It Was Only A Hotel Maid
- Thread starter R. Richard
- Start date
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2003
- Posts
- 33,665
What fog would that be?
Today has been a sunny day. If you mean my frequent drunk arrests, that was 35 years ago or more.
Handley_Page
Draco interdum Vincit
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2007
- Posts
- 78,287
I just thought:
It Was Only A Hotel Maid:
What do you mean - ONLY ?
[sorry folks, I'm a bit slower this week]
It Was Only A Hotel Maid:
What do you mean - ONLY ?
[sorry folks, I'm a bit slower this week]
sr71plt
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Posts
- 51,872
I think he meant the same thing you do.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
Chechens coming home to roost.
Reviewing the posts on DSK, here are some highlights. The original screamers, R Richard, Lovey, Box-liver, Superhero Freddy, TE, have gone quiet, excepting Boxy, who's waffling. Sr71's posts, generally, urged caution, and were/are the most sane.
The case is variously said, in reputable news outlets, to be 'in tatters', or 'imploding,' and DSK's bail is refunded. See recent story excerpts, below.
I'm not saying the truth is known, but it appears the accuser is lacking in credibility on this matter and much older ones,
as detailed by the *district attorney*. Elements to establish a criminal offense are lacking. I don't think it will come to trial.
In retrospect, the screamers were reacting to DSK's being rich, French, European and somewhat socialist-- so hey, why not add rape to the list.
R Richard,
It Was Only A Hotel Maid
If you're a politician with a big enough position, apparently you can convince yourself that you don't have to obey the law. This isn't the first time that the scumbag has been caught in a sexual predator situation. Those interested might follow the case to see how the scumbags let him squirm out of the situation this time. Comment?
IMF Head Strauss-Kahn Arrested for Sexual Attack
Dominique Strauss-Kahn, head of the International Monetary Fund and French presidential hopeful, was arrested in New York today over accusations of a sexual attack on his hotel room maid, the New York Times reports. The attack allegedly occurred earlier today in the Times Square hotel where Strauss-Kahn was staying.
A 32-year-old woman told authorities that she entered Strauss-Kahn’s suite at the luxury Sofitel hotel not far from Manhattan’s Times Square at about 1 p.m. Eastern time (1600 GMT) Saturday and he attacked her, Browne said. She said she had been told to clean the spacious $3000-a-night-suite suite, which she had been told was empty
===
Superhero Ralph
Wow! Every man's secret fantasy becomes his real nightmare.
I'm just glad they caught the bastard.
Unbelievable, dumb pervert allowed his lust to get the better of him. Shame on him. It's better he's found out now, then later when he's running the country.
===
Box-liver
Under no circumstances would I sink to the level of Freddie but, at the same time, I would not say there was no comparison with Clinton, as Stella did. Strauss-Kahn is vastly worse, assuming he did what he is accused of doing, which appears to be the case.
---
Yeah.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...74E38220110515
And, hopefully he will be considered such an extreme flight risk he will not be allowed bail.
Of course, he must be considered innocent until proven guilty, but the evidence against him is pretty strong.
---
It seems now to be a matter of He says, She says.
===
Lovey
Most mind blowing thing here to me is that with this guys money just get a damn high priced escort or garb a girl off of Craigs list. Did he think the odds of getting caught with a paid hooker were greater than a violent assault.
Honestly this is one of the few situations that I think someone's mistakes becoming viral and are sent all over the world is a good thing. I mean were not talking about something stupid here this is rape
This will certainly make it a bit harder for the scumbags to let this guy off Scott free. It will also say a lot about his wife to see if she tries to stay with this pariah
Part of me is wondering if part of the reason for his quick get away was that he was under some type of influence, won;t get him off the hook, but I would like to think he can't possibly be this fucking stupid.
----
Tell you what is sad is that I am already surprised they are pushing this as if he were a nobody. We have gotten to a point where we are so conditioned to watch these pricks walk that it is a breath of fresh air when they get nailed. Kudos to her for sticking with this.
===
Estragon
International Monetary Fucker. Excuse: "I didn't know it was rape, I thought she was French."
=============
TE999
She was probably scared to accuse the toad of any wrongdoing, especially in Europe where you never speak ill of your 'betters' or risk their wrath. Now that he's stepped in it again, and in a country that doesn't rely on noblesse oblige to right wrongs, she's emboldened to speak out.
====
========================
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/01/strauss-kahn-letter-from-prosecutors
[From] District Attorney County of New York June 30, 2011 People v. Dominique Strauss-Kahn Indictment No. 2526/2011
Dear Mssrs. (William) Taylor and (Benjamin) Brafman [DSK's lawyers]:
In the weeks following the incident charged in the indictment, the complainant told detectives and assistant district attorneys on numerous occasions that, after being sexually assaulted by the defendant on May 14, 2011 in Suite 2806, she fled to an area of the main hallway of the hotel's 28th floor and waited there until she observed the defendant leave Suite 2806 and the 28th floor by entering an elevator.
It was after this observation that she reported the incident to her supervisor, who arrived on the 28th floor a short time later. In the interim between the incident and her supervisor's arrival, she claimed to have remained in the same area of the main hallway on the 28th floor to which she had initially fled. The complainant testified to this version of events when questioned in the Grand Jury about her actions following the incident in Suite 2806, she proceeded to clean a nearby room and then returned to Suite 2806 and began to clean that suite before she reported the incident to her supervisor.
