Is the Head of the IMF a Sex Criminal?

@JTT,

Quote:

Are you packing now to start your new job at the Sofitel or whatever the name is?

I doubt it. hawk hasn't the proper accreditations.

0 Replies

@engineer,

Quote:

I'm not sure what the point of her pay is? Are you saying she had such a good job that she would never risk it by falsifying a rape charge?

No. That isn't what I am suggesting.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

but it also could mean that she is lying and she knows that if she screws up she will have the state on her ass so she has a lawyer for this as a prophylactic.

You know that they hardly ever punish a woman for lying about rape at least in the US.

British for one seem slightly better in that regard.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

as I recall their take was that he is a silly, lonely old man.

Which is most unlikely. I think they were more worried about French cuisine and other Gallic institutions.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

the numerous war crimes and terrorist actions of the US government

Gee, I didn't think you would manage to fit that into the topic...still, you tried to not be compulsive/obsessive for a little while . Congratulations . Now try to be normal for a little longer before your next fit .

0 Replies

@panzade,

Quote:

To listen to the French you would think their system of justice was a model of defendants' rights

Some provinces of France (perhaps all ?) have the defendant guilty as soon as they are charged . They then have to prove their innocence before a panel of three judges .

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

Some provinces of France (perhaps all ?) have the defendant guilty as soon as they are charged . They then have to prove their innocence before a panel of three judges .

An in the US if you are accused of rape you seem to be guilty unless you can prove you are innocent and even then a question mark is going to follow you for life.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

An in the US if you are accused of rape you seem to be guilty unless you can prove you are innocent and even then a question mark is going to follow you for life

And if the court rules against you you have to go on a sex offenders registry and check in with the police and have the police advertise you name address and guilty status far and wide this making the rest of your life very difficult/impossible to conduct........do the French do that???

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

to go on a sex offenders registry and check in with the police and have the police advertise you name address and guilty status far and wide this making the rest of your life very difficult/impossible to conduct........do the French do that???

I think I took you that the local politicians in my area had set a 2500 feet limit from schools and parks and a numbers of others locations where anyone on the sexual register can not live.

The crazy results was that we ended up with a large tent community under a bridge/overpass as that was the only location such people could live that met this 2500 feet rule.

In day when kids was out and around these people could be anywhere but a night when the kids are in their parents home back under the bridge they need to go.

People then wonder why such people stop reporting and did their best to disappear off the radar screen. All attempts to bring reason to this matter had been turn away.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Two NYC cops was on trial for rape and Firefly made a brief comment about it on this thread and in my readings I came across the information that they was just found innocent

They were not found "innocent"--the verdict on the rape charge was not guilty. When someone is "innocent" it means they have been completely exonerated of the charges--they could not have possibly done the crime.. That is not the same as being found "not guilty" at trial. These two will have a cloud of suspicion remaining over their heads because everything they did that night was very questionable.

I really did not follow the trial closely but I do know there was no DNA evidence and the woman involved had a very spotty memory because she was extremely intoxicated when this all took place. The jury deliberated for 7 days and apparently they were not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt regarding the rape. They found the accuser credible, but the lack of hard evidence was what made for reasonable doubt. The verdict was very controversial and I heard that the judge was shaking his head when he announced the verdict. But, if the jurors had reasonable doubts, they returned the correct verdict.

The two officers were found guilty of departmental misconduct and they could go to jail for up to two years on those charges. As soon as the verdict came in, the police commissioner announced they would be fired from the NYPD and they will lose their pensions.

The woman involved has a $57 million civil suit against the City and the two police officers. The standard of proof is lower in a civil case than a criminal case. and she might win a sexual assault verdict in the civil case. The City prosecutors in the criminal case did believe the woman was raped, so the City is in a somewhat awkward position, although their lawyers will defend against the suit. They may settle with her, but for a much lower payout than she is asking for. So, it's not over yet.

A group of protesters gathered on the steps of City Hall today to protest the verdict. They said they will be offering support to the hotel maid in the DSK case.

3 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Her station in life is way above what the victim culture promoters claim that it was, she was not in a position to be easily exploited by a guest at the hotel.

I believe she is considered a victim, or an alleged victim, because she reported she was the victim of a crime.
I haven't heard any sob stories about her barely scratching out a living. But it does sound like she had a good job she wouldn't want to lose.

I think the issue in the case has nothing to do with her being "easily exploited" by a guest at the hotel. The issue, and the only issue, in the DSK case is whether she was sexually assaulted by a certain guest at the hotel.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

A group of protesters gathered on the steps of City Hall today to protest the verdict. They said they will be offering support to the hotel maid in the DSK case

That is a very liberal definition of "group" , Judging by the video there were not even two dozen protesters. Come to think of it, the protests that the French Feminists claimed that the NYC feminists were trying to organize the bring attention and sympathy to the alleged victim of DSk has not happened so far as I can see. Maybe the women of NYC have enough doubt about this maids claims to stand on the sidelines for now.

http://manhattan.ny1.com/content/top_stories/139914/activists-gather-to-condemn-nypd-rape-trial-verdict

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Some provinces of France (perhaps all ?) have the defendant guilty as soon as they are charged . They then have to prove their innocence before a panel of three judges .

I believe you might be right about that

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Maybe the women of NYC have enough doubt about this maids claims to stand on the sidelines for now.

