Head Of I.M.F. Arrested In New York And Accused Of Sexual Attack

[chuckd]

May I add my two satang into this little discussion?

1. DSK's hearing was in a State of New York court, not a Federal court. State judges are traditionally more concerned about the risk of flight from defendants than are federal judges.

2. Bernie Madoff was permitted bail, by a Federal judge, but was required to remain under house arrest wearing an electronic monitor. He is now serving time in a federal prison.

3. DSK was sitting in an airplane bound for France when he was arrested. This might further complicate his request for bail in the mind of a State judge. The judge might feel it would be easier to get him to appear if he was on Ryker's Island than if he were in the South of France.

4. France and the US have had a checkered past regarding extradition. One has only to look to the Roman Polanski case where the nation of France refused to extradite a fugitive, self confessed pedophile, to the US for sentencing and possible imprisonment.

5. It appears another case might be brought against him in his native country...

IMF head Strauss-Kahn accused of 2002 sex assault

By JAMEY KEATEN, Associated Press – Mon May 16, 6:21 pm ET

PARIS – French voters who've shrugged at politicians' infidelities for decades are suddenly grappling with something far more serious: allegations that International Monetary Fund head Dominique Strauss-Kahn engaged in a pattern of sexual assaults dating to at least 2002.

Strauss-Kahn's defenders say his self-acknowledged reputation as a womanizer made him vulnerable to a baseless smear campaign aimed at derailing the most serious threat to President Nicolas Sarkozy in national elections next year. They point out that Strauss-Kahn's accusers in France have yet to file formal complaints, let alone offer evidence.

But other commentators are wondering if the long-standing French tolerance for private sexual misadventures has allowed criminality by one of France's best-known public figures to go unpunished. Questions are being raised about what some call an "omerta" — or unofficial law of silence — in France about sexual misconduct.

Read more here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110516/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_imf_head_france

6. While certain members might feel indignant that DSK was 'paraded' before the press, it might appear to others that just another sex offender has been caught. The NYPD has strict procedures when they are transporting prisoners between cells, court rooms or hearing rooms. I imagine these procedures called for him to be handcuffed and two officers escorting him at all times. Perhaps this constitutes a 'parade' in smaller countries, but not in the US.

7. He has retained the services of the best lawyer money can buy so he may will get off, or we may find he is actually innocent and has been set up by the current French government.

Only time will tell

[SteeleJoe]

May I add my two satang into this little discussion?

1. DSK's hearing was in a State of New York court, not a Federal court. State judges are traditionally more concerned about the risk of flight from defendants than are federal judges.

2. Bernie Madoff was permitted bail, by a Federal judge, but was required to remain under house arrest wearing an electronic monitor. He is now serving time in a federal prison.

3. DSK was sitting in an airplane bound for France when he was arrested. This might further complicate his request for bail in the mind of a State judge. The judge might feel it would be easier to get him to appear if he was on Ryker's Island than if he were in the South of France.

4. France and the US have had a checkered past regarding extradition. One has only to look to the Roman Polanski case where the nation of France refused to extradite a fugitive, self confessed pedophile, to the US for sentencing and possible imprisonment.

5. It appears another case might be brought against him in his native country...

IMF head Strauss-Kahn accused of 2002 sex assault

By JAMEY KEATEN, Associated Press – Mon May 16, 6:21 pm ET

PARIS – French voters who've shrugged at politicians' infidelities for decades are suddenly grappling with something far more serious: allegations that International Monetary Fund head Dominique Strauss-Kahn engaged in a pattern of sexual assaults dating to at least 2002.

Strauss-Kahn's defenders say his self-acknowledged reputation as a womanizer made him vulnerable to a baseless smear campaign aimed at derailing the most serious threat to President Nicolas Sarkozy in national elections next year. They point out that Strauss-Kahn's accusers in France have yet to file formal complaints, let alone offer evidence.

But other commentators are wondering if the long-standing French tolerance for private sexual misadventures has allowed criminality by one of France's best-known public figures to go unpunished. Questions are being raised about what some call an "omerta" — or unofficial law of silence — in France about sexual misconduct.