Finally, during the course of this investigation, the complainant was untruthful with assistant district attorneys about a variety of additional topics concerning her history, background, present circumstances and personal relationships
===
====
Dominique Strauss-Kahn case: how it imploded
The biggest political sex scandal in decades had erupted spectacularly on 14 May but looked in tatters by Friday morning
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/01/dominique-strauss-kahn-case-imploded
At first, the hotel worker at the centre of the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case was portrayed as the perfect witness: consistent, believable and backed by forensic evidence.
But by the time the former head of the International Monetary Fund walked into a New York federal court on Friday morning, with his wife Anne Sinclair at his side, the case compiled against him on the basis of the maid's testimony that he had sexually assaulted her looked to be in tatters.
The alleged sex scandal that had erupted spectacularly on 14 May at the luxurious New York Sofitel hotel appeared to be imploding.
Reviewing the posts on DSK, here are some highlights. The original screamers, R Richard, Lovey, Box-liver, Superhero Freddy, TE, have gone quiet, excepting Boxy, who's waffling. Sr71's posts, generally, urged caution, and were/are the most sane.
The case is variously said, in reputable news outlets, to be 'in tatters', or 'imploding,' and DSK's bail is refunded. See recent story excerpts, below.
I'm not saying the truth is known, but it appears the accuser is lacking in credibility on this matter and much older ones,
as detailed by the *district attorney*. Elements to establish a criminal offense are lacking. I don't think it will come to trial.
In retrospect, the screamers were reacting to DSK's being rich, French, European and somewhat socialist-- so hey, why not add rape to the list.
R Richard,
It Was Only A Hotel Maid
If you're a politician with a big enough position, apparently you can convince yourself that you don't have to obey the law. This isn't the first time that the scumbag has been caught in a sexual predator situation. Those interested might follow the case to see how the scumbags let him squirm out of the situation this time. Comment?
IMF Head Strauss-Kahn Arrested for Sexual Attack
Dominique Strauss-Kahn, head of the International Monetary Fund and French presidential hopeful, was arrested in New York today over accusations of a sexual attack on his hotel room maid, the New York Times reports. The attack allegedly occurred earlier today in the Times Square hotel where Strauss-Kahn was staying.
A 32-year-old woman told authorities that she entered Strauss-Kahn’s suite at the luxury Sofitel hotel not far from Manhattan’s Times Square at about 1 p.m. Eastern time (1600 GMT) Saturday and he attacked her, Browne said. She said she had been told to clean the spacious $3000-a-night-suite suite, which she had been told was empty
===
Superhero Ralph
Wow! Every man's secret fantasy becomes his real nightmare.
I'm just glad they caught the bastard.
Unbelievable, dumb pervert allowed his lust to get the better of him. Shame on him. It's better he's found out now, then later when he's running the country.
===
Box-liver
Under no circumstances would I sink to the level of Freddie but, at the same time, I would not say there was no comparison with Clinton, as Stella did. Strauss-Kahn is vastly worse, assuming he did what he is accused of doing, which appears to be the case.
---
Yeah.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...74E38220110515
And, hopefully he will be considered such an extreme flight risk he will not be allowed bail.
Of course, he must be considered innocent until proven guilty, but the evidence against him is pretty strong.
---
It seems now to be a matter of He says, She says.
===
Lovey
Most mind blowing thing here to me is that with this guys money just get a damn high priced escort or garb a girl off of Craigs list. Did he think the odds of getting caught with a paid hooker were greater than a violent assault.
Honestly this is one of the few situations that I think someone's mistakes becoming viral and are sent all over the world is a good thing. I mean were not talking about something stupid here this is rape
This will certainly make it a bit harder for the scumbags to let this guy off Scott free. It will also say a lot about his wife to see if she tries to stay with this pariah
Part of me is wondering if part of the reason for his quick get away was that he was under some type of influence, won;t get him off the hook, but I would like to think he can't possibly be this fucking stupid.
----
Tell you what is sad is that I am already surprised they are pushing this as if he were a nobody. We have gotten to a point where we are so conditioned to watch these pricks walk that it is a breath of fresh air when they get nailed. Kudos to her for sticking with this.
===
Estragon
International Monetary Fucker. Excuse: "I didn't know it was rape, I thought she was French."
=============
TE999
She was probably scared to accuse the toad of any wrongdoing, especially in Europe where you never speak ill of your 'betters' or risk their wrath. Now that he's stepped in it again, and in a country that doesn't rely on noblesse oblige to right wrongs, she's emboldened to speak out.
====
========================
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/01/strauss-kahn-letter-from-prosecutors
[From] District Attorney County of New York June 30, 2011 People v. Dominique Strauss-Kahn Indictment No. 2526/2011
Dear Mssrs. (William) Taylor and (Benjamin) Brafman [DSK's lawyers]:
In the weeks following the incident charged in the indictment, the complainant told detectives and assistant district attorneys on numerous occasions that, after being sexually assaulted by the defendant on May 14, 2011 in Suite 2806, she fled to an area of the main hallway of the hotel's 28th floor and waited there until she observed the defendant leave Suite 2806 and the 28th floor by entering an elevator.
It was after this observation that she reported the incident to her supervisor, who arrived on the 28th floor a short time later. In the interim between the incident and her supervisor's arrival, she claimed to have remained in the same area of the main hallway on the 28th floor to which she had initially fled. The complainant testified to this version of events when questioned in the Grand Jury about her actions following the incident in Suite 2806, she proceeded to clean a nearby room and then returned to Suite 2806 and began to clean that suite before she reported the incident to her supervisor.
