9
   

Is the Head of the IMF a Sex Criminal?

 
 
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 11:24 am
@BillRM,
Quote:

Look up the case the basketball player Kobe for a fine example of how a hotel employee can become wealthy by means of a settlement on a rape charge.

That case is an excellent example of how a wealthy, well known, man can buy his way out of being tried on a criminal rape charge. He bought the woman's silence, by getting her to agree not to testify against him.

You should be aware that, in the public apology Kobe Bryant issued to the woman and her family, he admitted that, although he believed he had the woman's consent, he now understood that she did not see it that way, and he did not question her motives in lodging a complaint.

I don't doubt that Strauss-Kahn will try to buy off the hotel maid to get her not to testify at trial--and anything he would offer her would be small change for him. He wants this over with. He can't completely "clear his name", even with a trial and a not guilty verdict, because his reputation regarding women was far from unblemished prior to this incident. And, if it goes to trial, he risks up to 25 years in jail. He has every incentive to offer this woman as much as she wants to shut up and go away. He wants his criminal nightmare to end. His political career is over. He just wants out of the mess he is in. And, if he is guilty, he knows it. He might as well pay her off in a civil settlement--it's probably a lot cheaper than his legal bill would be after trial.

But you seem to regard receiving money in a civil settlement in a sexual assault case as being able to wipe away all the horror, and trauma, and humiliation, of being sexually assaulted, in this case, assaulted by a stranger. What makes you so smug that money alone removes long-lasting psychological and emotional damages and harm from a sexual assault--including the unfortunate social stigma that still goes along with being a sexual assault victim? What makes you think any woman wants to trade being sexually assaulted for a pile of dough?

All women are not whores, BillRM, even though you seem to view them that way. And even whores trade consenting sex for money--they do not want to be sexually assaulted against their will.



High Seas
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 11:28 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Easy does it.

I think she was merely referring to the easy verifability of the closing of that or any door with an electronically coded lock. Everything else could be reduced to a 'he says, she says' deadlock - precisely as she noted.

Thanks - that should be blindingly obvious to anyone not afflicted by whatever hysterical compulsion motivates Firefly's posts, unless - and since I hardly ever read her interminable screeds, this is said tentatively - she has some hard data, which she should turn over asap to Cyrus Vance Jr., Esq., Manhattan District Attorney. The "legal spokesman" of the African woman, J. Shapiro, Esq., has no brief to represent her.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 11:41 am
@firefly,
Quote:
That case is an excellent example of how a wealthy, well known, man can buy his way out of being tried on a criminal rape charge. He bought the woman's silence, by getting her to agree not to testify against him.


Strange as I see it as a wonderful example of how a woman can used our legal system to become wealthy by giving a man a choice of paying her off or taking a chance that he will get a brain death/racist jury who will convict this Black man of raping this blonde ‘victim’.

It, by both of their stories, not his idea that she follow him up to his room and it was not his idea by both of their stories that sexual actions began between them.

From that point on it is a she said he said situation and we are not all that many generations from where we just hung a black man on a word of a white woman.

Given all this he was likely being wise to had just pay her off.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:04 pm
@firefly,
The only woman Firefly who in any sane world Kobe owed even more then the million dollars plus ring he gave her was his wife.

In no sane world would a she said he said case of this nature had gone as far as an indictment as on it face there is no way to prove his guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

Wealthy men such as Copperfield and Kobe had targets on their backs.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  4  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:09 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
the imprisionment charge is bogus

No it's not. It is based on her complaint that he prevented her from leaving the room by holding onto her, physically restraining her. And, by shutting the door to the suite, he would be preventing those passing-by in the outside hall from observing what was taking place.

She's accusing him of trying to forcibly rape her and of dragging her from one room to another--all of which involve physical restraint which would have prevented her from leaving the suite, and would justify the unlawful imprisonment charge. According to her, she escaped at the first oppotunity she could do so.

It's not bogus. And unlawful imprisonment will become one of the charges a jury must decide on.

It's not all "he said/she said"--the case involves forensic evidence and witnesses. For, instance, I believe they have a male hotel employee as a witness who says he told the maid the room was unoccupied before she entered it.