Read more here: http://news.yahoo.co...imf_head_france

6. While certain members might feel indignant that DSK was 'paraded' before the press, it might appear to others that just another sex offender has been caught. The NYPD has strict procedures when they are transporting prisoners between cells, court rooms or hearing rooms. I imagine these procedures called for him to be handcuffed and two officers escorting him at all times. Perhaps this constitutes a 'parade' in smaller countries, but not in the US.

7. He has retained the services of the best lawyer money can buy so he may will get off, or we may find he is actually innocent and has been set up by the current French government.

Only time will tell

Excellent post. But are you sure it's not just a matter of the US not being civilized enough?

Oh, and not to nitpick but I think it significant to note that while he is a fugitive and almost certainly guilty of the crime for which he was convicted, Polanski is not "a self confessed pedophile". That is arguably far worse than the sleazebag he really was.

[LaoPo]

If you can't provide a post # for me, I think I'll just take your word for it and apologize rather than try and dig it up...can't be bothered at the moment.

Imagine a hi-so American ex-president, vice president or other hi-so, arrested in London, Frankfurt, Paris, Tokyo, Sydney......arrested, handcuffed and shown off as a dirty "alleged" criminal for the rest of the world.

I can't speak for the entire country but I personally would never ask that a "Hi So" from my country be above anyone's law or get special treatment (A Head of State? maybe, in some contexts) and I wouldn't take it for graneted that it has to happen.

Everybody is an alleged criminal when they are charged with a crime. That can't be helped. Nor can the worldwide interest.

But, Europe and even Asia are too civilized to "handle" such a hi-so American the same way as the NY police did to the Frenchman who's still not guilty until proven.

Wow, You're funny. "Too civilized".

Yep, clearly that's the problem -- Americans aren't civilized enough (what happened to the conspiracy? Apparently being too civilized means framing a man for rape and ruining his life and career...)

He is indeed innocent until proven otherwise. That fact isn't in contention.

Above, in blue: You don't have to apologise to me but here's the link in which I already mentioned it; it's in the last 3 or 4 paragraphs of my post.

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4428881

And, about civilized: I spoke about the treatment by the NY police; not by Americans in general.

Civilized manners are watched upon differently by the many countries of our world.

What's supposed to be civilized in one country isn't the same in another. It wouldn't be considered as chique and very civilized to handcuff a former hi-so American in a European country since there's no need to handcuff a 62 yr old man.

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

So that's just another complaint - the charges are trumped up, the justice system is (deliberately) doing things the wrong way -- because he's someone special and should be treated as such -- and the NY press is not breaking a rule that you think normally would and feel they should be?

And it seems to me that you originally conflated this silence about the victim with your claims that there was skullduggery afoot.

If I have to believe another poster the NY press is breaking the rules (if there are any rules that a victim's name is prohibited from publishing; I don't know) that's history.

LaoPo

Ah, so you should be pleased about that. (Going by your previous posts).

What's in the first amendment ?

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

I think he was just getting some practice in, before he went to Mondays meeting to rape European tax payers.

Its a total joke IMO...A champagne socialist, flying first class and staying in $3000 a night rooms at the expense of tax payers.

Only the non-haves give comments like yours.

I bet you want to be rich as well

LaoPo

[SteeleJoe]

You don't have to apologise to me but here's the link in which I already mentioned it; it's in the last 3 or 4 paragraphs of my post.

Thanks. But you've misunderstood (though in context I had thought it clear):

Scott: In the case of sexual assault (and some other crimes), the press is prohibited from giving out the name or identifying information about a victim.

Me: As I thought (and as should be). I'm still wondering why Lao Po feels it should be any different

So my question was about what the press are allowed or not allowed to reveal and why you think it shouldn't be different for this person . Not about special treatemt by law enforcement (which of course I don't agree with and have stated why several times).

But since you have pointed out that post:

And, to the one who asked why he would need a "better treatment": NO, not a better treatment but a treatment with some dignity for a mere "suspect" of grand standing

That is, by definition, better treatment.

And everyone who is arrested is a mere "suspect" until they are tried and a verdict is rendered. He is no different from anyone else in that regard. But you think he should be - becasue of his "grand standing". (I can imagine the average American reaction to his "grand standing" being a reason for better treatment would not be any different than mine - disgust).

