chief, the choice of Timmy Geithner who called for DSK to step down early on and the date to file to enter the Presidential primary in France.

There's a lot more that has been revealed, but definitely Vance has a problem with the way it was handled, and the role of Ray Kelly should be investigated, who it is now revealed, may have made a call to the French Presidential Palace. That would explained how two bloggers had the arrest story at 5.00pm, barely 15 mins after the police boarded the plane, when the actual arrest did not occur until after 2.00 AM the following morning.

When questioned about how they got the story the bloggers claimed they 'knew someone who worked at the hotel'. But that never made sense since he was not at the hotel when apprehended by the police so who could have seen that happen? Besides he was not arrested until hours later. But the info on the call to the French from the NYPD I believe, does help clear that up.

It was the French press who followed up on much of the missing pieces. Here we had to rely on the NY Post and the rest of the media basically took a lot of their lead from those stories. Also, Kelly's media Rep, Browne, was the one who misled the press about timing etc and that he 'fled' in the beginning, none of which was true.

Anyhow, if it was all a coincidence, it definitely benefited the Conservative opposition and the IMF and the Bankers. I don't much believe in coincidences like this though, and many are calling now, even those who initially did not think it was a set up, for an investigation. I hope that happens. If it was, it is despicable. The French Sarkozy blogger is like their Breitbart who had been conducting a smear campaign in France against DSK and he had his lawyers threaten to sue him if he continued, he also complained to Sarkozy.

I guess the equivalent here would be the way the right went after Clinton. Yes, he cheated on his wife, but they turned it into an impeachment. As I said, I really hope he still has enough support that an investigation is conducted. Seems he probably does as most of the French people did not believe it from the beginning, but then they knew about the smear campaign against him and were familiar with the players, as we would have been with Breitbart eg.

Anyhow, thanks for the link and your response. :-)

[Me.]

13. You'll Pardon Me If I Disagree With Your Conclusion That The Case Should've Been Dropped?

Regarding the maid. It is, according to our news a rampant problem in NY hotels. As to the conspiracy, if there was one, he walked right into a honey trap and has no one to blame but himself. As there is to be a civil suit we'll see what a jury thinks.

[sabrina 1]

14. I don't mind at all that you disagree.

But I only know about this case. The fact that there are many other cases doesn't mean this one was legitimate. Nor do I agree that if someone is set up 'they have no one to blame but themselves'. No one should be setting people up, in fact I believe it is a crime. So, while his own weakness may have made it easy for someone to do this, the blame is certainly shared by anyone devious and ruthless enough to set up a policital opponent and have them falsely accused of a crime.

I followed it pretty closely from the beginning and had doubts even before we knew anything about the woman.

The doubts were raised by the claims made in the tabloids early on, which did not add up at all to the facts as they unfolded.

I had no idea who the woman was, but it became clear early on that there were a lot of things that made no sense.

Eg, the timeline. The time the police arrived at the hotel, compared to the claims made by the woman's representatives about WHEN she reported the incident. The story told by the Police Rep, Browne, that DSK had 'fled' which morphed into him quickly booking a flight and trying to leave the country. Many people still believe that.

The facts showed this to be completely false, as we know now.

And that was just the beginning of what did not add up. After the prosecutor revealed his own findings, a lot fell into place and made it even less likely that there was a crime committed.

This prosecutor does not want to drop this case, so if he's doing so, he knows there is no case. A woman who lies to the Grand Jury about the case itself, has pretty much zero credibility. There was no need for her to lie, if a crime occurred, all she had to do was tell the truth. She did not. And the question is why. Not to mention that she has a hitory of lying, lying about how many children she has to cheat on her taxes, lying to get cheap housing, lying about her marriage, divorce, widowhood. We still can't sort out which story is true.

Sometimes people lie to make money. And this would not be the first time a woman lied about being raped, especially one who already lied about another rape. I think the case has to be dropped, as there appears to be no case. And yes, he was foolish, but no one should lose their freedom, their job, reputation etc. unless they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and in this case there is so much doubt it is stunning it ever was prosecuted in the first place.

Btw, the woman prosecutor who quit during this whole mess, it has since been revealed, since she was the expert on Sex Crime, normally would have handled this case. But from the beginning she doubted the woman but was ignored and not put on the case.

[Me.]

15. Hah, It Looks Like We Will Continue On Our Agree To Disagree Path

As to deserving...I think when people reach a certain pinnacle, they live in a bubble and a degree of willful blindness/arrogance sets in. DSK, like Spitzer, is a very smart man and a political animal. They both had to know they had enemies and how ruthless. They were both running with the big boys and those enemies can be and they both played right into their hands.

[sabrina 1]

16. No problem, and I agree regarding the stupidity of these supposedly

brilliant men, Clinton also, who know they have enemies and still cannot seem to help themselves, or maybe they like the danger, who knows? Still, that doesn't make them criminals or rapists.