You can't say any of the charges are bogus at this time--you don't know what the evidence is or what it suggests. You really will have to wait for the trial.

roger
 
  5  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:17 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
What money are you talking about? Where have you read that the alleged victim has been offered any money, either to induce her to make a complaint or to persude her to drop it?
They are not going at advertise it, but the alleged victim has certainly by now tapped into several tax supported revenue streams, some of which will dry up if she where to decide to stop cooperating with the police. For the forseeable future she will get victims assistance money and be housed by the state, if a conviction is obtained SDK will pay her victim restitution, and then she will most certainly go after civil charges and compensation. It is highly unlikely that this alleged victim will ever need to work another day in her life. University for her kid is now paid for as well.


That pretty well nails it. They wouldn't advertise it, and sure enough, nobody has heard of it. What more proof could anyone want?
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:18 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
the imprisionment charge is bogus.


That's truly not up to you to decide. You can certainly say that this is your opinion - but it's not a fact - that is why there are charges/indictments/trials - to determine the truth as much as possible.

You post your opinions as if they're facts. It is part of what causes such a negative reaction to your posts.

Then again, that may be your goal.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:19 pm
@roger,
You are the bone-driest rat I've ever known.

Win!
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:28 pm
@firefly,
Assuming the case against DSK does not fall apart from her story not matching the provable facts I foresee a similar payoff to the Kobe situation.

Her having a high profile lawyer this early in the case mean to me that she is looking for a big payday otherwise there would be no need for a lawyer nor would a lawyer be interested in a case without the hope of a payday.

Now waiting for a year or more hoping he will be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt and then suing him in civil court seem the hard and long way to reach that payday.

Now Firefly would you like to place a little bet with me that if this case does not fall apart in the next month or so we will end up with not a trial but a private settlement?

Howabout a token five dollars bet on it Firefly?
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:28 pm
Well, Strauss-Kahn is still sitting on Rikers Island--the luxury building he was supposed to stay in, as part of his bail arrangement, doesn't want him as a tenant. So, he has to work out new living arrangements for his house arrest before they can release him.
Quote:
The New York Times
May 20, 2011
Luxury Building Blocks Strauss-Kahn for House Arrest
By JOHN ELIGON

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former managing director of the International Monetary Fund, must find another place to stay when he leaves his Rikers Island jail cell because the Upper East Side building where his wife had rented an apartment will not accept him, a court official said on Friday.

Instead, Mr. Strauss-Kahn will be staying at a corporate-housing building used by the security company, Stroz Friedberg, which has been hired to guard him while he remains under 24-hour home confinement, according to the official at State Supreme Court in Manhattan. He had been expected to leave on Friday from Rikers, where he has been held after being arrested last Saturday on sexual assault charges.

But by midday, it was clear that the arrangements for the apartment — arrangements that figured in a judge’s decision to grant bail and approve his release — had fallen apart. Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s wife, Anne Sinclair, had rented two apartments in the building, the Bristol, at 210 East 65th Street, according to real estate executives, where some apartments rent for about $14,000 per month.

In the meantime, officials with the city’s Department of Correction were working to come up with a plan to take Mr. Strauss-Kahn off of Rikers Island to his ultimate destination and avoid the phalanx of media waiting outside in a caravan of vehicles.

The judge set bail at $1 million on Thursday, saying that Mr. Strauss-Kahn could leave Rikers if he stayed under 24-hour home confinement in the apartment with an armed guard posted outside — presumably to see that he stayed inside. The judge, Michael J. Obus, also ordered that Mr. Strauss-Kahn would have to wear a monitoring ankle bracelet.

Some residents of the building said they were unhappy at the prospect of having Mr. Strauss-Kahn as a neighbor.

“I think it’s an inconvenience for all of us,” said one resident, Michele Smith, who spoke outside the Bristol. “I don’t want that kind of publicity in my building.”

Another resident, Barry Schwartz, echoed the idea that the residents did not want the publicity Mr. Strauss-Kahn would bring. “He’s not a convicted felon yet,” Mr. Schwartz said, “but he’s very high profile, and it’s upsetting to tenants to have all of that.” He gestured in the direction of the throng of reporters waiting outside the building.

