Is the Head of the IMF a Sex Criminal?

I'm sure she cares about money in order to be able to survive and provide for herself and her child. That doesn't mean she thinks in terms of gaining millions from what happened to her, or that money ever crossed her mind when she reported her assault to the police. And, at trial, she would be expected to give that same version of events to the jury that she initially gave to the police and D.A. and the grand jury.

The "financial advantages" of her potential testimony at trial rest primarily in the credibility of her account--the more credible she is, and would sound to a jury, the more it's worth to DSK to pay her off, and shut her up, so they'll be no trial.

Being willing to work hard to get ahead is not the same as willing to make a false allegation against someone with the hope of extorting money. Given your legitimate claim that DSK's womanizing does not imply he is a rapist, I'm surprised you would flip and make such an insinuation.

Once more it is in her and her lawyers best interest is to have the matter settle before a criminal trial as for the five hundreds time a US civil suit judgment is likely to gain her nothing at all.

Her only real hope of winning the lottery is to settle with him and then go away.

You're assuming that "winning the lottery" is what she really wants and values most. That might, or might not, be what she wants. She might want to see DSK go to prison for what she alleges he did to her.

She can collect some money from a civil suit filed after the criminal case. She could also make money from book deals, movie deals, etc. If she helps to put DSK behind bars, many would regard her as a heroine.

That is not what I was saying, I was confronting Firefly's notion that she has placed several places that this woman's history makes it unlikely that she would be motivated by money in this situation. Not only do we not know this, but her history indicated to me the exact opposite, that this is a woman who will do what ever it takes to get ahead wealth wise. Maybe this includes tricking DSK, maybe not, but I do not see a woman who is as clear as the driven snow here.....she is most certainly not a woman who should be automatically assumed to be telling the truth. Lets see what her documents say re persecution in her homeland, see if she was honest about that as a start. But dont tell me that because she works hard then she must be honest, the bosses on Wall Street routinely work 60 or more hours a week, and they are some of the biggest crooks ever seen.

Yes, I am sure that she would throw a future for her and her child of luxury away in order to see DSK maybe be found guilty and serve some years behind bars or maybe not.

That does not sound like the actions or thinking of a survivor who had climbed out of a hell hole to give herself and her son a future but more of the type of fantasy of a comfortably off middle class woman like yourself.

Given the lawyers she had surrounded herself with there is no indication that your fantasy of her wishing revenge first is at all likely to say the least.

No, actually it doesn't. Even if her story is completely true, would you really expect her to walk away from a substantial sum of money? Even if she would have to put up with people saying she made it all up and it was just an extortion plot? If one of her goals was that DSK would never be free to assault another woman, doesn't she already have that? If DSK did it but buys her off, every woman he ever meets will be on guard and he will know that next time, he could easily go to jail. She gets very little from a guilty verdict, but a well managed seven figure settlement gets her daughter a college degree, a decent home, a better life. It's hard to see her turning down a lot of money if it comes her way. I've always been amazed when a star athlete is told to play his senior year instead of going pro when just the signing bonus for going pro makes him set for life and an injury in college means he gets nothing. I don't believe the charges against DSK are financially motivated and I'll be sad if it happens, but DSK clearly has the resources to buy this woman off.

He claims he wants a trial, which I hope is true, and she would ruin her book and movie deals of she takes a payoff and does not work for the state, so she has no incentive to take one unless she has credibility problems and thus a straight acquittal is likely. The maid does not need the state to get convictions on any of the top charges to come out of the criminal trial golden, all she needs is something to go through...if she gets that she is sitting good for the civil suit against the hotel and DSK, and she is fine for her book and movie deals.

Her history indicates a young woman who has worked hard to better her overall life circumstances, seemingly without a lot of support from others. That doesn't mean she will do "what ever it takes to get ahead wealth wise"--it means she has had the courage and emotional stamina to move herself from one part of the world to another, and, without much in the way of resources or education, slowly move her way out of poverty by working hard at menial jobs. That's a typical immigrant story, but, for a single young mother, it's an even harder path to follow. And, given her background, and what little we know of her more recent simple life-style, the idea that she was motivated toward "wealth" seems almost ludicrous--she was slowly making her life safer, more secure, a little more comfortable, and her earnings from hard work helped her to do that, but that's a far cry from seeing her as a "wealth seeker".

