Is the Head of the IMF a Sex Criminal?

You had just publish a link where the woman name and picture are given.

How dare you treat the woman in a similar manner that the man is treated?

Nope. No name - no photo on that link.

Slate.fr had such on their site.

I'm finding it so hard to believe that even our two morons are trying to supply explanations, justifications, and excuses for someone who has been accused and arrested of a violent crime against another person.

What if the maid had been a male? Would they have gone off on this tangent?

I'm operating on the premise that the DA had justification for an arrest. The woman was probably advised to get a lawyer (only speaks some English) because a) she'd need one, and b) she's going to be put through the mill. Likely the police advised her, but who knows? Each side is allowed representation, so why not her? I'm talking to the morons here.

FF I know rape isn't generally accepted in France, but given the stories abounding earlier about Chirac and this dude and the general tone of acceptance of the criminal activities of the higher ups in France, it's a different issue than for the masses.

The problem for the morons is that they have no idea what it's like to be victimized, so they make things up about male victimization (look at any of Hawk's posts, for example). What it's really like is horrifying and it takes a long time for some to recover. You never completely trust again. That's a lasting damage for many that affects the rest of their lives. THe fact that it's POSSIBLE this maid is telling the truth has never once entered into the morons' brains, and I find that really, really sad. Can they not imagine how she's feeling, how her life is upset and in turmoil, how awful it must be for her - IF IT'S TRUE? Or does she not matter at all?

We don't know the true story - but the police and DA's office have information which have led to him being arrested and denied bail. That's something, is it not? Do the morons not even trust their own justice system?

If they thought her story was weak or had holes, I'm sure there wouldn't have been arrest.

As usual, though, they victimize the victim, and fail to see the error of their ways.

Q: Why is it the defense went from DENIAL to now it was CONSENSUAL sex? Why not continue to deny? Obviously there is evidence!

You are both very sad creatures.

we can have full confidence that she will be made whole, we love our victims. It is the fairness to DSK which is in major doubt, so that is where I choose to focus my attention.

Your posts only serves to highlight some of the points that Bill and Hawkeye have raised, Mame.

As it is with many laws, the pendulum has swung too far. And don't think that I say this because I lack feeling for anyone who has to suffer through any kind of assault upon their person.

Your posts have indicated a "hate" for this man that makes it seem you care not at all for innocent until proven guilty.

If he's found guilty, so be it. It would be nice if that could happen without any victim ever having to suffer through any more trauma, but that's just not the way it works.

I don't 'hate' him - I SAID I was operating on the PREMISE that he did it. Why is that? Because I can't find a reason why a woman unknownst to him who was just doing her job would claim such a violent act had occurred, and because the DA has arrested him, AND because what's ahead of her, in court, is AWFUL. What the hell is in it for her? Nothing! Pain, anguish, being called a liar, hiding from the press, not working, having to dredge the whole thing up time and time again, lost reputation perhaps... nothing good. So for her to accuse him, she had to be telling the truth - who in the world would put themselves through that otherwise? Look at the women in France who are now coming forward - they are educated, employed professionals and THEY didn't accuse him because they know it would go nowhere. She is an 'uneducated' immigrant who is supporting a daughter by herself. She'd have to be NUTS to claim this if it didn't happen, and it doesn't appear (as yet) that she has a history of this.

Plus, the police and DA don't take these claims lightly and don't arrest on little evidence, so, that is also why I'm leaning to her telling the truth.

And IF she's telling the truth, then it is a horrible and violent invasion of her self.

And that's despicable. Are we clear now?

You are so fucked. Up.

Can't find anyone to claim that Nafissatou Diallo, known at Sofitel as "Ophelia" (it's in the public domain now, her Bronx block is overrun with satellite trucks) is lying. Instead, the French left press seems incensed at the fact Strauss-Kahn's lawyers called her "butt-ugly" and now they're calling the lawyers "racists". In this whole 5-ring circus the small matter of the Greek debt default has been set aside - though not by the CDS holders, expected to file suit soon

http://lemotjuste.blogs.nouvelobs.com/archive/2011/05/17/affaire-dsk-voici-nafissatou-diallo.html

Diallo, a famous name in New York police history, if I remember.

I have a bias I'll admit to re this case, but I'll wait and see.

As a summer student I worked in a New York hotel. You wouldn't believe the number of businessmen bringing black girls up to their suites. 70% of girls were black. So you can see many black children with white features as a result.

My co-worker was a black and he said "Hmm, them white folks like black meat!"

Oh. Gee. Really?

I think I resent the assumptions going on there whereas it may have to do with the numbers re prostitutes.. which has nada to do with this case as far as we know. Or maybe I don't resent it completely and you are partly right re who prefers whom for hotel sex. Seems pretty irrelevant in this guy's case, re his seeming history, kind of pan-women's universe.

A white family member married a black woman because he loved her; nothing to do with "meat".


Anyway, my reference to Diallo and the NYC police -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo_shooting

Yup. He used to take them up and I did take quite a few up. He was a lucky guy. He told me when walking look down at the street. While on break with me he picked up a few hundred bucks, hundred dollar bills from the street.

No kidding?

You know guys say things to each other that women find offensive. It was not meant for women to read.

I followed his advice and found once a $10 bill being blown about by the breeze. I ran after it and giot it. It is not safe as you might bump into people and cars could knock you down.

Then why do you post it on a website with many women, on a thread with many women, of many heritages?

Not everyone is down with the PC ideology that one person claiming to be offended by what is said means that the speaker needs to shut up.....I often hear the holier than though set proclaiming "arn't we so advanced and civilized, as we dont say things that offends others anymore!!"

Well ya, but this also means that we have a very difficult time speaking about truth now. Stick THAT in your cost/benefit analysis and run it.