I agree with your compassionate analysis of this disgraceful situation.

And am intrigued by your final paragraph. Does this mean wealthy men prefer the carpet to the $3000 a night bed? What's that about? It's almost a topic for a masters in sociology.

I always said the idea of the encounter being "consensual" is a good one for a porn movie - a hotel maid entering a room she believed to be empty spontaneously offers herself for consensual rough sex on the carpet with the naked head of the IMF who emerges from the dunny apparently e(l)ect, and all in the space of nine minutes. Yep, I can see that on the naughty screen. But in real life? Stretches all credibility.

The one matter, certainly the most important matter that the author did not mention was the Jewish connections of Strauss-Kahn.

So a court case heard in the city of New York was never going to receive justice, in any form whatsoever. As well, in a country where 80% of the Congress dances to the Israeli tune, (slightly less in the Senate) the insidious nature of that sort of influence meant that this case was dead in the water from day one. Just took a little longer as they needed to seriously work on the victim and they did a thorough job there. She was an easy target.

That's the way it is over there.

The shrewdness of Strauss-Kahn's legal team, thick on the ground, was to ensure that he was not placed in a position where he was forced to answer a single question, thereby not subject to cross-examination. This they were able to do by using the shortcomings in American law, which, like taxation, is designed for the rich.

The treatment therefore was to concentrate on the poor, uneducated African girl, a simple task for Jewish money. When one can afford a hotel room at $3,000 per day, hiring a team of investigators was of little consequence to someone like Strauss-Kahn. Tea money, so to speak.

The one consolation in the whole matter is that because sufficient decent and honest people know of his guilt, in a political climate like France, well away from the US, of course, his actions may be judged by his own countrymen hopefully and have some bearing on his future prospects.

Once a sleeze, always a sleeze regardless of the hymn book from which one sings.

As for the multiple stains on the carpet indicating other activities of perhaps a similar nature but more importantly, a poor regime of cleaning, I have removed this hotel at $3,000 a day from my list of future accomodation options.

I'm struck by the the metaphor here.... it matches perfectly the treatment inflicted by the IMF on developing countries in Africa (and elsewhere)....and that organisation's true motives and conduct go largely unexamined as well.

It is interesting to speculate how differently this may have turned out in a non-adversarial judicial system.

The DA system is not designed to elicit the facts, as perhaps might have happened under a juge d'instruction in France, but to assess whether the case would survive the court process.

In my view, the NY district attorney took the only path open to him, since he knew full well that the victim's evidence would have been ripped apart by a string of highly-paid defense lawyers.

And the presiding judge was obliged to agree with him. Why go to the expense of a lengthy trial - the lawyers would make sure it was drawn out as much as possible - whose only result would be even more embarrassment and humiliation for the poor girl? It would be romantic folly to believe any other outcome possible, outside the realms of pulp fiction.

Justice, US-style. Sometimes it's not a pretty sight.

C'mon. NOBODY, apart from the two involved, knows what happened. The complainant is here portrayed as the classic 'victim' while the rich, white European is portrayed as the classic perpetrator. Yet this is all a fantasy of the author.

The court determined that the complainant is an unreliable witness and any conclusion about guilt or innocence of Strauss-Kahn merely reflects one's ingrained biases, be they political or sociological.

Author promoting and approves of lying as modus operandi of potential immigrants. End justifies the means in his opinion. It casts dark shadows on honest legal immigrants who do not need to obtain an entrance visa on false pretences and on the government agencies that admit them.
He based his article on lies, not facts. He defines it as “confidential information leaked to the press by one of DSK's victims.” (Read: DSK’s enemies).
“The cavalry charge DSK made, totally naked” is not a proven fact (the author was not in that hotel room, sadly), but the fruit of pathological imagination of a serial liar.
The notion that it was made “in pure hussar style” is totally ridiculous. What is pure hassar style? Running naked?
“There were traces not only of DSK's semen but of three other, unidentified, men as well. How about that for hygiene in a $US 3 000 a night luxury suite” states the article. Exemplary hotel maid Nafi did not clean very well after all.

Pressidential erection or not, that poor Nafissato, the African maid, has her own opinion of what such an erection really means.

socratease

I suspect that, had it been written without such blatant tear-jerking bias, I would agree with this article. I agree with the sentiment - that the lady was never going to 'have her day in court' and wouldn't have stood a chance.

Sadly, the way the article is written is hardly even-handed. We are to forgive this lady her transgressions because she has had a hard life, but we are to condemn DSK despite the claim that there is actually something wrong with him to cause him to behave in this way. She is a victim, he is a predator. She is a liar, but he is a ... well, a predator. We should feel sorry for her because she may be prosecuted for perjury, and we should feel sorry for her because all he has suffered is the ruin of his reputation, career and career prospects.

I really do feel for the poor lady. Whether he assaulted her or not, she's been put through the wringer and has got nothing out of it (apart from an apparent 7 or so minutes of sex with a greasy old man). Sadly, articles like this do little to advance her cause, in my opinion.

.

EPHEMERAL JUSTICE FOR AN EPHEMERAL ENCOUNTER …

.

One was an elderly white male Jew. The other was a young black female Muslim.
One was from the international social elite. The other was from the Bronx underclass.
One was married. The other was a widow.
One was rich and important. The other was poor and insignificant.
One was powerful and intelligent. The other was fragile and dumb.
One was highly educated. The other was illiterate.
They had never met before in their lives. Each ignored the other’s identity.
The encounter was totally unexpected. Each was taken by surprise.
It lasted less than 9 minutes, shocked the world and caused havoc in their lives.
Both claimed to be the victim.
One had previous experience of similar encounters. The other had none.
One said nothing and was asked no questions. The other was the object of a 25 page report.
After a preliminary investigation justice declared forfeit, considering it was not worth a court case.
One went free. The other might be indicted for perjury and expulsed from the United States.
That’s it. Move on please ...

