DSK, and the Rush to Judgement 83


I think I am entitled to claim some wisdom in what I wrote about the DSK rape allegation, which was this:

The allegations against Dominique Strauss Kahn are of a different order as they do seem to involve violent assault and non-consensual sex acts. Plainly there is a very serious case to answer, especially given his known highly charged sexual history.

But I have been given pause today by learning that the police have amended their accusation to say that they were one and a half hours mistaken in the time that the rape took place. Given that it was reported pretty well immediately, how can there have been this confusion about when it happened? A ten minute mistake would be natural, but one and a half hours wrong in a period of three hours?

The difference is very significant, because the police were alleging that he raped her, then rushed from the hotel to the airport to flee. They now acknowledge as true the defence statement that he actually went to a lunch engagement quite close to the hotel before going to the airport. Given that his alleged hurried running away was a major factor in not granting him bail, this seems to me inportant. I repeat – how on earth could an investigation make such a very fundamental mistake?

My feelings of unease were then increased by US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner coming out to lead international demands for DSK’s replacement – as the prosecuting authority, surely it would behove the US government to shut up until he has been found innocent or guilty? Since then I have been listening to Ghanaian radio (I am in Accra) where callers are more or less unanimous that as the woman is from Guinea, in Francophone Africa, the Sarkozy connection is to blame. That fact is certainly a boon for conspiracy theorists.

DSK deserves the benefit of the presumption of innocence for now. We just don’t know what happened yet. The failure to grant him bail appears to me completely unjustifiable – where on earth do they think he will vanish, and how? There seems something peculiarly vindictive in the handling of this – of which his bail appearance without being allowed clean clothes or a shave was a stark symbol.

I have added the emphasis because I had got hold of absolutely the key point. It turns out the woman lied to the police, and in fact had gone back to cleaning rooms after the alleged assault, before reporting it – but then not told the truth about that. it also turns out that the woman – who you may recall we were told at the time was a very quiet religious Muslim – has a long term relationship with an imprisoned drug dealer and had received US $100,000 in recent months, largely from him. It is also the case that she had admitted to a flase claim of gang rape in her political asylum claim, and she has been taped discussing how much money she might make from the case.

Here is part of the prosecutor’s letter to the court:
“Additionally, in two separate interviews with assistant district attorneys assigned to the case, the complainant stated that she had been the victim of a gang rape in the past in her native country and provided details of the attack. During both of these interviews, the victim cried and appeared to be markedly distraught when recounting the incident. In subsequent interviews, she admitted that the gang rape had never occurred.”

Actually, for me the scariest and most evil thing about this entire episode are the warped feminists at the Guardian who conflate the terms “men” and “rapists” as though they were the same thing. As in this:

How do we get men to stop raping lesbians or independent or highly sexual women as a “corrective act” rather than addressing the forces and powers they are truly angry at? How do we get men to understand the impact of rape: how the external bruises are internalised and remain for ever?

The hate speak involved in conflating “Men” and “rapists” in this way is a vital insight into the viciousness of the militant feminist movement.

None of that, of course, makes it impossible that DSK raped her. But I considered it unlikely before, and I consider it still more unlikely now. Fascinating that the Guardian chooses to lead the first of their articles I link to with the ludicrous bluster of her lawyer, rather than the damning facts about her which come right down later.

It is an unfortunate boon to the Daily Express tendency that it turns out this case plays right into so many of the stereotyped categories Black Americans still have to struggle against – lying asylum seekers, convicted drug dealers, out to make crooked money. But in a criminal trial, Strauss Kahn, wealthy white banker though he is, still has as much right to have his story heard as her. That is what the equality of human beings means. And bluntly, from what we know at this moment, his side of the story seems a great deal more believable than hers. That may change as more evidence emerges; but the public bluster of her attorneys to date outlines an extremely weak case.

Talking of which, yet further evidence of stunning illiberalism by the coalition was revealed in Teresa May’s unjustified – in the literal sense of the term – action against Sheikh Saleh. What precisely is Sheikh Saleh alleged to have done that made his visit to the UK so harmful? Is there any evidence of any Lib Dem influence in any direction that can be described as liberal, in any area of government policy? Answers on a postcard please.