Finally, during the course of this investigation, the complainant was untruthful with assistant district attorneys about a variety of additional topics concerning her history, background, present circumstances and personal relationships
===
====
Dominique Strauss-Kahn case: how it imploded
The biggest political sex scandal in decades had erupted spectacularly on 14 May but looked in tatters by Friday morning
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/01/dominique-strauss-kahn-case-imploded
At first, the hotel worker at the centre of the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case was portrayed as the perfect witness: consistent, believable and backed by forensic evidence.
But by the time the former head of the International Monetary Fund walked into a New York federal court on Friday morning, with his wife Anne Sinclair at his side, the case compiled against him on the basis of the maid's testimony that he had sexually assaulted her looked to be in tatters.
The alleged sex scandal that had erupted spectacularly on 14 May at the luxurious New York Sofitel hotel appeared to be imploding.
Last edited:
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2003
- Posts
- 33,665
I'm a little puzzled by what you mean by "waffling." I am familiar with the term, but I haven't changed my mind. Even my earliest posts on this thread expressed the belief in "innocent until proven guilty."
The evidence of rape is quite solid, certaiinly more solid than it was against Mike Tyson. The fact, if there are any facts, that the alleged victim is of dubious character neither proves nor disproves anything.
I still say DSK will be safely in France before a verdict is announced, unless the prosecutor drops the case in the near future.
manyeyedhydra
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2007
- Posts
- 1,014
The evidence of sexual intercourse is quite solid, certaiinly more solid than it was against Mike Tyson. The fact, if there are any facts, that the alleged victim is of dubious character neither proves nor disproves anything.
Fixed it for you. A subtle but rather important distinction, I'd argue.
"It was consensual m'lud." "She wanted it a little rough, m'lud."
Rape is horrendously hard to prove when it comes down to one word against another.
The alleged victim being of dubious character is then very important. How valuable is the word of someone who's apparently been caught out telling a pack of lies?
I feel very sorry for her if she was the victim of a sexual assault, but I doubt they'll even bring this one to trial.
3113
Hello Summer!
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2005
- Posts
- 13,823
Tired old comparison....
As we wouldn't even exist if not for the French, I kinda think that our debt to them for helping out or little battle for independence can never be "paid back." Even so, it's an apples/oranges comparison at best to compare their help with our World War help. As sr7 points out, we didn't enter into those wars to help out France and only France. We had this other aim in mind (hint: we thought Germany would be coming after us next). Helping out the French came with wiping out Germany, a nice byproduct.
And we benefited enormously from entering into WWII (major world power for at least fifty years), whereas all the French got for helping us out during the early 1780's was that reign of terror.
If we're keeping score, then I think we still owe 'em. When they go into a war and we help them and only them out of it, then I think you can call it even.
I thought WWI was repaying them for the Statue of Liberty...
As we wouldn't even exist if not for the French, I kinda think that our debt to them for helping out or little battle for independence can never be "paid back." Even so, it's an apples/oranges comparison at best to compare their help with our World War help. As sr7 points out, we didn't enter into those wars to help out France and only France. We had this other aim in mind (hint: we thought Germany would be coming after us next). Helping out the French came with wiping out Germany, a nice byproduct.
And we benefited enormously from entering into WWII (major world power for at least fifty years), whereas all the French got for helping us out during the early 1780's was that reign of terror.
If we're keeping score, then I think we still owe 'em. When they go into a war and we help them and only them out of it, then I think you can call it even.
Last edited:
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
box in circles
Box of old.:
Of course, he must be considered innocent until proven guilty, but the evidence against him is pretty strong.
===
The evidence of rape is quite solid,
===
Box currently:
I still say DSK will be safely in France before a verdict is announced, unless the prosecutor drops the case in the near future.
you are saying the evidence of rape is quite solid, but the prosecutor might drop the case? why would that be? inordinate love of Frenchmen? of socialism? of the rich?
the District Attorney's letter mentions her lies on several items, including an account of gang rape a while back, including whether she reported the incident immediately, *or went back and finished cleaning DSK's room*--- some or all of the lies being admitted by the complainant herself.
would this, in your view affect how 'solid' the evidence of rape, is?
are you predicting that DSK will unlawfully flee the US to France? that this will be before, during or just after a trial on rape, but before a verdict is rendered by the judge?
Box of old.:
Of course, he must be considered innocent until proven guilty, but the evidence against him is pretty strong.
===
The evidence of rape is quite solid,
===
Box currently:
I still say DSK will be safely in France before a verdict is announced, unless the prosecutor drops the case in the near future.
you are saying the evidence of rape is quite solid, but the prosecutor might drop the case? why would that be? inordinate love of Frenchmen? of socialism? of the rich?
the District Attorney's letter mentions her lies on several items, including an account of gang rape a while back, including whether she reported the incident immediately, *or went back and finished cleaning DSK's room*--- some or all of the lies being admitted by the complainant herself.
would this, in your view affect how 'solid' the evidence of rape, is?
are you predicting that DSK will unlawfully flee the US to France? that this will be before, during or just after a trial on rape, but before a verdict is rendered by the judge?
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
hmmmm
Strauss-Kahn Accuser’s Call Alarmed Prosecutors
[NYTimes]
By JIM DWYER and MICHAEL WILSON
Published: July 1, 2011
Twenty-eight hours after a housekeeper at the Sofitel New York said she was sexually assaulted by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, she spoke by phone to a boyfriend in an immigration jail in Arizona.
Investigators with the Manhattan district attorney’s office learned the call had been recorded and had it translated from a “unique dialect of Fulani,” a language from the woman’s native country, Guinea, according to a well-placed law enforcement official.
