A lack of credibility

It looks very much like the case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn is about to collapse because prosecution investigations into the background of the woman involved has shown that there is a lack of credibility. This does not mean that the events did not happen. It does not mean that her version is correct. It means that on the stand she would not be a reliable witness. It is like the case against Michael Jackson, redux.

The New York Times is running with the story about the things that have been discovered, that have poked a very big hole in the case. These include the fact that she lied in her application for asylum:

Although forensic tests found unambiguous evidence of a sexual encounter between Mr. Strauss-Kahn, a French politician, and the woman, prosecutors do not believe much of what the accuser has told them about the circumstances or about herself.

Since her initial allegation on May 14, the accuser has repeatedly lied, one of the law enforcement officials said.

Senior prosecutors met with lawyers for Mr. Strauss-Kahn on Thursday and provided details about their findings, and the parties are discussing whether to dismiss the felony charges. Among the discoveries, one of the officials said, are issues involving the asylum application of the 32-year-old housekeeper, who is Guinean, and possible links to criminal activities, including drug dealing and money laundering.

According to the two officials, the woman had a phone conversation with an incarcerated man within a day of her encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn in which she discussed the possible benefits of pursuing the charges against him. The conversation was recorded.

That man, the investigators learned, had been arrested on charges of possessing 400 pounds of marijuana. He is among a number of individuals who made multiple cash deposits, totaling around $100,000, into the woman’s bank account over the last two years. The deposits were made in Arizona, Georgia, New York and Pennsylvania.

The investigators also learned that she was paying hundreds of dollars every month in phone charges to five companies. The woman had insisted she had only one phone and said she knew nothing about the deposits except that they were made by a man she described as her fiancé and his friends.

In addition, one of the officials said, she told investigators that her application for asylum included mention of a previous rape, but there was no such account in the application. She also told them that she had been subjected to genital mutilation, but her account to the investigators differed from what was contained in the asylum application.



2 responses to “A lack of credibility

  1. Hello Everybody.

    No, I did not die nor did I flee. I have been so incredibly busy. But I just had to leave an “I TOLD YOU SO” comment. Directed at everyone in general and no one in particular.

    There is no doubt DSK is a sleaze and a womanizer (like WFC!) but there has been speculation for months if not years that he was ripe for a fraudulent setup of some sort – a mega blackmail.

    Again, the fact he dropped his pants and whipped out his thing is probably true. What is TOTALLY UNKNOWN is to what level it was consensual (or paid for) or to what level the “victim” was actually in part or in full the perpetrator.

    From the beginning I have seen ZERO EVIDENCE (other than “she said”) of any great crime. I predicted this would all blow away.


  2. Carlyle, there are so many problems with the case that it is unbelievable what has now taken place.

    That does not mean that the attack never happened. It means that the woman has a past that would cause a jury not to believe her story. There are inconsistencies in her story about what she did after the attack. However, there were signs on her body that showed she was attacked.

    I would not call it zero evidence. I would simply call it as similar to what happens when a prostitute is attacked.

    DSK most definitely is a sleaze and yes I really do think that he attacked her, but this case will not come to trial.