It is worth noting that in the two occasions I have stood for parliament, just as independent me with no party behind me, no organisation except this little blog and definitely no Deputy Prime Minister to back me, I have always obtained more votes and a higher percentage vote than the Liberal Democrats did at Inverclyde in the early hours of this morning. Unless the Scottish Lib Dems abandon the hard line unionism they have adopted – which would not have been supported by either Jo Grimond or Russel Johnson, and certainly not Rosebery – they are going to be annihilated.


83 thoughts on “DSK, and the Rush to Judgement

1 2 3
  • kathz

    There’s lots of misdirection from both sides, it seems to me. I note that the Evening Standard says that the “drugs dealer” was in fact convicted for having $400 dollars’ worth of cannabis in his possession – certainly a crime but not as bad as “drug dealer” implies. Reuter’s has other details on the reasons for the woman’s claim for asylum and adds that she lied about tax and so as not to lose her housing. I wonder if I would tell the truth if I were fearful of deportation or homelessness – I hope I would but I can imagine that desperation might lead me to lie. I don’t suppose the truth will ever be known and I don’t suppose either party has behaved with unparalleled virtue throughout their lives. But I do think that, whatever the truth of her claim, it was unwise of a woman in so vulnerable a position to report anyone so powerful to the police. That is a point about power, not gender. I very much wish the world were otherwise.

    • Methuselah Now

      Hi,

      Re:Sheikh Saleh, did anyone watch NewsNight?

      How does that once reputable programme, with still some exceptional journalists, get to so freely become the gutter mouthpeace of neocons and zionist-reforming Muslims with Quilliam’s number on speed-dial?

      Kind regards,

      MN

      • Azra

        Yes I watched it, this once reputable programme as you call it, stop having people from QF almost every week after lots of people wrote and said they were fed up with seeing the same faces on NN regularly!, and yes I watched the ex secret service agent from Libya dishing out information/rumours (which has been available on the net for years), as though this was a QF discovery.
        But what sickened me more was this repeated mention of the Brigadier, as though it is not well known that many of the lower and middle rank officer are either affiliated or sympathetic to HT, and the reason for making a big noise about it now is that the guy embarrassed the military high brass at a meeting on May 5th by questioning their complicity with the American raid which ended in extra judicial killing of Osama. I think less and less of BBC every day..but so do all of us!

  • Tom Welsh

    As a lifelong Conservative voter (nowadays I won’t vote for any of the major parties, but that’s another story) I have always had the impression that Lib Dems were people who broke away from Labour because they felt it was too wishy-washy and didn’t take socialism far enough.

    Liberalism as a way of thinking is excellent; but I suspect true liberals are not the stuff of which successful political parties are made. (Greatly to their credit).

  • Mark

    The DSK case is now looking like a mutant mash-up of the Tawana Brawley brouhaha and the Eliot Spitzer stitch-up.

    A highly sexed alpha male takes a career body blow courtesy of his rampant appetite- ie a variant on the Spitzer scenario. (It would appear that DSK and the maid had sexual relations on that fateful morning, but that DSK didn’t force the issue).

    The chambermaid meanwhile gets to know DSK during his repeated stays at the Sofitel, and sees a rape allegation against him as a pathway to riches & fame- much as Ms Brawley did when making her ludicrous gang-rape allegations 25 years ago.

    The DSK, Spitzer, and Brawley cases were also all played out in NYC, and to a greater or lesser extent precipitated intense media interest across the world.

  • Bert

    Was Dominique Strauss Kahn nobbled out of the way, to allow John Lipsky, as IMF ‘acting managing director’ to facilitate the Greek ‘austerity measures’?

  • Methuselah Now

    Hi,

    Normally, I’d completely agree with you Craig on the feminists and my judgement initially lay with DSK.

    However, on more detailed context, there’s something fishy about today’s events. What if the victims actual pertinent claims are actually true, and a wealthy powerful man could avoid justice by paying to dig for cause to denigrate the person rather than the facts.

