Take a look at this the gang rape story was not on her INS form and was make up out of the blue for the investigators and she told the story very convincingly.
With this kind of material in the puble record she and her lawyers are not going to get a dime out of DSK no matter where a civil trial might be held.
Now the interesting question is when are her lawyers going to stop throwing good money after bad in this case trying to pursue a civil case and pack their tents?
This also kind of make my point that most women can tell outright lies far more convincingly the most men can tell the truth.
Thank god she was not bright enough to keep her story straight and not changing over time.
===============================================
Disclaimer for AM benefit the thank god comment was a saying to express an emotion and I am not a believer in any god.
===============================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------
With False Tale About Gang Rape, Strauss-Kahn Case CrumblesBy JIM DWYER
Published: August 23, 2011
LinkedinDiggMySpacePermalink. For those who thought, as I did, that the best way to resolve the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case was to have a jury decide his guilt or innocence, the brief filed this week by the office of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., shows in powerful detail why that approach almost certainly would have been unethical and a fool’s errand.
.Take, for instance, the story of the gang rape that the hotel housekeeper, Nafissatou Diallo, told and retold, and that seemed to have been associated with her application for asylum.
Many people might have been inclined to write off the gang-rape tale as the sort of tactical fiction that people deploy to gain entry to the United States. Such a lie would make sense in Darwinian terms, conferring an advantage on her and her child, but seem to have little bearing on her credibility about Mr. Strauss-Kahn.
It may come as a surprise to learn that Ms. Diallo did not, in fact, tell the gang-rape lie on her asylum application.
What happened was this: Two days after the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn, Ms. Diallo was asked by prosecutors if she had been the victim of other assaults. Indeed she had been, she told them: she had been gang-raped by soldiers who invaded her home in Guinea.
Next, at a meeting two weeks later, “she offered precise and powerful details about the number and nature of her attackers and the presence of her 2-year-old daughter at the assault scene, who, she said, was pulled from her arms and thrown to the ground,” said the motion, which referred to Ms. Diallo as the complainant.
“During both interviews, she identified certain visible scars on her person, which she claimed were sustained during the attack. On both occasions, the complainant recounted the rape with great emotion and conviction: she cried, spoke hesitatingly and appeared understandably distraught, and during the first interview, even laid her head face down on her arms on a table in front of her.”
The prosecution team pressed harder. She hired a new civil lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson, who, prosecutors said, urged her to come clean. “In subsequent interviews conducted on June 8, 2011, and June 9, 2011, the complainant admitted to prosecutors that she had entirely fabricated this attack,” the prosecutors stated.
Why had she told a false tale to the very prosecutors who begged her to be honest with them?
Initially, Ms. Diallo said she had included the gang rape in her asylum application, and wanted to stick with her story.
“She also stated that at the time she told prosecutors this account, she was not under oath,” the prosecutors said.
Oh.
The investigation continued.
“When confronted with the fact that her written asylum application statement made no mention of the gang rape, she stated that she had fabricated the gang rape, as well as other details of her life in Guinea, in collaboration with an unnamed male with whom she consulted as she was preparing to seek asylum,” the court papers state. “She told prosecutors this man had given her a cassette tape that included an account of a fictional rape, which she had memorized. Ultimately, she told prosecutors she decided not to reference the rape in her written application.”
So the gang rape was not a piece of her history, not even a fictitious piece adopted for the sake of the asylum application. Whatever logic, if any, drove her to recount it to the district attorney’s staff, they could see it only as a stunning demonstration of her ability to weep over a sexual assault that had never taken place, and then to quickly pile another falsehood on top of it.
“Most significant is her ability to recount that fiction as fact with complete conviction,” the prosecutors wrote. Having been tricked by Ms. Diallo, none of the seasoned lawyers or investigators could ask a jury to convict Mr. Strauss-Kahn based on those very tools of dramatic persuasion. Her gang-rape performance, they wrote, was “fatal.”
Mr. Strauss-Kahn had been quickly arrested based on Ms. Diallo’s convincing report of a crime. In retrospect, it might have been better to slow down the proceedings, but Mr. Strauss-Kahn exercised his right to silence, so only Ms. Diallo’s version of events — and tests that showed his semen on her clothes — were available to the grand jury that indicted him.
More than most people, prosecutors and detectives know that nearly all of us dabble in tactical lying or selective truth-telling. When they’re doing their jobs right, as they did in this case, they cut through the underbrush to search for the core truth.
Sometimes, though, you just can’t get there from here.
E-mail:
[email protected]
This man doesn't seem to think at all. His judgment is nil, his consideration of consequences is nil. And, when you act that recklessly, and that impulsively, without considering consequences at all, you are being self destructive and you are responsible for the results of your actions in terms of hurting yourself. And his own actions, and his own decisions, in that hotel suite, wound up costing him his career. And ,he did this to himself, for what? A blowjob?