Regarding the forensic evidence you mentioned above, which was never verified btw, by the Prosecution. Now we have the details.

The Prosecutors have submitted a motion to dismiss the case and outline their findings in the 25 pages they submitted to the court.

Regarding the 'evidence' that she was abused, there is none. As far as the shoulder injury, prosecutors believe that was an old injury and the woman refused to release her medical records to them.

Here is a link to Talk Left and the prosecutor's findings. http://www.talkleft.com/story/2011/8/22/194021/907?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TalkleftThePoliticsOfCrime+%28TalkLeft%3A+The+Politics+of+Crime%29

The prosecutors were afraid she would commit perjury on the stand it as she lied over and over again to them, giving three different versions of the 'attack' and then lied about the lies.

1) Defendant told not 2, but 3 different versions of what happened on the day of the incident, each time changing her story when confronted with facts

(2) There is no evidence that the reported redness around her vagina was even an injury, much less than that it was caused by being grabbed by DSK. An expert in fact concluded that it was not likely caused by such an act.

(3) Expert testimony also suggests that any trauma to the shoulder was not caused by DSK but perhaps by repetitive acts over time. The accuser refused to grant access to prior medical records so that the prosecutors could check to see if this was a pre-existing condition.

(4) The incident allegedly took place between 12:06 and 12:26. Phone records indicate that DSK placed a call to his daughter at 12:13.

I think that should say 'plaintiff' not 'defendant'.

I wondered if he had made any phone calls during the alleged time of the attack. This answers that question. Looks like they were not the only ones fooling around in that room, the police found semen from several different, unknown men there also, on the rug and elsewhere.

I really wish we had a responsible press that did not publish information that have not verified, like the forensic evidence you mentioned before. I saw it airc, but couldn't find a verification from law enforcement so I dismissed it at the time, as it was the NY Post airc.

Anyhow, it looks like there was no crime, unless lying about a crime is a crime, and/or stupidity, as in the case of DSK is a crime.

But none of this answers the question as to whether he was set up or whether everyone who wanted him gone, just got lucky. Her lawsuit probably doesn't stand much of a chance, and her lawyer will probably end up dropping it in the end. She already lost two lawyers earlier on who did not say why they quit, but I think it's pretty obvious now.

I'd still like to know if they kept him in NY so that he could not implement his plans regarding Greece. Too bad, as they got what they wanted and it hasn't worked anyhow. This whole case was like something out of an International spy novel and I hope we do learn the rest of the story. And I hope HE learned a lesson from all of it, although probably not :-)

[Cleita]

10. Sexual assault is always very "uncertain" because of the

fact it's often her word against his and who cares about those rape kit evidences any way. :sarcasm: There usually are no third party witnesses. It will always be her fault as long as they can find something to blame her for whether it's her past or the way she dresses.

[sabrina 1]

7. No, it shows no such thing. It shows that if you are about

make some pretty important decisions that might adversely affect the Global Banking industry, and you are also the most likely 'progressive' candidate to remove from office the Globalists' 'Austerity' Man in France, Sarkozy, you better watch your back, especially when visiting a city where the Police Chief is good friends with your political opponent, Sarkozy and you are about to make a huge decision as IMF Chief on the Greek bailout, that the Banks might not like.

Ray Kelly, NYPD Chief needs to be investigated, and sued if that what's it takes to get to the bottom of this, what role he played in the phony arrest and charges. We know now though how Rupert Murdoch's rag the NY Post got the story, and how those 'bloggers' in France knew about it hours before it happened.

And the fact that people here are willing to believe every charge by a woman of sexual harrassment without bothering to even look into the facts of the case, the initial lies about the timeline eg, were a big clue that someone was lying, is a shame.

They should arrest that woman and her corrupt gang of 'friends'. Although at least one of them is already in jail. And DSK should sue her, she has lots of money spread around in different banks, they need to find out who paid her all that money.

[malaise]

8. That Murdoch connection must not be ignored

This story stinks big time.

[Warpy]

2. Yes, it was, and that perp walk

will damage US-French relations for years.

I have no particular opinion on who's telling the truth. Apparently Strauss-Kahn is a pig when he's around women, but this isn't the case to have undone him. There were problems with Ms. Diallo's story from the beginning and I'm not surprised the charges were dropped.

That doesn't mean no assault took place. It just means there were too many problems with her ability to stick to the facts to convict him.

It also doesn't mean an assault did take place. After all, she did boast about making some sort of big score to one of her friends.

However, I'm glad they didn't run this one into the ground the way the DA did with the Duke case. When it fell apart, they cut their losses and dropped the case.

[tblue]

17. I hope his thing shrivels up and falls off.

Poor woman. I hope she writes a book.