When the conversation was translated — a job completed only this Wednesday — investigators were alarmed: “She says words to the effect of, ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing,’ ” the official said.
Strauss-Kahn Accuser’s Call Alarmed Prosecutors
[NYTimes]
By JIM DWYER and MICHAEL WILSON
Published: July 1, 2011
Twenty-eight hours after a housekeeper at the Sofitel New York said she was sexually assaulted by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, she spoke by phone to a boyfriend in an immigration jail in Arizona.
Investigators with the Manhattan district attorney’s office learned the call had been recorded and had it translated from a “unique dialect of Fulani,” a language from the woman’s native country, Guinea, according to a well-placed law enforcement official.
When the conversation was translated — a job completed only this Wednesday — investigators were alarmed: “She says words to the effect of, ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing,’ ” the official said.
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2003
- Posts
- 33,665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
The evidence of rape is quite solid, certaiinly more solid than it was against Mike Tyson. The fact, if there are any facts, that the alleged victim is of dubious character neither proves nor disproves anything.
I fixed it back the way it was intended to be.
I say the evidence of rape is solid. For one thing, there is the circumstance. I think it is generally acknowledged sex of some kind did occur, which means we can ask whether it was consensual or not.
I am making some assumptions here, because I don't know how work assignments are given out at the hotel: A maid who had been working there for several years was assigned to clean a certain room. She went there and was surprised to find the occupant was still there.
The occupant was not surprised. He said something like: "Ah, I see the management has recognized my importance and has sent this young woman to entertain me sexually."
Of course, when he went to take advantage of this generosity, she resisted, and pissed him off by not recognizing him as the great man and great lover he considers himself to be, and he tried to take what he considered his due. He forced himself on her and, when he was done, began to realize he was not in France, and he remembered reading about men being arrested in the USA for doing what he had just done. He decided then to make a hasty departure and go to the airport. Whether or not he had a reservation would be of importance in that case.
After he left, the traumatized woman finished her chores, all the while thinking of what had just happened and resenting it. She then contacted her supervisor, and things went from there.
That would be one scenario. Another would be that he propositioned her and she accepted it and did what he wanted. After they finished, she completed her chores and thought about the possibility of extorting a large amount of money from a rich man, whose identity she might or might not have known. She then tore or stretched her clothing and bruised her vagina and did whatever else might have looked like evidence of rape and called her supervisor. Being a woman of low character, this is entirely possible. I refer to her low character, because of the evidence of that which has been uncovered.
There are circumstances I don't know about, but I am sure the prosecutor does. Was it a normal thing for this maid to clean this particular room or, if not, how did it happen she was there? Did DSK already have a reservation on the flight he was waiting for or did he make it on short notice? Was there other evidence of a hurried departure, such as things left behind? There may be other questions to be answered.
Personally, I think he is guilty, but that is up to a jury to decide.
I think the first scenario is far more likely than the second, but it could be either.
ETA: Although there is strong evidence of rape, which may be stronger than I realize, the prosecutor might drop the charges anyhow, because of the possibility of losing. In such a high profile case, that would be a very negative mark against him. At the same time, I believe that, guilty or not, DSK will be safely in France by the time the case comes to trial, or during the trial, if he thinks it is going badly. It wouldn't be all that hard to find somebody with a private jet to take him there, even without a passport.
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
The evidence of rape is quite solid, certaiinly more solid than it was against Mike Tyson. The fact, if there are any facts, that the alleged victim is of dubious character neither proves nor disproves anything.
I fixed it back the way it was intended to be.
I say the evidence of rape is solid. For one thing, there is the circumstance. I think it is generally acknowledged sex of some kind did occur, which means we can ask whether it was consensual or not.
I am making some assumptions here, because I don't know how work assignments are given out at the hotel: A maid who had been working there for several years was assigned to clean a certain room. She went there and was surprised to find the occupant was still there.
The occupant was not surprised. He said something like: "Ah, I see the management has recognized my importance and has sent this young woman to entertain me sexually."
Of course, when he went to take advantage of this generosity, she resisted, and pissed him off by not recognizing him as the great man and great lover he considers himself to be, and he tried to take what he considered his due. He forced himself on her and, when he was done, began to realize he was not in France, and he remembered reading about men being arrested in the USA for doing what he had just done. He decided then to make a hasty departure and go to the airport. Whether or not he had a reservation would be of importance in that case.
After he left, the traumatized woman finished her chores, all the while thinking of what had just happened and resenting it. She then contacted her supervisor, and things went from there.
That would be one scenario. Another would be that he propositioned her and she accepted it and did what he wanted. After they finished, she completed her chores and thought about the possibility of extorting a large amount of money from a rich man, whose identity she might or might not have known. She then tore or stretched her clothing and bruised her vagina and did whatever else might have looked like evidence of rape and called her supervisor. Being a woman of low character, this is entirely possible. I refer to her low character, because of the evidence of that which has been uncovered.
There are circumstances I don't know about, but I am sure the prosecutor does. Was it a normal thing for this maid to clean this particular room or, if not, how did it happen she was there? Did DSK already have a reservation on the flight he was waiting for or did he make it on short notice? Was there other evidence of a hurried departure, such as things left behind? There may be other questions to be answered.
Personally, I think he is guilty, but that is up to a jury to decide.
I think the first scenario is far more likely than the second, but it could be either.