Why not? There is absolutely nothing to suggest that this woman is dishonest, or devious, or even very sophisticated. She seems to have been a simple, hard working, immigrant single mother who doesn't even seem to have had much of a social life. I can easily believe that she didn't know who the hell DSK was when she unexpectedly encountered him naked in that hotel suite. Why would you assume she's not telling the truth? Why do you find it so hard to believe that he might have sexually assaulted her? He was apparently so aggressive that even high priced call girls didn't want to do business with him. He's the one with the dubious reputation when it comes to women.

Sorry but first of all no sane man is going to wish to take a chance even a fairly small chance of ending up in prison for the rest of his life when he can just pay the woman off to go away.

DSK had no reason to think highly of the US/New York justice system to say the least that he would be willing to take such a chance and as Firefly had already stated a not guilty verdict would not clear his name.

Second movies deals or whatever else you think she might be able to sign is not going to come near the three millions plus settlement she is likely to be able to tap DSK wife for and a US civil judgment is likely to be totally or nearly totally worthless.

Sorry but there is not at all likely to be a trial over this matter just another very successful example of state aided blackmail.

.

This simple woman had three lawyers in a matter of days working for her!!!!!

DSK was a star in that hotel that they was proud to have staying with them many times in the past so the idea that a member of the staff would not have a clue of who he was is not at all likely to me.

Second comment, if you groundless postings that he had some history of bad conduct in that hotel have any truth behind them there is no question if her work place is in anyway similar to every other work place in the world that she would not had have that information.

In any case there is hardly any indication she was simple minded enough after all to not to be aware of her surroundings.

and now she has a couple of cracker jack civil lawyers working for her, one of which has as a specialty go after employers for cash. I would not be surprised if they wait till the end of the one year statute of limitations to file their civil suits, but they for damn sure will if they dont get the price they want before then.

WTF do you call getting entry into the USA legally? And how did she get her very cushy union job? Nobody knows how she snagged the job, but I am sure DSK lawyers have looked into it....being a strong young pretty woman who speaks French well may be all that there is to that, but maybe not.

Other than that she is a woman, and that the grounds for her entry into the USA is very murky you mean....

high priced call girls are not street walkers who take anyone who pays, they are I am sure much more choosy about who they have sex with than you have ever had the luxury of being. Dont think that I did not notice that you dont think too highly of high priced call girls, which is no doubt you looking down your nose at all sex workers....because you hate sex of course.

I think many people might choose to forgo a substantial amount of money if it meant that people--and, in this case, people all over the world--might forever regard them as a liar or schemer who deliberately destroyed the illustrious career of an innocent man by ensnaring him in a sexual trap.

The prospect of a substantial sum of money certainly has its real temptations, but it might also involve some compromises that carry a high price of their own. Not everyone would opt for the money under those circumstances.

I think this woman has the potential to gain financially, and legitimately, from this ordeal even if she refuses a pre-trial civil settlement and testifies against DSK. Her entire life story, including what she is going through right now, can be worth a lot of money--millions-- in book and movie rights and paid interviews--and, I could see someone like Oprah Winfrey helping this woman out in that regard. But all of that would likely hinge on this woman maintaining her credibility, and having the courage to go through with a trial, rather than accept a settlement.

While DSK has the resources to offer her a pre-trial civil settlement, such an arrangement might not even be legally possible to pull off in this particular situation. Unlike the Kobe Bryant case, this one involves a man who had considerable power and influence on the world stage, and a D.A. who set off international shock waves in giving the go-head to make an arrest. And issues of consent or force appear considerably less muddled in this case than they were with Bryant. Cyrus Vance, Jr. wants this to end with a conviction and not with a settlement that would have his main witness refusing to testify at trial. I would think he would pursue any and all "obstruction of justice" issues very aggressively--this is a high stakes situation, for all of the attorneys on all three sides, but Vance has a definite high stake in at least trying to get a conviction, and he's going to fight hard. very hard, to avoid having the rug pulled out from under him prior to trial.