    It’s not unheard of for victims of traumatic or major events to continue their “normal” activity, what are the pertinent details rather than the stuff outside the room, how many normal people know who run the IMF/UN/world Bank? How many people don’t exagerate immigration/tax-related forms/applications? What relevance is it on being a victim of rape of ones race, religion, citizenship, other relationships, status?

    There are other women reportedly….

    I would previously not have taken such a skeptical position, but maybe now, the same position should be taken, don’t rush to judge the alleged victim yet?

    Yours kindly,

    MN

  • deepgreenpuddock

    One problem is that if it truly is some kind of contrived action against DSK for political reasons, is it possible whoever is responsible, could do it more incompetently.

    One strange thing about the case is that the woman is reported as spitting semen suggesting oral sex. Now while i can understand that an unwilling victim could be penetrated vaginally by force, a forceful entry to the mouth seems almost impossible in an unwilling, conscious victim, due to the very powerful closing mechanism of the jaw. Besides which, the victim then has some means of retribution, (assuming she has teeth).which would certainly be quite disabling. It really doesn’t add up.

  • YugoStiglitz

    Craig Murray, you’re a racist and a sexist. Who cares where this woman is from? In your original post, or your original post prior to amendment, you drew attention to this woman’s origin, as if that were dispositive.

    In any event, you’ve engaged in some creative amending of your original post – I certainly recall you claiming some sort of conspiracy behind this woman’s claims. You made a point to suggest that DSK was caught up in phony sex allegations, just like you were caught up in phony sex allegations. And now it seems that you’ve amended your original post on DSK.

    Come on Craig, you know how this works, your readers demand conspiracy.

    Otherwise, why are you commenting on an NYPD matter, with certain obvious but limited international repercussions? This has nothing to do with you.

    I will grant to you that you were lucky that this woman’s story fell apart. You were banking on conspiracy, but you got something far short of that. I know that you want to use this horrible episode to demonstrate that you were right about SOMETHING, but it’s merely that you were correct in immediately doubting a rape victim.

    How do you sleep at night, you racist?

    (Again, what did her background have anything to do with this?)

    • Azra

      Read the post again, what Craig said was the guy may be guilty but also the fact that innocent people are framed.. so we should not jump to any conclusions.

  • craig Post author

    Yugostiglitz,

    I have not amended my original post at all. I am sure you can find a cached version to
    confirm that.

    You have indeed – irrelevantly on several subsequent threads – claimed I have posited a conspiracy on this, which I never have. You have continually posted on this site for the last few years – ubcluding under your previous name as Larry – claiming I have said things I have not said, in an attempt to denigrate me. You also earlier revealed that you used to work for a paid lobbyist for the Karimov family, so whether you do this because you are crazed or because you are paid I know not – nor do I care, particularly. Anyway, keep it up.

  • gyges01

    Hi Craig

    If DSK’s innocence remains intact after this process, what are the chances of him returning to his original position at the IMF?

    My thoughts are that his chances are quite high; the current incumbent is a former lawyer who has worked for justice all her life. On this basis, I would imagine that she is someone who believes that it would be unjust for someone to be punished simply for being accused of a crime, and hence, she would make way for his return.

    What are your thoughts?

  • craig Post author

    Gyges01,

    I think the IMF board would have to approve it, and they won’t. On the other hand, I think his chances of becoming President of France are probably not now dead.