.

Thank you bloke! your post is true to its callings.

Banjo Paterson, said.....

ne was an elderly white male Jew. The other was a young black female Muslim.
One was from the international social elite. The other was from the Bronx underclass.
One was married. The other was a widow.
One was rich and important. The other was poor and insignificant.
One was powerful and intelligent. The other was fragile and dumb.
One was highly educated. The other was illiterate.
They had never met before in their lives. Each ignored the other’s identity.
The encounter was totally unexpected. Each was taken by surprise.
It lasted less than 9 minutes, shocked the world and caused havoc in their lives.
Both claimed to be the victim.
One had previous experience of similar encounters. The other had none.
One said nothing and was asked no questions. The other was the object of a 25 page report.
After a preliminary investigation justice declared forfeit, considering it was not worth a court case.
One went free. The other might be indicted for perjury and expulsed from the United States.
That’s it. Move on please ...

Well...there you have it:)

The great Australian.......but with-out fight of a Australian.

Bananas UP 10.00 bucks.
Rent up 80%
People up 200% and your off-spring....don't even think about them.
Your jobs are taken by boat people?

What is the world comming to?...aaay!

I glad my pop isnt alive.

Cactus

.

Dear Briar Rose

.

"And am intrigued by your final paragraph. Does this mean wealthy men prefer the carpet to the $3000 a night bed? What's that about? It's almost a topic for a masters in sociology".

Allow me to sugget that this is a case for Sherlock Holmes. It also seems to concern psychiatry as much as sociology. Social pressures may well be the cause of many psychiatric disorders.

In my experience, the regular clients of the most expensive suites in luxury hotels are senior international business executives and political leaders. It costs them nothing. It is their organisations that pick up the bills. They are on mission day and night from the moment they leave home until they return and it does not cost them a singlr dollar. On the contrary, they are generously paid for it.

The justification for the apparent generosity is that they are constantly under tremeandous pressure to pull off that million dollar deal or whatever it is that is expected of them. They are offered the moon if they succeed and they get hell if they fail.

All that stimulus builds up pressure until their psyche begins to burst at the seams. Unless they have some sort of safety valve they simply explode.

The safety valve usually takes the form of alcohol, drugs or sex.

Sex addicts tend to develop tastes for particular imaginatively constructed scenarios many of which fall into the sado-maso category due, probably, to the need to dominate their anxiety.

Whilst a bed may be considered the usual support for "normal" sex, the floor mat, in many cases, be a more appropriate stage for more threatrical representations.

.

.

Oops !

.

That's an amusing typing error. In the last paragraph, I meant to type "... the floor may ...", and typed "... the floor mat ..." instead.

Sorry about that.

.

.

Dear Pericles,

.

You could be right in thinking that "The DA system is not designed to elicit the facts, as perhaps might have happened under a juge d'instruction in France, but to assess whether the case would survive the court process.".

However, it is difficult to imagine how this could be done without hearing both sides of the story. Collecting the material evidence and hearing just one side of the story is insufficient to make a valid evaluation of the chances of the case to survive the trial process within the adversarial court system.

The only way to hear the other side of the story was to put the case to trial. DSK's continued silence may then have exposed him to the accusation of willful contempt of court and impact negatively on the jury.

No doubt Cyrus Vance's decision to abandon the charges was largely due to his loss of confidence follwing a whole string of losses of high profile cases leading up to the one in hand.

.

.

Dear Otokonoko,

.

I believe the essence of the message here is not that which you consider to be a biased opinion but that it has not been possible for justice to be allowed to freely run its normal course in one of the world's greatest democracies, if not its greatest democracy.

It is justice (supposedly at its best) that is on trial here, not the protagonists, nor what may or may not have occurred during their btief encounter in the hotel suite.

Justice is clearly the Achilles' Heel of democracy and this is just one more example of its difficult existence.

.

.

I take your point, Mr Paterson. I just wonder why Mr Crisp feels the need to sully his valid argument with shamelessly emotive language, colouring one party as a villain and the other as a victim.

Whether or not DSK sexually assaulted the woman has not been determined, and it is unlikely that it ever will be. The article uses his sexual indiscretions against him, but attempts to sweep the poor lady's difficulties with honesty under the rug. That bothers me, really.

The author is entitled to his opinions and, as he has mastered the art of rhetoric, is capable of presenting it very well. For that, I applaud him. It's only natural that, in a 'David and Goliath' battle, one tends to take the side of little Dave. It is possible, though, that David isn't always right.

.

Dear Otokonoko,

.

Understood and agreed. There are two things that bother me. Most importantly, that justice has been swept under the carpet, seemingly, because it is a logical consequence of the normal workings of the system.

Justice has led to no justice which, to me, seems eminently unjust. There can be only one victim of such an outcome: "the poor lady".

The second thing that bothers me is the injustice associated with the simple reality of being born a female. Civilisation is incapable of compensating this natural handicap. Males enjoy quasi-immunity and dispose of a large margin of freedom to abuse females sexually or otherwise at their discretion.

When it comes down to the word of one against the word of the other, the match is over and the male is declared innocent. The automatic inference is that the female lied. The roles are inversed. The female is the aggressor and the male is the victim.

This result is quasi-systematic to such an extent that it simply cannot correspond to reality. This means that, in cases of this nature, justice fails quasi-systematically in its mission. The system is out of gear and headed in the wrong direction.

For that reason, I consider that justice has lost all credibility in such cases. Its decisions are irrelevent to the truth. A mountain of probabilty is stacked up against it.

.