[SteeleJoe]

So that's just another complaint - the charges are trumped up, the justice system is (deliberately) doing things the wrong way -- because he's someone special and should be treated as such -- and the NY press is not breaking a rule that you think normally would and feel they should be?

And it seems to me that you originally conflated this silence about the victim with your claims that there was skullduggery afoot.

If I have to believe another poster the NY press is breaking the rules (if there are any rules that a victim's name is prohibited from publishing; I don't know) that's history.

LaoPo

Ah, so you should be pleased about that. (Going by your previous posts).

What's in the first amendment ?

LaoPo

What are you trying to imply -- that the NY press should be allowed to investigate and report on the victim because of rthe 1st Amendment? Seriously -- you are going to pretend to be taking issue with constitutionality of such a law?

I am about to walk out the door and don't have time to check but I'm pretty sure that's not at all what your argument was before or the reason for your objection to the lack of reporting by the NY on the maid.

[LaoPo]

May I add my two satang into this little discussion?

1. DSK's hearing was in a State of New York court, not a Federal court. State judges are traditionally more concerned about the risk of flight from defendants than are federal judges.

2. Bernie Madoff was permitted bail, by a Federal judge, but was required to remain under house arrest wearing an electronic monitor. He is now serving time in a federal prison.

3. DSK was sitting in an airplane bound for France when he was arrested. This might further complicate his request for bail in the mind of a State judge. The judge might feel it would be easier to get him to appear if he was on Ryker's Island than if he were in the South of France.

4. France and the US have had a checkered past regarding extradition. One has only to look to the Roman Polanski case where the nation of France refused to extradite a fugitive, self confessed pedophile, to the US for sentencing and possible imprisonment.

5. It appears another case might be brought against him in his native country...

6. While certain members might feel indignant that DSK was 'paraded' before the press, it might appear to others that just another sex offender has been caught. The NYPD has strict procedures when they are transporting prisoners between cells, court rooms or hearing rooms. I imagine these procedures called for him to be handcuffed and two officers escorting him at all times. Perhaps this constitutes a 'parade' in smaller countries, but not in the US.

7. He has retained the services of the best lawyer money can buy so he may will get off, or we may find he is actually innocent and has been set up by the current French government.

Only time will tell

Good observations with some notes from my side.

3. His plane ticket was booked way in advance of the alleged crime next to his important scheduled meetings on Sunday with Chancellor Merkel in Berlin and Monday in Bruxelles so there was nothig suspicious with his leaving the country; next to that he was denied electronic monotoring but maybe that's only up to a Federal Judge as you said.

4. the US does not extradite their own citizens as well and in fact the US does not even allow other nations to prosecute members of their forces on other soil other than their own US..In fact the US Military reserves the right to free their soldiers -on foreign soil- if they would be arrested by a foreign nation (there are many countries where US soldiers are stationed)...

Now, could you ever imagine any other country, entering the US and try to free their soldiers, (if there would be any of course)?

You see, that's the way the US sees itselfs versus the rest of the world.

5. This lady journalist is all over the news now but did not press charges 9 years ago in 2002..and now she comes forward again?; this is, to put it mildly frowned upon in France. But this kind of behavior is not new. If people smell money and attention they jump on the wagon.

6. Paraded; yes indeed and I'm sure the NY Police has standard procedures for this kind of accusations; the point is that it is frightening that any woman can accuse any man and you and I (assuming you're a man) could be in handcuffs also within a split second and put to utter shame in front of many cameras whether you're guilty or not.

I oppose to such a scandalous parade, whether that's the system or not. In fact I think that the system is sick, meaning that women in general have such enormous powers over men and men are arrested BECAUSE a woman accuses...true or not. Frightening.

7. I agree.

LaoPo

[slapout]

The Us LEGAL system with all its warts would appear much more civilized than many, WHEN COMPARED TO OTHERS OUT THERE.

Granted the death penalty is judged as barbaric by some as are the acts that are a prerequisite to its use. This part of the system is determined by states and in some cases federal laws/penalties.

Judges are given the authority/responsibility to ensure a defendant answers, to a crime he/she is accused of and that those proceedings are carried out as per the laws which apply. Many accused are denied bail for reasons which are deemed relevant to that particular individual by that individual judge. It is worth noting that they are public figures and thus their decisions are watched closely by the public and their peers, with consequences if they are not diligent in carrying out these duties.

