Comments on: A tale of two rape charges Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: Demetrenos Sun, 29 May 2011 20:00:47 +0000 I am certain that the cops raped the woman because they had no business being in her apartment. If she was to drunk and needed medicinal assistance they would have called 911. It’s common knowledge by the way that cops commit crimes all the time. My father was a cop and he told me that about half of them where corrupts. There is also nothing like cops solidarity and judges giving cops the green light 99% of the time. In my case the cops made forgeries in order to frame. Search google with: Turku police forgeries . But lets go back to Dominique Strauss-Kah. It is also common knowledge that the rich and wealthy can get away with anything 99% of the times but in this case not? I don’t say he did or not because I wasn’t there but everything points to a setup to frame for sex crimes. “If” the maid had his DNA over her body I do not know but even if she had this still would not be a sign for rape nor any scratches on her body since she could have made them herself but he is already condemned before any investigation started? I am certain it’s political and most likely a setup. “You are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty under a court of law”. I grow up with this. So what happen since my school days? Accusations = guilt? Reminds me of the fake rape charges towards Assagne, founder of wikileaks.

By: lhathaway Sun, 29 May 2011 14:00:37 +0000 Yet another example of the two Americas, one for the wealthy, where powerful interests move quickly, so quickly in fact that they are able to make an arrest within hours of the supposed crime, and the America without money, where crimes drag on for months without any progress.

By: Zapata Sun, 29 May 2011 11:28:09 +0000 I grant Naomi Wolf’s point that DSK is being treated differently than the usual accused rapist in NYC.

Which is right? — the treatment the police gave M&M or the treatment of DSK?

Did Naomi Wolf listen to Harriet Lessel?

“Rape is “a grossly underreported crime” in New York. Worse, she says, many victims under other circumstances believe that the criminal justice system is unresponsive to their needs and more oriented toward ensuring that the innocent are not convicted.”

Naomi Wolf seems perfectly happy to give a kid-gloves treatment to someone accused of rape. She seems perfectly happy to be unresponsive to the victim’s needs.

Naomi Wolf should know better. In these two cases the accused already have a massive power advantage. Not just that of rapist over victim but also the advantage of being a part of the power structure itself. I’m with Harriet Lessel.

Time to treat accused rapists like folks accused of other crimes. And time to remove the kid gloves when the accused culprit is someone “important.” Rebecca Solnit in yesterday’s New America Media makes that last point beautifully. I’ll close with her opening lines about the case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

“How can I tell a story we already know too well? Her name was Africa. His was France. He colonized her, exploited her, silenced her and even decades after it was supposed to have ended, still acted with a high hand in resolving her affairs in places like Côte d’Ivoire, a name she had been given because of her export products, not her own identity.

“Her name was Asia. His was Europe. Her name was silence. His was power. Her name was poverty. His was wealth. Her name was Her, but what was hers? His name was His, and he presumed everything was his, including her, and he thought he could take her without asking and without consequences. It was a very old story, though its outcome had been changing a little in recent decades. And this time around the consequences are shaking a lot of foundations, all of which clearly needed shaking.”

Stephen Voss

By: BajaArizona Thu, 26 May 2011 17:46:46 +0000 hsvkitty, no I’m not impartial. I’m not the legal system, I’m not on the jury, so I don’t need to be.

DSK somehow got his DNA all over the victim, her injuries are consistent with her story, the police only knew what flight number was because he called the front desk.

There is no conspiracy.

By: BajaArizona Thu, 26 May 2011 17:42:15 +0000 “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.”

G. Orwell

By: hsvkitty Wed, 25 May 2011 20:47:57 +0000 @ BajaArizona, as a responsible citizen I would be truthful and recuse myself as a jury member if my remarks didn’t do it for me. I am well aware of my bias and reasons for my opinions to be so. I am not shamefully ignorant, however…

I allow my impartiality to show and I also allow that he may be found innocent in a court of law should the evidence not back up the story.

Although that same jury will not be able to hear of his past offenses and attempted rapes, I have and I make my opinion based on that. His lecherous behaviour makes him deserved of my dislike and presumption of guilt.

Let the lawyers duke it out in court, where his presumption of innocence and the law that allows him that privilege will take place. In my individual court of law, he would be castrated as he laid a hand on me.

Are you one of the same lawyers of friend of the accused that would proclaim or buy his innocence or pay for his lawyer or bribe the family or the judge to ensure it?

By: BajaArizona Wed, 25 May 2011 12:46:20 +0000 “And having opinion makes debate,using
slurs is very childish,Grow up.”

No, having opinion doesn’t make debate. Having facts makes debate. Visiting Kings and Princes and other heads of state/government functionaries have diplomatic immunity. The worst we can do to a Saudi King is deport, even in the case of murder. DSK had limited diplomatic immunity, but since he wasn’t on IMF business, it didn’t apply. Obama has the power to pardon, but only after a trial and conviction. Your demand that he “would find some way of shutting it down” is rooted in ignorance. You are ignorant of the facts. That may hurt your feelings, but the facts are unchanged.

If you want your “debate” to be respected, stop making facts up in your mind and start learning how the world actually works.

By: radray Wed, 25 May 2011 11:18:48 +0000 Typical response of yours Baja.Your Treasury secretary opened the door by comments he made.Euro officials always
follow the line of no comment cant comment,because you wait
until a trial is over.Anyway if he was a King maybe of saudi
arabia or Bahrain,your government would find some way of
shutting it down.They always take care of the right OH sorry !!Wrong people.And having opinion makes debate,using
slurs is very childish,Grow up.

By: Dafydd Wed, 25 May 2011 09:50:06 +0000 Harriet Lessel: “Worse, she says, many victims under other circumstances believe that the criminal justice system is unresponsive to their needs and more oriented toward ensuring that the innocent are not convicted”

You report this without challenge.

There was once a principle “that it is better to let 99 guilty defendants walk, than to convict one innocent”.

Is this principle abandoned in general, or just for sex crimes?

By: Tue, 24 May 2011 23:03:50 +0000 I am so happy to finally see a converging view with my own opinion. And an american one. And a woman !

DSK is still under judgement and has not expressed himself, so he deserves innocence presumption: that’s the rule of the game or there’s no justice. How despicable all these lynching calls, in the supposed name of justice !

Innocent till proved guilty. That’s all

DSK is a proven womanizer. There are so far unsubstantiated rumors of quite oppressive seduction behaviors, even rape attempts. He’s certainly not my kind of person, even though I admire his political and economical skills. I would not be surprised he’s guilty of something in this NY case, though not something deserving 74 years of jail, but since i was not there, I would not ever claim anything, but his right to be judged fairly.

Regarding the political agenda of NYPD, I am too far to have good insights but i’m really surprised of their absence of doubts and their adamant reactiveness. Is Wall Street in NY, by any chance ?

(from paris)