ETA: Although there is strong evidence of rape, which may be stronger than I realize, the prosecutor might drop the charges anyhow, because of the possibility of losing. In such a high profile case, that would be a very negative mark against him. At the same time, I believe that, guilty or not, DSK will be safely in France by the time the case comes to trial, or during the trial, if he thinks it is going badly. It wouldn't be all that hard to find somebody with a private jet to take him there, even without a passport.
Last edited:
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 46,124
Box,
Why do you waste your time? he is beyond deluded. he is no longer conceited he is convinced.
I agree with you that no matter what she may have dine previously rape is rape. I wonder if he has Big Ben's lawyers.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
lovey's confusions
lovecraftI agree with you that no matter what she may have d[o]ne previously rape is rape.
you confuse the issue. it's NOT the case that the defense alleges she's a prostitute, or that she's previously fucked 99 guys. or that she's smoked pot or was high at the time, etc--- all the usual nonsense that used to be brought up at rape trials. rather---
one previous event was a false story of a gang rape.
AFTER the event, she discussed the fellow's money with her bf.
AFTER the event, she first said she called the super immediately, then later said she'd cleaned another room and that of the accused, first.
AFTER the event, she said she had only the income from being a hotel maid, but there are tens of thousands of dollars of deposits into her bank account, apparently from her 'dealer' boyfriend.
Review of problems of the case: http://www.slate.com/id/2298414/
i have no doubt that maids are exploited and sometimes assaulted, but this case is fatally damaged by problem of the credibility and honesty of the accuser. and that is NOT a minor or 'technical' detail, but a stake through the heart of the criminal case. i have no doubt that the rich often 'get away' with missteps, and even crimes, including murder: but these problem of justice are NOT ameliorated by allowing attorneys and the media to decide on the guilt of prominent persons, and by following 'public opinion' [e.g. box's] about the quality of evidence.
lovecraftI agree with you that no matter what she may have d[o]ne previously rape is rape.
you confuse the issue. it's NOT the case that the defense alleges she's a prostitute, or that she's previously fucked 99 guys. or that she's smoked pot or was high at the time, etc--- all the usual nonsense that used to be brought up at rape trials. rather---
one previous event was a false story of a gang rape.
AFTER the event, she discussed the fellow's money with her bf.
AFTER the event, she first said she called the super immediately, then later said she'd cleaned another room and that of the accused, first.
AFTER the event, she said she had only the income from being a hotel maid, but there are tens of thousands of dollars of deposits into her bank account, apparently from her 'dealer' boyfriend.
Review of problems of the case: http://www.slate.com/id/2298414/
i have no doubt that maids are exploited and sometimes assaulted, but this case is fatally damaged by problem of the credibility and honesty of the accuser. and that is NOT a minor or 'technical' detail, but a stake through the heart of the criminal case. i have no doubt that the rich often 'get away' with missteps, and even crimes, including murder: but these problem of justice are NOT ameliorated by allowing attorneys and the media to decide on the guilt of prominent persons, and by following 'public opinion' [e.g. box's] about the quality of evidence.
Last edited:
ishtat
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Posts
- 5,765
The circus will soon move on. Julian Assange 's extradition appeal followed by Bradley Manning's trial in November.
I wonder if they will get a fair go. I remember that some people on this board were prepared to condemn these two roundly (particularly Assange), again without any of the evidence being heard or tested.
I wonder if they will get a fair go. I remember that some people on this board were prepared to condemn these two roundly (particularly Assange), again without any of the evidence being heard or tested.
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 46,124
Personally I have come to the conclusion that for many people myself included it is knee jerk reaction to want to see these assholes go down. For someone like this guy if he didn't do it this time he has before I am sure and it was hushed up. It is also appalling to me that in French society (or their government anyway) even if he raped her it was okay because-see thread title- for a country of elitists they are pretty ill mannered.
The thing-and speaking only for me here- that makes me want to see idiots like him and Kobe, and Big Ben and all the other sgo down is the level of pure stupidity. Why are these rich famous people constantly putting themselves in these positions?
Look at Big Ben from Pitt gulity or not (seeing for him it was twice I'm thinking guilty and will do it again) Here is a pro nfl quarterback and a good one with 2 superbowl rings and plenty of chances for more. He is attending parties populated with college kids and girls. What the hell is wrong with him? Kahn could have been president off France and he tosses it away over sex with a maid. For Kahn and all the others my question is why not just a damn escort? Yeah you can get caught there as well but it's not setting yourself up for this,
Course if you are doing the Whore route be a little smarter than Tiger and get a seperate ho phone, talk about stupid.
Last edited:
sr71plt
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Posts
- 51,872
I can agree that just on the basis of what he claimed happened (consensual sex with a hotel worker in an impromptu encounter), he exhibits as irresponsible for the positions he held and aspired to and sleazy. And on that basis, I think he should be sidelined at least--just as I believed the same thing about Bill Clinton.
Beyond that, you are just a bundle of sweeping generalization prejudices, aren't you?
Beyond that, you are just a bundle of sweeping generalization prejudices, aren't you?
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
lovey: For Kahn and all the others my question is why not just a damn escort?
the answer is that most [=majority] rich guys don't like to pay for sex (as is true, perhaps of non rich guys, as well), though there are exceptions, e.g. E. Spitzer, H. Grant, C. Sheen.