[Scott]

He has been treated with no more and no less dignity than any other person charged with such a crime. Persons accused of crimes are almost always handcuffed when being taken to court. During a trial they are (usually) allowed to dress appropriately and are not restrained. Such treatment is considered prejudicial to the defendant. During an arraignment, they are not.

It's not a good idea to have free hands that can grab a police officers gun.

He probably didn't shave because they don't like giving sharp objects to inmates.

He was not 'paraded' anywhere. The press is free to take pictures as long as they are in an authorized area. More secretive escorts are provided for defendants who are likely to be a target of an attempted assassination. He would still be handcuffed, but he would be wearing a bullet proof vest.

He was denied bail for very good and logical reasons by a judge. He has a reasonable chance of getting bail and probably electronic monitoring after he is arraigned. Up to this point, it seems he's been quite cooperative.

The alleged victim's identity will be protected. She can certainly come forward of her own volition, however, she would be advised not to since this could prejudice any legal proceedings.

The time line doesn't make sense. It usually doesn't in a criminal case. Unless it was a set up, she most likely wasn't looking at her watch, she most likely can't say how long she was in the room 5 minutes may seem like an hour. She probably reported the incident to her supervisors; they probably took some time to ascertain whether it was serious and then the police were called. They, no doubt, also took some time to decide whether it was a hysterical woman or a legitimate crime. The rest, as they say, is history.

[midas]

5. This lady journalist is all over the news now but did not press charges 9 years ago in 2002..and now she comes forward again?; this is, to put it mildly frowned upon in France. But this kind of behavior is not new. If people smell money and attention they jump on the wagon.

Where there is smoke ( no pun intended ) usually there is.....

Oh come on LaoPo - why are you so strenuously defending this guy ?

And it may have nothing to do with smelling money ( a very insensitive remark by you by the way ) - there is a such a thing as not being believed if you cry attempted rape.

" Novelist Tristane Banon's attorney said that after the 2002 attack she was dissuaded from filing charges by her mother, a regional councillor in Strauss-Kahn's Socialist Party.

Lawyer David Koubbi told French radio RTL on Monday that Banon did not file suit earlier due to "pressures" she faced over the alleged 2002 sexual assault, and would now because "she knows she'll be taken seriously."

Anne Mansouret, a regional Socialist official in Normandy and Banon's mother, said she had advised her daughter against filing suit against Strauss-Kahn years ago. She said she believed it was a temporary moment ( maybe it is the day of reckoning for too many temporary moments " )in which he "lost his way" — and that a lawsuit could forever stain Banon's career.

Speaking on BFM TV, Mansouret recalled telling her daughter then: "Listen, you know, if he had raped you, I wouldn't have any hesitation, but that wasn't the case. He sexually assaulted you, there wasn't any rape per se ... so until the end of your life, you're going to have on your resumé, you know, Tristane Banon is the girl who ... "

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/news/story/2011/05/16/strauss-kahn-imf.html

[Credo]

I wonder what the responses would be about the NYC police had he been given preferential treatment?

This is a 62 year old man facing a very serious charge. He has a lot to lose. He has been subjected to treatment to which he is not accustomed. Many people in his situation might be a danger to themselves. Some of this alleged mistreatment might be for his safety as well as the safety of the community (if he is indeed guilty of sexual malfeasance).

[LaoPo]

Oh come on LaoPo - why are you so strenuously defending this guy ?

Maybe read better?

If I filter opinions, articles and news from around the world they are not necessarily my own opinions, yet I wrote them down.

If you have read my posts I already said that I wouldn't know if DSK is guilty or not.

I oppose to certain systems, that's all. I thought I have a right to express my own opinion here on board, as everybody else has?

When I write that the US doesn't even allow other nations to prosecute their own US military, in case of crimes on foreign soil, I hear nothing but deafening silence.

In fact, the US reserves the right to invade another country to "rescue" or "free" it's own soldiers, whether they are found guilty of a crime or not, ...the US simply does NOT allow their military to be prosecuted on foreign soil.