  • Jon

    I’m curious as to your motivations, Larry, now that you appear to be coming off the rails. I’m not of the view that you get paid for your trolling, since I can’t see it is having much of an effect, even after all these years. What a waste of your time! Even the foul-mouthed anti-semite sock-puppets were better at disruption, and even they were chased away by a bit of moderation.
    .
    I wonder if you are part of the Give Israel Your United Support crowd? There must be so many cognitive dissonances experienced in being slavishly pro-Israel, what with having to ignore all the stories of Palestinian children being shot, houses being raided etc. We recently learnt that Israel wants to pass race-specific laws to say that Arabs must pay for their own house to be demolished. And Mark recently posted some horrifying videos of IDF soldiers ignoring pleas for calm and lobbing tear-gas canisters at painted children flying kites. It’s on YouTube in HiDef, if you want to try your loyalty! Little jihadists, of course. Miniature painted terrorists!
    .
    Apartheid, all over again. Is that what you want? Ignore the racism emanating from the Israeli establishment. What does your Megaphone software say you should do? Ignore the calls in the Knesset for a ‘shoah’ on the Palestinians. And what would you do to achieve peace? Ignore ordinary people dying needlessly at checkpoints. A one or a two state solution for you? Try not to think that Operation Cast Lead was named after a child’s toy. Would a Truth and reconciliation commission help?

  • Hildegard

    “The viciousness of the militant feminist movement”? “hate speak”? “conflating men with rapists”? Eh? What is the correct emoticon for a double-take? I think I need it after reading the above post.

    I’m 100% with you on due process & I don’t like a number of the features of American justice’s media relations. For example, I don’t like perp walks for anyone & think the French insistence on presumption of innocence is a good thing – for everyone, not just high-profile types.

    Howsomever, when you then go off-piste with a rant about “militant feminism” one has to ask seriously; are you living in the 80s? One doesn’t have to be either militant or feminist to observe that rape is a male crime. Now, I do think that in UK law we need to tidy that up, since here at least, certain acts of sexual violence that don’t involve a penis are considered rape when perpetrated by a man, but would be deemed a sexual assault were they to be perpetrated by a woman. That inconsistency does need correcting.

    Nonetheless, whether the victims are men or women, the majority of sexual assaults, be they rape or other acts, are perpetrated by men. Your own assumption that advocating for victims is per se a feminist act is merely another regrettable instance of the way in which male victims of rape are routinely ignored in public debate on the issue.

    A final point – even if someone has criminal associations, even if they have committed felonious acts themselves, that does not render them immune to rape. Cases should be judged on the evidence, not on the previous conduct of the parties. Due process is the right of both accused & accusor.

  • craig Post author

    Hildegard,

    I agree with much of what you say – but you create distance by distorting what I say. Certainly having lied before does not mean she was not raped this time. But having lied before and admitting that you also lied this time on certain key details, does not increase the chances of your being believed. of course, none of that means she was not raped. I said that. But it does go to her credibility.

    I nowehre say that advocating for rape vicitms is per se a feminist act. It is a matter of a human being’s rights and dingnity. I am married to a rape victim, as made plain in Murder in Samarkand. But there is a huge difference between advocating for rape victims and writing general diatribes against men like that nasty one I linked to from Eva Ensler. Did you read it?

  • mary

    Eve Ensler (born May 25, 1953) is a Tony Award winning American playwright, performer, feminist and activist, best known for her play The Vagina Monologues.
    .
    Contents
    1 Personal life
    2 The Vagina Monologues
    3 Recent works
    4 Activism
    5 Awards and honors
    6 Criticism
    7 Selected works
    8 See also
    9 References
    10 External links
    .
    Personal life
    .
    Ensler was born in New York and is Jewish on her father’s side. She reports having been physically and sexually abused by her father when she was a child. She started writing because it was her only way of communicating to herself what she was witnessing and experiencing as a child.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve_Ensler
    ~~~~
    Is it true that what goes around comes around?

  • mary

    BBC are running it large on DSK’s electoral chances.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14000265
    Allies of Dominique Strauss-Kahn eye political comeback
    .
    “Here in Paris there is huge anticipation. The man who had been written out of the script for next year’s presidential elections is potentially back in the running.”
    Gavin Hewitt
    BBC Europe editor
    .
    Yet they do not have the decency to update their report on the flotilla sabotage dated 30 June 16.50

  • Methuselah Now

    Hi,

    This question about character and credibility, what are our sources to doubt either?

    Also, wasn’t one of the little tricks used against you to slander your character, whether it be sex, drugs or money, most of us, for those determined, could have such innuendo and inference painted on us, however innocent, in a short degree of separation and self-righteous society.