==
loveyThe thing-and speaking only for me here- that makes me want to see idiots like him and Kobe, and Big Ben and all the other sgo down is the level of pure stupidity.
again, you assume a lot. Faber's accusation against Kobe never went to trial. the facts remain murky, though he made an apology for the 'misunderstanding.' [Wiki account]
your approach is similar to that of RRichard, the thread starter; he says the powerful are scumbags and implies they're guilty, when accused. you're saying they're arrogant and 'stupid' [often the case!] and implying that this [for you] makes them guilty when accused [it doesn't].
the answer is that most [=majority] rich guys don't like to pay for sex (as is true, perhaps of non rich guys, as well), though there are exceptions, e.g. E. Spitzer, H. Grant, C. Sheen.
==
loveyThe thing-and speaking only for me here- that makes me want to see idiots like him and Kobe, and Big Ben and all the other sgo down is the level of pure stupidity.
again, you assume a lot. Faber's accusation against Kobe never went to trial. the facts remain murky, though he made an apology for the 'misunderstanding.' [Wiki account]
your approach is similar to that of RRichard, the thread starter; he says the powerful are scumbags and implies they're guilty, when accused. you're saying they're arrogant and 'stupid' [often the case!] and implying that this [for you] makes them guilty when accused [it doesn't].
Last edited:
JackLuis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Posts
- 21,881
Very interesting case developments.
Was he just foolish to rip off a little dark meat before his flight, or was he a ravaging beast bent on domination the servant class?
Was she a hard working maid, supporting her daughter, or a part time prostitute preying on the hotel patrons?
How much money/political backscratching did it take to dig up the disparaging evidence?
Will we ever know, can we ever know the TRUTH of the matter?
colddiesel
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2006
- Posts
- 5,742
DSK was an inept banker, She was an efficient maid.
She proved that an incompetent banker really can be sacked. Maybe we should be grateful for that.
I hope she gets a big wad of cash when she sells her story to the media, she has after all brought about a modest improvement to International Banking.
She proved that an incompetent banker really can be sacked. Maybe we should be grateful for that.
I hope she gets a big wad of cash when she sells her story to the media, she has after all brought about a modest improvement to International Banking.
R. Richard
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2003
- Posts
- 10,382
I originally posted this:
If you're a politician with a big enough position, apparently you can convince yourself that you don't have to obey the law. This isn't the first time that the scumbag has been caught in a sexual predator situation. Those interested might follow the case to see how the scumbags let him squirm out of the situation this time. Comment?
IMF Head Strauss-Kahn Arrested for Sexual Attack
Now it appears that the maid may be a 'ho' and may be involved in other nasty things, as well. The maid's situation may even destroy the case.
Now let's consider why the politician was in a situation where he was consorting with a 'ho' and apparently having sex with same. Hey people, when they raid a whorehouse and they catch some big time politician, the excuse, "I was just here to listen to the piano player." doesn't really work.
If you're a politician with a big enough position, apparently you can convince yourself that you don't have to obey the law. This isn't the first time that the scumbag has been caught in a sexual predator situation. Those interested might follow the case to see how the scumbags let him squirm out of the situation this time. Comment?
IMF Head Strauss-Kahn Arrested for Sexual Attack
Now it appears that the maid may be a 'ho' and may be involved in other nasty things, as well. The maid's situation may even destroy the case.
Now let's consider why the politician was in a situation where he was consorting with a 'ho' and apparently having sex with same. Hey people, when they raid a whorehouse and they catch some big time politician, the excuse, "I was just here to listen to the piano player." doesn't really work.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
rrIf you're a politician with a big enough position, apparently you can convince yourself that you don't have to obey the law. This isn't the first time that the scumbag has been caught in a sexual predator situation.
you're arguing in a circle, rr. the evidence is rather shaky as regards clearly indicating a breach of the law. the issue isn't so much 'predation'; the actual charge is rape. and, as information has come to light, it's rather unclear if there was a *rape* situation, or at least one clearcut enough to bring to trial (i'm betting.) there is apparently some talk of reduced charges.
you have a kind of 'free association going.
rich banker= scumbag.
accused scumbag = guilty scumbag.
as it turns out, your position is not well based in the evidence.
==
as to your analogy:
Hey people, when they raid a whorehouse and they catch some big time politician, the excuse, "I was just here to listen to the piano player." doesn't really work.
this doesn't work. he was found on a plane. the sexual events took place in his hotel room. there is no evidence of money being charged or paid for the sex. so there is no setting which could reasonably lead to a presumption of illegal activity there.
you're arguing in a circle, rr. the evidence is rather shaky as regards clearly indicating a breach of the law. the issue isn't so much 'predation'; the actual charge is rape. and, as information has come to light, it's rather unclear if there was a *rape* situation, or at least one clearcut enough to bring to trial (i'm betting.) there is apparently some talk of reduced charges.
you have a kind of 'free association going.
rich banker= scumbag.
accused scumbag = guilty scumbag.
as it turns out, your position is not well based in the evidence.
==
as to your analogy:
Hey people, when they raid a whorehouse and they catch some big time politician, the excuse, "I was just here to listen to the piano player." doesn't really work.
this doesn't work. he was found on a plane. the sexual events took place in his hotel room. there is no evidence of money being charged or paid for the sex. so there is no setting which could reasonably lead to a presumption of illegal activity there.
Last edited:
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 46,124
Why is it that her history makes her story bogus but DSK's past indescretions do not hurt him? Because he has the money honey. If I assaulted a maid at the Best Western (in my price range
) and I got hauled in I go to the joint reason? The public defende I could afford would not have the cash time or resources to dig up shit like this.A dog is a dog. He will do this again but maybe now stick to doing it within his own sexually lawless borders.
You keep going back to the fact people hate the rich. I keep going back to the fact that they are above the law to a degree. Millionaires are like everyone else the average is probably a half way decent person but it is the small handful that make the news.