But, yet, some on board here say that everybody in the US gets the same treatment....

Really ?

It seems to be that there are nations who make their own international laws; that's why the International Criminal Court is not recognized by other countries, including the USA

LaoPo

[Scott]

Military personnel fall under a different set of agreements between countries. They have, in the past, been turned over to civil authority in foreign countries. If not, they face a court martial.

US military personnel on US soil are subject to both military and civil laws.

But this isn't about the US military, which has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

[Ulysses G.]

The NY Post says that now he is claiming that he DID have sex, but that the maid "consented":

IMF chief claims consent in hotel 'attack'

By LAURA ITALIANO, JAMIE SCHRAM and KATE SHEEHY

Last Updated: 8:02 AM, May 17, 2011

Posted: 1:58 AM, May 17, 2011

France's leading presidential candidate may have pounced on a Manhattan hotel maid -- but she wanted it, his lawyer asserted in court yesterday, hinting at what could be an explosive defense.

"The evidence, we believe, will not be consistent with a forcible encounter," said Ben Brafman, the high-powered lawyer of IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, at the suspect's sensational arraignment in a packed criminal courtroom.

A source close to the defense later told The Post, "There may well have been consent."

Disturbing information also emerged about Strauss-Kahn's behavior after he left the hotel -- including his coolly having lunch with his daughter, who lives in Manhattan, at a restaurant about a half-hour after the alleged attack.

The developments came as an exhausted and humiliated-looking Strauss-Kahn -- a financial jet-setter and world politico -- was ordered held without bail by a leery Judge Melissa Jackson, who noted that he had been caught just in the nick of time at JFK Airport.

Read more: http://www.nypost.co...N#ixzz1Mbxr8rMV

[chuckd]

May I add my two satang into this little discussion?

1. DSK's hearing was in a State of New York court, not a Federal court. State judges are traditionally more concerned about the risk of flight from defendants than are federal judges.

2. Bernie Madoff was permitted bail, by a Federal judge, but was required to remain under house arrest wearing an electronic monitor. He is now serving time in a federal prison.

3. DSK was sitting in an airplane bound for France when he was arrested. This might further complicate his request for bail in the mind of a State judge. The judge might feel it would be easier to get him to appear if he was on Ryker's Island than if he were in the South of France.

4. France and the US have had a checkered past regarding extradition. One has only to look to the Roman Polanski case where the nation of France refused to extradite a fugitive, self confessed pedophile, to the US for sentencing and possible imprisonment.

5. It appears another case might be brought against him in his native country...

6. While certain members might feel indignant that DSK was 'paraded' before the press, it might appear to others that just another sex offender has been caught. The NYPD has strict procedures when they are transporting prisoners between cells, court rooms or hearing rooms. I imagine these procedures called for him to be handcuffed and two officers escorting him at all times. Perhaps this constitutes a 'parade' in smaller countries, but not in the US.

7. He has retained the services of the best lawyer money can buy so he may will get off, or we may find he is actually innocent and has been set up by the current French government.

Only time will tell

Good observations with some notes from my side.

3. His plane ticket was booked way in advance of the alleged crime next to his important scheduled meetings on Sunday with Chancellor Merkel in Berlin and Monday in Bruxelles so there was nothig suspicious with his leaving the country; next to that he was denied electronic monotoring but maybe that's only up to a Federal Judge as you said.

4. the US does not extradite their own citizens as well and in fact the US does not even allow other nations to prosecute members of their forces on other soil other than their own US..In fact the US Military reserves the right to free their soldiers -on foreign soil- if they would be arrested by a foreign nation (there are many countries where US soldiers are stationed)...

Now, could you ever imagine any other country, entering the US and try to free their soldiers, (if there would be any of course)?

You see, that's the way the US sees itselfs versus the rest of the world.

5. This lady journalist is all over the news now but did not press charges 9 years ago in 2002..and now she comes forward again?; this is, to put it mildly frowned upon in France. But this kind of behavior is not new. If people smell money and attention they jump on the wagon.

6. Paraded; yes indeed and I'm sure the NY Police has standard procedures for this kind of accusations; the point is that it is frightening that any woman can accuse any man and you and I (assuming you're a man) could be in handcuffs also within a split second and put to utter shame in front of many cameras whether you're guilty or not.

