The Acquittal - One Last Look

I would like to draw to a close the discussion about Dominique Stauss-Kahn's acquittal. There has been, as you know, a deluge of articles and comments. The story itself will go on, and new chapters will be written, but the events of this past Tuesday can be explained primarily, if not exclusively, by the lies, inconsistencies, and altogether crazy behavior of Nafissatou Diallo and the fantasy world in which she lives. I am not saying she was not attacked, only that she made prosecution of her alleged attacker impossible.

This article from the New York Times gives a good summary of the decision to drop charges. The readers' comments are very helpful, at least the first batch printed which are not in chronological order, but chosen by the Times for their content.

You will see from the article and the comments that we were misled into thinking Diallo had made up a story about being gang raped in Africa at the time of her application for entry into the United States. In fact she made up the story during the questioning by the District Attorney. The first comment explains:

After re-reading all of the statements that have been put out about this case, I want to make a point about a small detail that's become a source of great confusion. According to the DA's motion to dismiss and the first news articles about Diallo's credibility issues in early July, she did NOT lie on her asylum application about being gang raped in Africa. In fact, the first time that she told this tale to anyone was to the DA's prosecutors immediately after lodging her complaint against DSK. So, it turns out that she wasn't merely trying to keep her life story "consistent" during her interviews with the prosecutors, as some of her advocates would have us believe. She made up the gang rape story on the spot at the DA's Office for goodness knows what reason.

Somewhere in the course of the media circus this fine distinction was lost, and I think that it is an important one. It helps us to understand that the DA moved to dismiss the charges not because she was a poor, scared woman who just wanted to stick to the story that she gave to immigration officials, but because they found her to be a pathological liar capable of contriving pure fiction in an emotional and believable manner to those--cops, prosecutors, and even the Grand Jury--who were just trying to help her.

Thus, dismissal was the only logical step.

Here is another comment:

To paraphrase the DA's motion to dismiss, there was ample physical evidence that a "hurried sexual encounter" took place between the two at the Sofitel. One element of the crime of rape is provable beyond a reasonable doubt: the sexual encounter. But, to prove rape, you need to prove that the encounter was involuntary and not consensual.

In this case, the DA had to rely solely on the testimony of Diallo to prove that she did not consent. The DA interviewed this woman many times and apparently never got a consistent story out of her, either about the "crime" or events in her past. Then, other credibility destroying facts emerged, including the recorded phone call with the incarcerated boyfriend about her plans to extort DSK.

The DA and his team have correctly come to the conclusion that THEY could not believe her testimony of a forced encounter beyond a reasonable doubt. As a result they had to drop the case.

A prosecutor cannot ethically present a case to a jury which he/she does not believe can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. It would not be ethical for Vance to let this trial proceed and "let the jury decide."

We will never know what went on in the hotel room. Any fair minded person who is familiar with the criminal justice system has to conclude that the NYPD and the Manhattan DA's office consistently acted appropriately given the information they had at the time.

Try as I may I cannot find a silver lining in this. Black and feminist associations may continue to use the case as a pretext for their ideologies, Dominique Strauss-Kahn will return to France and re-enter the political arena. It is fair to assume he will attempt to over-compensate for the lost time and the bad publicity by exerting every ounce of his resourcefulness in the quest for high office. If not the presidency, some other function. Should the Socialists win in 2012, he will surely be given a ministry, maybe finance, maybe foreign affairs. He will continue to work for Turkey's entry into the EU and he will, we can assume, continue to chase women whenever possible, wherever he may be. Would any woman dare to accuse him after this?

This case has absorbed much of our time and mental energy. But more important things have happened since he was first arrested - there were the killings in Norway, the riots in England and the strange events in Libya where a dictator has been toppled leaving a huge void that the Western nations, whose reckless and irresponsible behavior helped to bring about his fall, will be called on to fill.

The Guardian has an article that reveals the disarray of the French Socialists at the thought that HE will be back. Here are some excerpts:

"I'm terrified he'll turn up here," whispered a 50-year-old regional councillor from rural south-west France, who did not want to be named. "If he wants the party to win next year's presidential election, he'll stay well away," she added. "This whole Strauss-Kahn affair is far from over. Politically, he's fried. I don't know how he could come back knowing what we now know about his behaviour. Whatever the truth about these allegations, the whole party was blackened by this saga, its credibility was put on the line." (…)

The French feminist backlash has not abated, and many continue to question how a nine-minute encounter in a hotel room between two complete strangers, a powerful man and a poor hotel worker, could have been consensual.

Strauss-Kahn will not have an easy landing in France. A poll on Friday found 80% of people do not want him to play any role in the Socialist primary race to choose a presidential candidate. If the party elite confidently rushed to proclaim their joy and relief after the New York case was dropped this week, it illustrated how far they are from public feeling. French voters are sceptical over the confusing and unresolved affair. Strauss-Kahn's private life and treatment of women has been pored over, his reputation tarnished. The French justice system also continues to investigate a complaint by the writer Tristane Banon, who said Strauss-Kahn tried to rape her during a 2003 interview.

Read more.