It gets me on the other side of the coin how people flock to to defend the asshole with the "you're just picking on him" Heaven forbid someone is called a name or accused of something. That would just be mean.
Years ago my sister was assaulted the cops did catch the guy. Now he was not a millionaire but family did have money but more importantly conections withint he city, Low and behold he walked because years prior my sister had had issues with coke and had spent a month (one month) working at a strip club. When she was attacked she had three years clean and a decent job. It turned into a joke.
I was pretty screwed up back then and decided to handle it myself. I actually got him to hit me first. In theory anything after that is self defense. Guess who did a year Plus? Better yet a couple of years later they get him again for raping another woman. While they had him it came to light he assaulted another before that and one before my sister so two women were raped because a judge was told to look the other way when they had him dead to rights.
I have no issue with the amount of malice that gets directed at someone like DSK or these other womanizers.
Money can buy it all.
On another note it can't heal things and that piece of crap still walks with the use of a cane. It's been a long time and I occasionally regret how extreme I got. So had his family not bought or begged someone to let him off and he did his time things would have turned out better for all involved.
Innocent until proven guilty leaves more work for the prosecution than the defense and in a case like this the defense inevitably has more cash. In the end even the victim will be offered something to try to hush her up when the smoke clears. He'll go back to France and abuse more women but for some all's well that ends well because we would not want to think poorly of the wealthy.
It's just too bad the average Joe who gets falsely accused of a sexual assualt doesn't have enough money to buy sympathy from the bleeding hearts that love to see the guilty win out.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
note to lovey
hi lovey,
your post has some interesting points, but also manages to muddy the waters as to the present DSK case. again, as i've said, there is no doubting that money can lead to dropping of prosecution, light sentencing (if any) and so on. that said, 'he's got money; he's accused; he's guilty.' is also a travesty of clear thinking, not to say, justice.
as to some of your points:
lovey [1]Why is it that her history makes her story bogus but DSK's past indescretions do not hurt him? Because he has the money honey.
[...]A dog is a dog. [2]He will do this again but maybe now stick to doing it within his own sexually lawless borders.
----------
1. It's not being asserted that her history makes her story bogus. Parts of her story of the event are already shown and admitted by the DA to be untrue, e.g contacting her supervisor just after the event.
In the larger picture, her history makes her 'story' and other assertions open to question; that is sufficient, most likely, to prevent a criminal case based on her word, from proceeding.
You say, Innocent until proven guilty leaves more work for the prosecution than the defense, and i'm unclear as to whether you are suggesting this is a bad thing? In case you were prosecuted, would you want the opposite: for the prosecutor's job to be a cakewalk, and your defense attorney have to difficulties? Sort of like a Guantanamo Bay-type trial?
As to DSK's past 'indiscretions,' which may amount to various sexual harassments and aggressions for which no charges were laid. Yes, by commonsense they *suggest* something similar make have occurred. However in a legal setting, there are limits to introduction of past actions as having value in determining the occurrence of a present, allegedly criminal action. And in general this seems right.
There are exceptions specifically allowed, e.g. with serial killers whose actions show a pattern. Generally, however, if you robbed a bank last year, and this year you're charged, the prosecutor, during the trial cannot suggest, "he did it last year, so it's almost certain he did it in the present case." Your past comes up at sentencing.
2. As to the 'lawless border' of--I presume, France. Yes, harassment issues are quite alive there, and brought to light by the present events. That's good. OTOH, you seemingly suggest some kind of US superiority, in that at least DSK was charged. I remind you of the following events in the US, as to 'lawlessness,' namely the documented occurrences of rape allegations and their leading nowhere: The US Air Force Academy, it seems had lawlessness in its borders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_United_States_Air_Force_Academy_sexual_assault_scandal
The Secretary subsequently directed the Air Force's Inspector General to review individual U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) cases and to investigate cadet complaints concerning the alleged mishandling of sexual assault cases. In due course these investigations were carried out and a report issued on 14 September 2004.[1]
Findings
Twelve percent of the women who graduated from the Air Force Academy in 2003 reported that they were victims of rape or attempted rape while at the Academy. Of 659 women enrolled at the Academy at the time, 70 percent of the 579 women at the academy alleged they had been the victims of sexual harassment, of which 22 percent said they experienced "pressure for sexual favors."[2] [...]
Nineteen percent of those surveyed claimed to have been the victims of sexual assault and more than seven percent said that assault took the form of rape or attempted rape.[2] [...]Accusers have generally left the academy, as they decided not to continue with courts martial, their cases lacked merit or evidence of force or lack of consent[...]
=====
I'm very sorry to hear of your sister's being sexually assaulted and that, according to you, "influence" was brought to bear. Many of us have loved ones who were assaulted, and it's wrenching even where charges are laid--plea bargains, etc. You also mention that previous drug use would have been a factor at trial. As i stated in my earlier post, past sexual history and drug use are now, at least, more often treated as irrelevant to a present allegation, and this is, in general, as it should be.
As to your 'self help' approach to punishing the accused who was not charged, I understand such a resort in some circumstances. However, if one thinks of 'shoe on the other foot' scenarios, 'self help' shows itself to be a minefield. For example, suppose there was a barroom fight of you and another person; though there is a lack of serious injury on either side, you, only, end up charged (for some reason). As evidence is processed, however, the basic 'fight' scenario emerges, and charges are dropped. Whereupon the other party's brother, feeling there was an injustice, accosts you, provokes you to hit him, and beats the crap out of you. Are you ok with this ?