I oppose to such a scandalous parade, whether that's the system or not. In fact I think that the system is sick, meaning that women in general have such enormous powers over men and men are arrested BECAUSE a woman accuses...true or not. Frightening.

7. I agree.

LaoPo

As you might have expected, I have a response to your response.

3. Perhaps since he was already aware he had a booked seat back to France, he thought he might as well take liberties with the maid, flee the scene and the hotel would not report it due to his position in life. He could be safely on his way and the matter would be dropped. I don't know his thinking but when he made the reservation has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not he committed the crime.

4.This discussion is not about what the US does. It is about what the French government is likely to do in light of what they have done in the past. AS far as your comments about the US military are concerned, I do believe you will find instances where military members have been charged locally with crimes. It all depends on what the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) is with the country they are serving in when any alleged crimes are committed. Your last sentence is merely your further bashing the US without basis in fact.

5. Obviously you did not read the article I supplied with my post. Midas did and has answered your remark about the 'smell' of money.

6. Since this was an open hearing in a court of justice, our illustrious DSK was probably being taken from one place to another in a public building. Police requirements are going to state he must be handcuffed and escorted. He was...and he was. Simple as that. While it may have been demeaning to him, I seriously doubt the two police officers accompanying him had intentions to publicly humiliate him. Perhaps he brought this on himself? I'm sorry you oppose such a 'scandalous parade' and would suggest you never get arrested in New York so you will never have to endure the same humiliation.

7. I'm pleased as Punch you agree with this one. :jap:

[chuckd]

The NY Post says that now he is claiming that he DID have sex, but that the maid "consented":

I would not be surprised if the next thing we hear is the maid has dropped all charges and DSK is happily winging his way to France, sipping champagne.

The maid will be winging her way to her home country having just hit the New York State Lottery.

[SteeleJoe]

Oh come on LaoPo - why are you so strenuously defending this guy ?

Maybe read better?

If I filter opinions, articles and news from around the world they are not necessarily my own opinions, yet I wrote them down.

If you have read my posts I already said that I wouldn't know if DSK is guilty or not.

I oppose to certain systems, that's all. I thought I have a right to express my own opinion here on board, as everybody else has?

When I write that the US doesn't even allow other nations to prosecute their own US military, in case of crimes on foreign soil, I hear nothing but deafening silence.

In fact, the US reserves the right to invade another country to "rescue" or "free" it's own soldiers, whether they are found guilty of a crime or not, ...the US simply does NOT allow their military to be prosecuted on foreign soil.

But, yet, some on board here say that everybody in the US gets the same treatment....

Really ?

It seems to be that there are nations who make their own international laws; that's why the International Criminal Court is not recognized by other countries, including the USA

LaoPo

Man, you are all over the map! I don't think I've ever seen anyone shift their argument so much! The most recent example before this being that first you objected to the press coverage of DSK but then you object to the press not covering the maid and say that they should do so because of the 1st amendment (which by the way does not and should not allow absolute freedom of the press).

But I'll humor you for a bit more...

So you don't characterize your posts as defending him? That's quite surprising. But in any case you have repeatedly argued that he should get preferential treatment.

As for this...

When I write that the US doesn't even allow other nations to prosecute their own US military, in case of crimes on foreign soil, I hear nothing but deafening silence.

I'm not clear how this can possibly be relevant to a discussion of whether this man should get preferential treatment in this case.

Do you mean that you agree with the US policy and think all countries should do the same? Are you aware of the reasons for this policy and not think that maybe if other countries had the same situation as the US does in its projection of power, international defense treaties with allies and military presence they would do the same(whether you object to that projection of power, the treaties etc is another subject). And that if this policy applies to soldiers it should apply to everyone?

By the way, the US can and has, I believe, in some cases lifted that restriction (which I think applies to crimes committed on US bases). And as a matter of fact, I'm not too happy about the law -- and understand why other countries wouldn't like it (bit if they don't then they shouldn't sign the treaty) but I understand the reasons for it and think it may be necessary. Nonetheless, it's a seperate issue.

In fact, the US reserves the right to invade another country to "rescue" or "free" it's own soldiers, whether they are found guilty of a crime or not.