What might be worked out, is some sort of combined plea deal/settlement arrangement, that might leave all sides feeling they had gained something. If DSK's lawyers can work out a sweetheart plea deal, with minimal or no jail time, along with a public apology to the woman, and the complainant can be gotten to agree with the deal, and she then simultaneously files a civil suit which is immediately settled, all parties would have obtained some benefit. Vance can claim he spared taxpayers a huge amount of money with a plea rather than a trial, DSK would avoid the possibility of a long prison sentence, and the maid could feel her credibility is intact and she has been compensated for damages done to her. Even without a civil settlement, the maid might agree to a plea deal just to spare herself the ordeal of going through a trial where she is likely to be aggressively and gruelingly cross-examined for several days. She can then file a civil suit, and, even if her pay-out is less, she would likely see some money, and she could still stand to easily make millions from book and movie deals in which she would be free to tell her side of the story.

There are a lot of "ifs" and a lot of lawyers involved. And it's not just money, but people's lives and reputations that are on the line. And there are laws about "obstruction of justice". It remains to be seen how it will all play out.

I

You live in an interesting fantasy world indeed.

The likelihood is near to hundred percents that the two parties lawyers are already deep into settlement talks.

This will end up in the Guinness book of world records as the most expense blow job in human history.

I would love to know how this matter had impacted the Sofitel hotel bookings as if I was a high profile male you could not paid me enough to risk staying at that hotel.

I would in fact be wondering in staying in any New York hotel when another hotel staffer would decide to go for a lottery win at my expense and that go double for the Sofitel hotel.

The panic buttons should be issue to male guests so if they come out of a shower and find a maid in their room they could press it.

I said that there is absolutely nothing to suggest that this woman is dishonest, or devious. and you replied...

which really says it all, Hawkeye, in terms of how you feel about women, and apparently your paranoia in that regard prevents you from viewing any woman with anything approaching objectivity.

There was nothing "murky" about it. She apparently entered the U.S. on a work visa, and she was then granted asylum to remain here, which may be the case for many people from Guinea. I'm not sure you have any right to know exactly why she was granted lawful asylum, it has nothing to do with whether she was a crime victim in NYC--don't you believe that people have any right to privacy? She is legally in the United States.

Probably the way most people get their jobs--she probably had good references from her previous employer, and presented herself well during the interview. And she's held her job for three years with no complaints about her work. So, how she "snagged" it is rather beside the point.

Sorry, I am quite choosy, so speak for yourself. But, when not just women in his own social circle, but high priced call girls as well, describe DSK in distasteful terms, as behaving like "an animal" or a "rutting Chimpanzee", they are not talking about a man who is at all appealing, or who has any regard for the woman involved, but rather one who is hell bent on only gratifying his own needs in a rather aggressive manner. And those sorts of descriptions are quite compatible with someone who would commit sexual assaults.

When have I made negative comments about high priced call girls, or any sex workers? I think what they do should be legalized--so they can be better protected--I have no negative feelings about them. And, not only do I not hate sex, but, unlike you, I am fully able to distinguish highly pleasurable consenting sexual contacts from sexual assaults forced on unwilling individuals.

And, whenever you sink to the level of personal insults, it's a sure sign you have nothing cogent to say on the topic. DSK has an awful reputation with women, the alleged "great seducer" seems to be better known for crude, unwanted, forceful attempts at sexual conquest, and not much else to recommend him in the sack. The maid may have given the police a highly credible, and truthful, account of how he acts with a strange woman when he thinks no one is watching or will find out--and it may add up to criminal sexual assault in the first degree.

Yes placing his penis by force into the teeth full mouth of a random woman he just happen to find in his room is a credible account on it face!!!!!!!!!

He is charged only with forcing his penis to make contact with her mouth, by physically pushing her head. All his penis had to do was touch her lips for this charge to hold up. You have no idea what occurred beyond that. You are assuming, but you really don't know because you haven't heard her account.