“They just don’t want all that,” he said of his neighbors. “They just don’t want 40,000 reporters. It could be for a movie star for all they know.”

Judge Obus had said on Thursday that if there was the “slightest problem with your compliance,” he could change the conditions of the bail or even withdraw it. It was not immediately clear what the problem with the apartment would mean for the deal he had approved.

Before the judge gave his decision, prosecutors announced that a grand jury had indicted Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who has been in protective custody on Rikers Island since Monday, on charges that he sexually assaulted a hotel housekeeper at the Sofitel New York.

The charges included several first-degree felony counts, including committing a criminal sex act, attempted rape and sexual abuse; the most serious charges carry 25-year prison terms.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn is due back in court on June 6.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers argued that the proposed bail package was comprehensive enough to allow his release from Rikers. One of his lawyers, William W. Taylor III, noted that the defense had hired a security team that would provide video monitoring, an ankle bracelet to monitor his movements and an armed guard at the entrance and exit of the building.

As part of the arrangement for release, the defense hired Stroz Friedberg, a respected investigative consulting firm that focuses primarily on computer forensics and cybercrime investigations, to handle the security measures for Mr. Strauss-Kahn. The firm provided similar monitoring for Bernard L. Madoff.

Justice Obus said he would leave it up to Stroz Friedberg to determine how many people had to stand guard at Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s apartment, how many visitors he could have and the limited circumstances under which he could leave the apartment.

The decision on Thursday was a victory for the defense, which made the unusual and risky move of filing a new application on Wednesday, before Mr. Strauss-Kahn knew whether he would be indicted. Typically, if a defendant is held without bail after appearing in Criminal Court, that person’s lawyer waits until after an indictment, when all the charges are clear, to ask for new bail.

But it spoke to the urgency with which Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers wanted him released after images circulated of him in handcuffs, looking unshaven, glum and tormented. The French have expressed dismay over those images.

Getting Mr. Strauss-Kahn released will help the defense portray an image of him on their own terms — as a clean-cut businessman. That image is at odds with the portrait that prosecutors have tried to depict...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/nyregion/strauss-kahn-still-seeking-a-home-after-he-leaves-jail.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:39 pm
@firefly,
I'm missing something here. His wife has rented not one but two apartments in this building and she can't reside there with her husband.

I suspect that she rented them in a legal fashion, you know by signing contracts and all.

I'm also missing the part, Firefly, where you expound on the inherent unfairness of it all.
BillRM
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:39 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
building he was supposed to stay in, as part of his bail arrangement, doesn't want him as a tenant. So, he has to work out new living arrangements for his house arrest before they can release him.


Maybe he could move into the public supported housing with his accusor. Drunk
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:49 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
Her having a high profile lawyer this early in the case mean to me that she is looking for a big payday otherwise there would be no need for a lawyer nor would a lawyer be interested in a case without the hope of a payday.

No, that is not necessarily true. It is unfortunate, but defense lawyers often try to destroy the reputation and character of those who lodge rape complaints against their clients. They certainly try to do it when cross-examining the complainant at trial, and they also do this in the media by planting all sorts of rumors and negative comments about her, because they are trying to influence potential jurors as well as public opinion--and this is particularly true when their client is a well known or prominent person.

The alleged victim needs a lawyer to help protect her from libel and slander before the trial even starts, and that is exactly what this woman's attorney has been trying to do in his media appearances--correct rumors that are floating around. Also, this woman is being subjected to all sorts of invasions of her privacy (i.e. whether she is HIV positive), as well as possible invasions of her child's privacy. She needs some protection against that sort of thing.

Any complainant in this woman's situation would have to be crazy not to hire a lawyer.

You really can't understand what those who lodge sexual assault complaints go through, can you, BillRM? You are so sure that all the men are innocent, and all the women are lying, that you are unable to empathize with any woman who might be telling the truth.