    The naz/militanti-feminist commentary poison from people looking for relevancy and attention is separate from the facts of the case issue, perhaps we/you should be slightly more generous towards the alleged victim while hoping justice (currently suffering inherent prejudice due to those same such blind-spotted feminists) should itself be blind to victim and accused’s gender (the only way there could be justice).

    Kind regards,

    MN

  • technicolour

    Interested to understand how one could conflate Nazis and “militant feminists”? The Nazis were into their women staying at home – Kinder, Kirche, Kuchen, remember?

    This case is sad, not only because at least one person in it is a victim, but because it means that people are writing screeds on sexual guilt (or not) instead of pointing out that the IMF have been raping countries for years, and still are.

  • technicolour

    Btw I don’t see Ensler’s piece as a general diatribe against men; simply anti those men who rape (and even then it seems to be trying to understand what motivates them to such violence). In what way is it ‘militant’?

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Technicolour: “This case is sad, not only because at least one person in it is a victim, but because it means that people are writing screeds on sexual guilt (or not) instead of pointing out that the IMF have been raping countries for years, and still are.” Yes, on that and the other points you made, very well-said.

  • Herbie

    @tech

    “Interested to understand how one could conflate Nazis and “militant feminists”? The Nazis were into their women staying at home – Kinder, Kirche, Kuchen, remember?”
    .
    .
    The fascism in Nazism and Feminism lies in their methodology, not in their objectives.

  • craig Post author

    technicolour –

    who conflated nazis and militant feminists, where?

    It is interesting that in Ennsler’s piece you see the words “rapists” or “men who rape” where she actually wrote “men”. For example, if the passage I quoted said “How do we get men who rape to stop raping lesbians…” I would have no difficulty with it. But actually it does not say that. It says “How can we get men to stop raping…”. The deliberate and multi repeated conflation of men in general and rape in Ensler’s piece is very plain. This is the astonishing thing about the emotive effect on rape, which I referred to re the attacks on poor Kenneth Clarke. The subject turns those – like you, if you don’t mind me saying so – normally the most capable of seeing through media spin, into politically correct apostles of hate-filled idiots like Ensler.

  • JimmyGiro

    Eve Ensler wrote, in “The Little Coochie Snorcher That Could”, about the sexual interaction between an adult woman and a 13 year old girl, as “good rape”. It seems these feminists are quick to invent stories of paedophilia, but very slow to acknowledge the reality of pederasty.
    .
    Are these feminists morally qualified to talk out of their head orifices?
    .
    And to the usual gaggle of manginas that still think feminism is anything other than pure evil fascism, they easily disregard the statistics of 94% of rape claims are false according to the courts. And that about 1 million boys are being poisoned by Ritalin this day, to cover-up the feminist’s evil social restructuring.
    .
    You manginas might ask yourselves, why aren’t those women, who slander men, put in prison; to an equal extent that men accused, are automatically placed in remand? Especially as the latter are innocent in law, and the former are guilty in probability and practice.

  • technicolour

    Of course I don’t mind being called a politically correct apostle of hate filled idiots, but thanks for asking. Otherwise: Methuselah Now used the interesting term “naz/militanti-feminist”. Re Ensler: I am not persuaded that she is ‘hate filled’, perhaps because she utterly failed to rouse any feelings of hate in me in response to her (admittedly stylistically repetitive) piece. It did not make me see all men as rapists, or even most men as rapists, or even any but the very few sad cases who confuse sensuality and sexuality with power, violence, exploitation and desperation, as rapists. Dworkin, of course, did see all men as rapists at one point, but then my next door neighbour occasionally believes he is Jesus.

    Ah, herbie. May I refer you to a previous, exhaustive thread with JimmyGiro trying to explain why Harriet Harman counts as a feminist; it was quite amusing.

  • Clark

    Technicolour, I didn’t see Ensler’s piece as a general diatribe against men either, when I read it. But if I were to substitute something like: “How do we get Blacks to stop mugging and taking drugs”, or “how do we get Muslims to stop suicide bombing”, it all looks a bit different.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.