Source? Example? I can't think of any and indeed I can think of more than one occasion where US soldiers and citizens have been held -- even illegally, unlike this situation -- and there was no invasion.

But, yet, some on board here say that everybody in the US gets the same treatment....

Not sure if anyone has said that but what I've said is that everyone should get the same treatment on US soil. What the US does in regards to other countries' prosecution of US troops is, again, another issue. And by the way, US citizens accused of committing sex crimes abroad are not only expected to be tried abroad but if found guilty or if there is sufficient evdience they will often face punishment on return to the US.

As for the last bit -- I'm not going to follow you into a discussion of International Law and US compliance with it. That's ridiculously off-topic and just to absurd an example of you moving the goalposts yet again...

EDIT TO ADD:

Oops, if I'd seen Chuck's better prepared reply, mine would have been shorter. (I couldn't remember "SOFA" for the life of me, despite being ex-military!)

Edited May 17, 2011 by SteeleJoe

[Ulysses G.]

Not exactly a quality newspaper

Maybe not, but both of the stories that you mentioned are also in the New York Times.

[Scott]

Stick to the topic please. If you cannot, you will find yourself having a holiday.

One seriously off-topic post has been deleted.

[LaoPo]

Not exactly a quality newspaper

Maybe not, but both of the stories that you mentioned are also in the New York Times.

I can't find anything in the New York Times of today May 17th that confirms the New York Post's claim.

Any link?

LaoPo

[geriatrickid]

Assertions and counter claims raised by defense counsel are what a good defense counsel does. The job is to show why the charges cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt. This means raising everything and anything that can poke holes in the allegations. The prosecutor will then have to show why the counter claims are not valid.

It's going to keep the Court TV commentators busy and the accused is going to see his entire life exposed for the world to see. The IMF is going to have its personnel records requested and will most likely be called to testify. There will be a parade of rich and famous witnesses called. This is a crime that may be made to go away due to the fallout..

It will indeed be interesting to learn more about the alleged victim. If she is thin and young, the story will be more believable. If she is older and heavyset, questions will be raised as to how a short man with health issues was able to rip the clothes off such a person. The press will have a field day speculating and the lurid tales will take off.

The alleged victim is just that, a victim until such time as the charges are invalidated. She deserves some consideration as our past history shows that in many times these stories can be valid. No one believed the kids when they came forward with the stories of the abuse at religious schools. No one took the women seriously that came forward with the stories of sexual abuse in the US Peace Corps until some of the women were murdered. This is why the state is overly considerate of the allegations; because of past neglect in such cases.

[Ulysses G.]

I can't find anything in the New York Times of today May 17th that confirms the New York Post's claim.

Any link?

I said the two stories that you mentioned.

This new story seems to be breaking news, but I did hear it mentioned on CNN an hour ago. I am not sure if they quoted it from the New York Post though.

Edited May 17, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[midas]

I can't find anything in the New York Times of today May 17th that confirms the New York Post's claim.

Any link?

I said the two stories that you mentioned.

This new story seems to be breaking news, but I did hear it mentioned on CNN an hour ago. I am not sure if they quoted it from the New York Post though.

Then I am sure LaoPo wont have much regard for the UK Daily Mail

But they are saying the alleged victim's brother is now also involved in giving

supporting evidence.

And if she " consented " where does that tie in with " Police also reportedly found blood on bed sheets in the hotel suite where the assault allegedly took place and DNA samples on carpet and fabric that they removed for testing ". ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1387847/IMF-chief-Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-sex-attack-victim-told-brother-assault.html

[cdnvic]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/cartoon/editorial-cartoons-may-2011/article2006332/

[lomatopo]

Wow, what a turn of events, the defense must have realized there was sexual activity and the physical evidence would support that so now his only defense is to contend that it was consensual, time to trot out the Kobe Bryant defense. Can't wait to see how this one goes.

http://www.manhattanda.org/press-release/dominique-strauss-kahn-sexual-assault-arraignment

For Immediate ReleaseMay 16, 2011

DISTRICT ATTORNEY VANCE ANNOUNCES ARRAIGNMENT OF DOMINIQUE STRAUSS-KAHN FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT OF HOTEL EMPLOYEE

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., today announced charges against DOMINIQUE STRAUSS-KAHN, 62, for the sexual assault of a maid at the Sofitel New York hotel on West 44th Street. The defendant is charged with two counts of Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree, one count of Attempted Rape in the First Degree, one count of Sexual Abuse in the First Degree, one count of Unlawful Imprisonment in the Second Degree, one count of Forcible Touching, and one count of Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree. The top charge, Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree, is a class B violent Felony, carrying with it a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Melissa C. Jackson remanded the defendant. The next court date is May 20, 2011.