======
loveyYears ago my sister was assaulted the cops did catch the guy. Now he was not a millionaire but family did have money but more importantly conections withint he city, Low and behold he walked because years prior my sister had had issues with coke and had spent a month (one month) working at a strip club[...]
I was pretty screwed up back then and decided to handle it myself. I actually got him to hit me first. In theory anything after that is self defense.[**] Guess who did a year Plus? [...]
--
**Note by Pure: Actually this is not correct. Legitimate self defense, generally has to be proportional and not be carried past the point where the defender is out of danger. Just because you are first punched on the arm by an aggressor, you are not entitled (permitted) to smash his face with a tire iron, "in self defense"; and if he turns tail and starts running away from you, you don't get to pursue him down the street and stove in his skull, from behind.
hi lovey,
your post has some interesting points, but also manages to muddy the waters as to the present DSK case. again, as i've said, there is no doubting that money can lead to dropping of prosecution, light sentencing (if any) and so on. that said, 'he's got money; he's accused; he's guilty.' is also a travesty of clear thinking, not to say, justice.
as to some of your points:
lovey [1]Why is it that her history makes her story bogus but DSK's past indescretions do not hurt him? Because he has the money honey.
[...]A dog is a dog. [2]He will do this again but maybe now stick to doing it within his own sexually lawless borders.
----------
1. It's not being asserted that her history makes her story bogus. Parts of her story of the event are already shown and admitted by the DA to be untrue, e.g contacting her supervisor just after the event.
In the larger picture, her history makes her 'story' and other assertions open to question; that is sufficient, most likely, to prevent a criminal case based on her word, from proceeding.
You say, Innocent until proven guilty leaves more work for the prosecution than the defense, and i'm unclear as to whether you are suggesting this is a bad thing? In case you were prosecuted, would you want the opposite: for the prosecutor's job to be a cakewalk, and your defense attorney have to difficulties? Sort of like a Guantanamo Bay-type trial?
As to DSK's past 'indiscretions,' which may amount to various sexual harassments and aggressions for which no charges were laid. Yes, by commonsense they *suggest* something similar make have occurred. However in a legal setting, there are limits to introduction of past actions as having value in determining the occurrence of a present, allegedly criminal action. And in general this seems right.
There are exceptions specifically allowed, e.g. with serial killers whose actions show a pattern. Generally, however, if you robbed a bank last year, and this year you're charged, the prosecutor, during the trial cannot suggest, "he did it last year, so it's almost certain he did it in the present case." Your past comes up at sentencing.
2. As to the 'lawless border' of--I presume, France. Yes, harassment issues are quite alive there, and brought to light by the present events. That's good. OTOH, you seemingly suggest some kind of US superiority, in that at least DSK was charged. I remind you of the following events in the US, as to 'lawlessness,' namely the documented occurrences of rape allegations and their leading nowhere: The US Air Force Academy, it seems had lawlessness in its borders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_United_States_Air_Force_Academy_sexual_assault_scandal
The Secretary subsequently directed the Air Force's Inspector General to review individual U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) cases and to investigate cadet complaints concerning the alleged mishandling of sexual assault cases. In due course these investigations were carried out and a report issued on 14 September 2004.[1]
Findings
Twelve percent of the women who graduated from the Air Force Academy in 2003 reported that they were victims of rape or attempted rape while at the Academy. Of 659 women enrolled at the Academy at the time, 70 percent of the 579 women at the academy alleged they had been the victims of sexual harassment, of which 22 percent said they experienced "pressure for sexual favors."[2] [...]
Nineteen percent of those surveyed claimed to have been the victims of sexual assault and more than seven percent said that assault took the form of rape or attempted rape.[2] [...]Accusers have generally left the academy, as they decided not to continue with courts martial, their cases lacked merit or evidence of force or lack of consent[...]
=====
I'm very sorry to hear of your sister's being sexually assaulted and that, according to you, "influence" was brought to bear. Many of us have loved ones who were assaulted, and it's wrenching even where charges are laid--plea bargains, etc. You also mention that previous drug use would have been a factor at trial. As i stated in my earlier post, past sexual history and drug use are now, at least, more often treated as irrelevant to a present allegation, and this is, in general, as it should be.
As to your 'self help' approach to punishing the accused who was not charged, I understand such a resort in some circumstances. However, if one thinks of 'shoe on the other foot' scenarios, 'self help' shows itself to be a minefield. For example, suppose there was a barroom fight of you and another person; though there is a lack of serious injury on either side, you, only, end up charged (for some reason). As evidence is processed, however, the basic 'fight' scenario emerges, and charges are dropped. Whereupon the other party's brother, feeling there was an injustice, accosts you, provokes you to hit him, and beats the crap out of you. Are you ok with this ?
======
loveyYears ago my sister was assaulted the cops did catch the guy. Now he was not a millionaire but family did have money but more importantly conections withint he city, Low and behold he walked because years prior my sister had had issues with coke and had spent a month (one month) working at a strip club[...]
I was pretty screwed up back then and decided to handle it myself. I actually got him to hit me first. In theory anything after that is self defense.[**] Guess who did a year Plus? [...]
--
**Note by Pure: Actually this is not correct. Legitimate self defense, generally has to be proportional and not be carried past the point where the defender is out of danger. Just because you are first punched on the arm by an aggressor, you are not entitled (permitted) to smash his face with a tire iron, "in self defense"; and if he turns tail and starts running away from you, you don't get to pursue him down the street and stove in his skull, from behind.
Last edited:
Similar threads