This working woman, who is not accused of breaking any laws, has found herself in the midst of a media firestorm she did not ask for, simply because she lodged a sexual assault complaint against a very powerful, influential, prominent, wealthy man. She needs a lawyer for her own protection.
BillRM
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:55 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
The alleged victim needs a lawyer to help protect her from libel and slander before the trial even starts, and that is exactly what this woman's attorney has been trying to do in his media appearances--correct rumors that are floating around. Also, this woman is being subjected to all sorts of invasions of her privacy (i.e. whether she is HIV positive), as well as possible invasions of her child's privacy. She needs some protection against that sort of thing.


And how is a lawyer going to offer her any protection from the world press looking at her? If any lawyer had that kind of power his service would be in very high demand indeed

Quote:
Any complainant in this woman's situation would have to be crazy not to hire a lawyer.


I never knew you could hired a lawyer on a maid salary in New York State and to act as a PR/lawyer for you.

Even most of the middle class is lock out of using a lawyer in any major manner except when there is a civil settlement in the card.

firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 12:59 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
I'm also missing the part, Firefly, where you expound on the inherent unfairness of it all.

This goes on in luxury Manhattan apartment buildings all the time. Tenants and apartment owners in those buildings do not want their lives or privacy disrupted by other occupants who attract media attention.

I think Nixon was denied an apartment in a building in Manhattan for those reasons, and show biz celebrities are denied apartments all the time.

If I lived in that building, I wouldn't want him there either. Every time Bernie Madoff walked out of his building, there were hoards of media waiting for him--but Madoff was under house arrest in his own apartment, not a place rented for that purpose. With Strauss-Kahn, the media attention is even more intense than it was for Madoff because they have international media involved.

I don't think it's unfair. The other owners and tenants in the building are entitled to their privacy--they pay enough for it.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 01:01 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
And how is a lawyer going to offer her any protection from the world press looking at her?


Bill, that is so dumb.

A lawyer, any lawyer, hell it wouldn't even take a lawyer, just a rational human being, could, with simple advice, stop you from doing all the dumb things you do just here at A2K.
firefly
 
  4  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 01:06 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
And how is a lawyer going to offer her any protection from the world press looking at her?

He can threaten, or bring, lawsuits for libel and slander. Or he can make media appearances to try to set the record straight.

You're already repeating rumors about this woman--she was raped in her native country, she is HIV positive, etc. none of which have anything to do with Strauss-Kahn's guilt or innocence regarding the charges against him. So, you of all people, should understand why she needs a lawyer.
Quote:
Even most of the middle class is lock out of using a lawyer in any major manner except when there is a civil settlement in the card.

You can use a lawyer at no cost in any civil action, they work on consignment, and that includes libel and slander cases, as well as suing someone for damages from an auto accident, which a lot of people retain lawyers to do.

Maybe this lawyer is doing it pro bono because he has compassion for the situation this woman has found herself in, and his benefit is free publicity for his services.

A civil suit might be down the road, but there are other reasons this woman needs a lawyer right now.
BillRM
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 01:11 pm
@JTT,
Well thank for the free advice that would had cost me a thousand dollars or more an hour from a lawyer

She hired a lawyer my rear end as the only way for her to do so is to have a Contingency agreement with him to act as her agent is selling her story ETC and or in suing DKS in civil court.

JTT
 
  2  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 01:17 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
She hired a lawyer my rear end as the only way for her to do so is to have a Contingency agreement with him to act as her agent is selling her story ETC and or in suing DKS in civil court.


You slander the whole idea of what it is to be American - if there's a buck to be made, go for it, Jack.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2011 01:18 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You're already repeating rumors about this woman--she was raped in her native country, she is HIV positive, etc. none of which have anything to do with Strauss-Kahn's guilt or innocence regarding the charges against him. So, you of all people, should understand why she needs a lawyer
.

No lawyer is going to slow down any of this as no lawyer for the rich and powerful had been able to do so for their clients.

You and I both know the reason he is around is the hope by her and her lawyer to be able to turn this event into a big big payday.

So why are you so fearful to be honest over this?

Oh do we have that five dollar bet that if this case does not fall apart by it own weight it will end up in a Kobe type settlement or not?


 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 05/16/2024 at 11:58:54