Posted on 05/17/2011 8:57:47 PM PDT by rawhide
Dominique Strauss-Kahn will admit he had sexual contact with the hotel chambermaid who alleges he attacked her, but insist it was consensual, his lawyers have indicated.
The International Monetary Fund chief allegedly locked the maid in his suite at Manhattan's Sofitel on Saturday and forced her to give him oral sex. He was denied $1m bail and is being held at Rikers Island jail.
However in a hint at what may become his main line of defence, his attorney, Benjamin Brafman, said at New York criminal court: "The evidence, we believe, will not be consistent with a forcible encounter".
It came as prosecutors, who claim a medical examination of the maid "corroborates her accounts", were alleged to have discovered blood in the hotel room.
The maid's attorney, Jeff Shapiro, strongly denied suggestions that the pair may have had consensual sex.
“There is no way in which there is any aspect of this event which could be construed consensual in any manner,” said Mr Shapiro. “This is nothing other than a physical, sexual assault by this man on this young woman."
Mr Shapiro also moved to quash suggestions that the maid may have been involved in a conspiracy.
"This is a woman with no agenda," he said, adding that she had not even known who Mr Strauss-Kahn was.
Meanwhile the brother of the woman, a 32-year-old from Guinea with a 15-year-old daughter, said she had phoned him and said "somebody did something really bad to me" after the alleged incident.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
might be getting a little more humiliating...for him:
No comparison between the two women! You ought to be ashamed of yourself for even implying that!
No comparison between the two women! You ought to be ashamed of yourself for even implying that!
the comparison was not meant between people but cases...fair trial, rush to judgement and all that ... I was responding to someone suggesting we hold our judgement/conviction until the full evidence was presented. Crystal was a reminder of what can happen...
Why? Because that's never, ever happened before and everyone who has ever been accused of rape or sexual assault is 100% guilty as sin simply because of the at-present uncorroborated testimony of one alleged victim?
Its always the same. First they didn’t do it then well yes they did do it but it was consensual. She just liked it rough so thats why her knees are bruised and there’s blood all over the place. Tell it to the jury Dude.
There was a rape examination performed. FWIW, there are differences between consensual sex and forcible rape that can be found during the examination.
Ultimately it’s up to a jury.
I think you are right, and rape and sexual harassment cases are notoriously difficult to discern, because it often comes down to one person’s word against anothers.
In this case, Strauss-Kahn looks guilty to me - jmo - because of his previous history and the way he tried to flee. But the whirlwind of publicity does make me wonder if other forces are involved.
It appeared consensual to him, because of cultural and language differences.
She kept saying, “Don’t! Stop! Don’t! Stop!”
He kept hearing, “Don’t stop! Don’t stop!”
The French Socialists saw and heard nothing.
This is really horrible, that she doesn’t feel honored to been the object of the gratification of her betters. Our lords and masters have great stresses, and need to regularly relieve the pressures ruling over us cause. What is this world coming to, that she dare object? /sarc
I half wonder if the guy promised this maid the moon for doing what he wanted for half an hour, and she said yes, but when the ordeal was over he told her the check would be in the mail and she said pay up now creep or I go to the cops, and all he had was credit cards.
She spoke French herself and would have had little trouble making herself understood.
His lawyer has already stated, "we can prove his innocence to our satisfaction."
That doesn't sound very covincing...especially when he didn't say which of Straus-Kahn's multiple stories he was basing that on.
His career is finished. Even if he had just been caught having consensual sex with a hotel maid. Unbecoming of a political leader (although in France it may well bolster one’s career)
The victim's lawyer will arrange a financial settlement of some $5 Million or so, which he will manage, whereupon the charges will be quietly dropped. DSK will nolo on a charge of resisting arrest and be sentenced to time served, plus a fine. He will resign from the IMF "to spend more time with his family."
DSK's lawyer looks like he can handle it. His fee will be in the sevens, too. IMF will pay him. Maybe even underwrite the payoff to the victim. BTW, DSK, STFU.
New law...every place there’s a sprinkler head there will be a video camera. Forget privacy, just be able to say, “Let’s go to the tape”.
Of course he’s entitled to a defense! If he was an important American his evil James Carville-type friends would be all over the tv trashing the woman. But he’s a Frenchman with apparently few friends willing to stand up for him (Clinton is actually hiding under his bed as we speak.)
And as far as the rape: there appears to be plenty of evidence that it occured. She reported it early and underwent tests; he has also been forced to take tests.
I know you don’t mean it but it’s beginning to sound like some people of FR want 4 men to witness a rape - preferably 1 being a member of the family.
I’ve said this several times but it keeps getting ignored: the reason it is getting so much publicity is because of New Yorkers’ complete hate and disgust towards foreign big-wigs (particularly from the UN) who come to New York City, commit awful crimes, and then depart with immunity. I’m still disgusted that one of Saddam’s henchman was found eating in one of our most prestigious restaurants when we invaded Iraq!
While the cops are probably following the law to the T, New Yorkers like me are gloating over this pig being caught and treated like a common criminal. It’s about time.
Shades of Bonfire of the Vanities!
It’s gonna be the nuts ‘n sluts routine.
Not sure I understand. Medical examiners can’t prove rape. And the reason for the blood is key. If there is no blood on him then it could be she put it there.
His lawyer will focus on his defense in the courtroom not public opinion. He will only say things in public he thinks enhances his ability to defend his client.
How do I know...I’ve been in a similiar situation that was complete BS. Not rape or something like this and not directly me but none-the-less it took time to get all the facts and when they did it was clear the other person was lying.
Once again not defending him...just saying it’s too easy for a woman to claim rape and get men arrested.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.