They may have no questions about the maid's credibility. But there also is no reason to hold a demonstration for her right now. Why should they demonstrate only for her--women are, unfortunately, sexually assaulted in NYC all the time. If the defense team starts trying to smear her in the media, even before the trial starts--and they were already hinting at doing that yesterday--then she might start getting public support, not just from women's groups, but from a lot of other sources as well.

I don't blame Tristane Banon for not wanting to get involved in DSK's trial in NYC--and the reason she probably backed off filing charges against him now in France is to make sure she stayed out of the situation in NYC. DSK's defense team is going to try to destroy the hotel maid, any way they can, and they would do the same to Tristane Banon if the D.A. tried to use her in the NYC case. That's what makes women fearful about reporting sexual assaults.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

If the defense team starts trying to smear her in the media, even before the trial starts--and they were already hinting at doing that yesterday--then she might start getting public support, not just from women's groups, but from a lot of other sources as well.

The state has already been smearing DSK, so fair is fair. Actually, what defense was doing is taking a shot across the states bow, they said that if the State does not knock off leaking evidence to the press then they are going to take down the maid in the press. DSK's boys are playing hardball, as most everyone expect them to do. Given how outragous the states behavior has been till now I would call the defense moves to date restrained.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

The state has already been smearing DSK, so fair is fair.

They haven't been trying to smear him. They aren't saying anything about him to the press regarding his character.

The police have apparently been the source of leaks--about his DNA being found on the maid's shirt, and things like that. That's not really a smear. If it is true, it is only a leak about the evidence they have, and that info would come out anyway. The police could do that sort of thing to make themselves look good--see, we were right to arrest him before he skipped town--rather than to make DSK look bad. Simply the fact they arrested him makes him look bad.

The D.A. should tell the cops to knock it off, if they are the ones doing it. People should wait for the trial, and neither side in this case should do leaking just to feed the media appetite.

2 Replies

@firefly,

The DA told the cops to knock it off today.

"Firstly, on the leak front, the D.A says they strongly discourage law enforcement from passing on information to third parties, and certainly don't endorse any public statements. And they passed that message on to offices besides their own.

Secondly, they were "troubled" that DSK's lawyers were, in their opinion, being kind of hypocritical about the whole leak thing:

We were troubled that you chose to inject into he public record your claim that you possess information that might negatively impact the case and "gravely" undermine the credibility of the victim.

We are aware of no such information. To reiterate what we have told you orally, if there is anything you would like us to investigate regarding any aspect of this case, please bring it to our attention and we will gladly do so.

If you really do possess the kind of information you suggest that you do, we will trust you will forward it immediately to the District Attorney's Office."

I think DSK's lawyers are playing a dangerous game.

3 Replies

@panzade,

Quote:

I think DSK's lawyers are playing a dangerous game.

DSK's lawyer, Benjamin Branfman is well known for doing this sort of thing.

This is from an old piece on Branfman that was in New York magazine at least 15 years ago.

Quote:

His detractors see a darker side, accusing Brafman of using underhanded, albeit legal, courtroom tactics to win, and cynically manipulating the press with carefully orchestrated leaks. It’s fair to say that Perry Mason had a gentler style. But Brafman is effective, even if he doesn’t always play by Marquess of Queensbury rules. So fearsome is his reputation that critics, talking on the phone, sound a lot like Brafman’s Mafia clients fearing a wiretap. “I could trash him,” sniffs one antagonist, “but I’d rather take the high road.”...

Brafman is using bare-knuckle tactics to win this case. In a June affidavit, he inserted a footnote claiming that Kirkham alleged “a tale of a rather extraordinary personal relationship with one of the members of the Gatien-prosecution team.” Having planted this gem, at least in part for the benefit of the tabloids, Brafman went on to note piously that “because of the sensitive nature of this specific allegation, counsel does not detail that information at this time, as we have not been able to corroborate that allegation and do not wish to damage anyone’s reputation.” (The Village Voice reports that a recent Justice Department inquiry found the charges baseless.)

Apart from the legal maneuvering, the case has been played out in the press so acrimoniously and intensely that Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Friedberg took the unusual step of demanding a gag order against Brafman. Declining an interview request, Friedberg referred New York to the legal papers he filed, in which his rage is evident on every page. He charges Brafman with making “improper,” “inflammatory,” and “scurrilous” remarks to reporters in order to taint the jury and damage the credibility of witnesses. Federal District Court judge Frederic Block instructed both lawyers to stop talking to the press. The normally loquacious Brafman -- well acquainted with the court of public opinion -- is now watching his tongue. “High-profile cases like Gatien and Abdela bring extra pressure, because everything is in the public eye,” he says. “If you make a mistake and the world press is watching, it’s a bigger mistake.”
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/crimelaw/features/1984/

So, I think we can probably expect more of the same.

1 Reply

@panzade,

Quote:

The DA told the cops to knock it off today.

So the DA starts making the right noises after the defense threatens them......sounds to me like a win for the defense.

0 Replies

@panzade,

Quote:

I think DSK's lawyers are playing a dangerous game.

DSK is unfit and 62 years old and is looking at a lot a years if he loses. I'd say he has to go for the win here, 15 years in the pen might as well be 30. He needs a not guilty on the three main charges for sure.

1 Reply

Is the Head of the IMF a Sex Criminal?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know