According to the criminal complaint filed by the District Attorney, STRAUSS-KAHN shut the door his hotel room, thereby preventing the victim, a member of the hotel’s cleaning staff, from leaving. He grabbed the victim’s chest without consent, attempted to remove her pantyhose, and forcibly grabbed the victim’s vaginal area. His penis made contact with the victim’s mouth twice through the use of force.

Assistant District Attorney John (Artie) McConnell is handling the prosecution of this case under the supervision of Assistant District Attorney Lisa Friel, Chief of the Sex Crimes Unit; Assistant District Attorney John Irwin, Deputy Chief of the Trial Division; and Chief Assistant District Attorney Daniel R. Alonso.

Defendant Information:

DOMINIQUE STRAUSS-KAHN, D.O.B. 4/24/1949

Charges:

Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree, a class B violent felony, two counts

Attempted Rape in the First Degree, a class C violent felony, one count

Sexual Abuse in the First Degree, a class D violent felony, one count

Unlawful Imprisonment in the Second Degree, a class A misdemeanor, one count

Forcible Touching, a class A misdemeanor, one count

Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree, a class B misdemeanor, one count

A class B violent felony is punishable by up to 25 years in prison, a class C violent felony is punishable by up to 15 years in prison, a class D violent felony is punishable by up to 7 years in prison, a class A misdemeanor is punishable by up to one year in jail, and a class B misdemeanor is punishable by up to three months in jail.

Edited May 17, 2011 by lomatopo

[midas]

Not exactly a quality newspaper

Maybe not, but both of the stories that you mentioned are also in the New York Times.

I can't find anything in the New York Times of today May 17th that confirms the New York Post's claim.

Any link?

LaoPo

As more stuff is revealed it seems DSK has not been truthful............

" Reportedly, the maid is a devout Muslim with a family, and was a well-regarded employee until then. Not exactly who you'd expect to be a "honey trap", as DSK had feared for a setup."

Consent my ar*e

http://www.businessinsider.com/imf-chief-had-sex-with-the-maid-post-2011-5

Edited May 17, 2011 by midas

[SteeleJoe]

But he has "grand standing"!

[chuckd]

I see the French are acting as one might expect. The comments by the readers are also as might be expected.

______________________________________________________

French outraged by U.S. treatment of Strauss-Kahn

By Alexandria Sage and Paul Taylor | Reuters – 1 hour 42 minutes ago

PARIS (Reuters) - French Socialist politicians voiced outrage on Tuesday at the parading of IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn handcuffed and unshaven in the United States before he has a chance to defend himself on charges of attempted rape.

Arrested on Saturday and charged with sexually assaulting a chambermaid at a luxury New York hotel, Strauss-Kahn was made by police to walk manacled in front of cameras on his way to a courthouse, and his appearance before a judge was televised.

Former Culture Minister Jack Lang described the treatment of the Socialist presidential frontrunner -- whose political career is now in tatters -- as a "lynching" that had "provoked horror and aroused disgust."

The U.S. justice system, he said, was "politicized" and the judge appeared to have been determined to "make a Frenchman pay" by denying the head of the International Monetary Fund bail even though his lawyer had offered to post a $1 million bond.

To many Americans, the handling of Strauss-Kahn reflected an egalitarian tradition that all crime suspects get the same treatment, regardless of their wealth or power.

Read more here... http://ca.news.yahoo.com/french-outraged-u-treatment-strauss-kahn-123012695.html

[SteeleJoe]

To many Americans, the handling of Strauss-Kahn reflected an egalitarian tradition that all crime suspects get the same treatment, regardless of their wealth or power.

Hmmm...what an interesting notion. Sounds familiar...