And the 85 year old woman who was sexually assaulted on a Manhattan street about a month ago was also forced into oral sex. No one questioned her credibility or suggested it wasn't possible to force a woman to do such a thing. And they arrested the man and charged him with the same felonious sexual assault that DSK is charged with.

Terror, or extreme fear, can make a person submit to a lot of things, particularly if physical force is involved. Forced oral/genital contact isn't all that unusual in sexual assaults.

spendius wrote:



To which you replied--



Hardly. Why is there all this interest in this case when there are many other alleged, and actual, incidents like it. Many of them more serious? It is the seniority of the accused that has provided the opportunity for an indignation festival for the benefit of the "purity for men" brigade, the anti-Europe faction, the anti-semitic persuasion, the anti-authority gang and the joyous riders on the vicarious sexual stimulation roundabout. Plus the bounty hunters of varying degrees of subtlety.

Now--the levee is built to control a natural and impending force. As is the heavily guarded building. So also the traffic control mechanisms. They imply an anxiety concerning natural forces.

The more draconian the measures the more anxiety there must be concerning the dangerousness of the force.

The implication of this case cannot but be a perceived danger to women coming from the bestiality of men. The legal measures taken to control this natural force are such, as this case is proving, that there is an implied assumption that it is only fear of the law which prevents sexual assualts from being endemic.

Somebody once suggested that if the homicide laws were suspended for a week half the population would get knocked off. It's a silly exaggeration I agree but it makes an important point forcefully. It leaves anti-authoritarians standing on air. They control what is assumed a natural force in themselves by fear of the law. Which is neurotic. Neurotic cannot be defined by its symptoms but only by its causes. The artificial restraint of natural impulses as Freud explained. A cause of serious illness.

So the hyperbole being brought to bear on this high profile case is bound to be creating anxiety in women. And it is false. Men are not sex beasts at all. And anxiety causes serious illness too. ff did not respond to my question on that score. As hawk said, anxiety, neurosis and illness render people easier to control. The creation of those things is the control freak's heaven.

And who benefits from the creation of anxiety and neurosis? They are all on view here. But men are the natural and evolved protectors of women and their children. Even the cave paintings demonstrate that. "Women and children first" is the cry in a rescue operation. Men are expendable.

The portenous, serious and dramatic images being conjured into existence, often acted out, in this case, which is trivial in the scheme of things even if the worst is true, serve to remind women, especially young women, that men are a constant threat to their well being and only the vigilance of the officers of the law and large expenditures of resources stands between them and utter degredation. They can then spend the rest of their lives, after being sold this utterly unreal idea, contradicted thousands, nay, millions, of times every day by men in all walks of life, looking over their shoulders in nervous apprehension at every man who crosses their path and being startled by even the shadow of one. Which produces an effect which renders them into a vague state of uncertain nervous anxiety which tends to make them serious, scolding, nagging, bad-tempered, bitter, hypochondriacal and very, very effing tedious. For which joyous states the indignation merchants have a vast range of cures and palliatives ready to hand at barely affordable prices.

Speeding on the roads, which mangles, burns and maims thousands every single year, including children, is actually encouraged by the very organs which are parading their supposed indignation at DSK and is regularly disposed of by the issue of a "ticket". Their general adverising, and the copy wtitten to lend a hand in gratitude, is a factor to be reckoned with in the gross over-production of pollution which some say will boil us all in oil at some point.

This is not about DSK or the cleaning woman. It is about anxiety production for the benefit of those professional classes who specialise in alleviating the symptoms but, heaven forfend actually curing, it. Those who produce the actual wealth which facilitates their unending and complex machinations are never even considered.

But it is just here that my argument runs into trouble. What do I say if asked what unemployment would be without anxiety production and the industries designed to control it. If Goethe was right that people cannot sit quietly in their rooms I am in trouble. I can squirm out of it of course but I must admit that on the observable evidence my method is somewhat fanciful and far-fetched. But it isn't logically impossible.

How can anybody take all this interest in some sort of alleged scrabbling around on the 3rd or 4th floor, down the end of the corridor, last on the right doorway, in a seedy and decadent hotel, at 45 West 44th Street, in New York City, for any other reason? It's not even a blow on a ragman's trumpet really.