Strauss-Kahn

[thir]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/01/dominique-strauss-kahn-case-close-collapse-new-york-times

I wrote a while back with a comments on how the news papers and other media treated the case involving Strauss-Kahn. I hope to see some serious self-criticism among those news papers concerning objectivity and the fact that the courts decide cases, not the new papers, especially in a case with so marked political tones in it.

I further hope that some of the fundamentalistic feminists have come to their senses in this: an accusation is not automatically a proven fact.

And finallly I hope that some of us, all the rest, will maybe come to doubt the idea that the worst is not always true about other people.

The case is certainly not proven or disproven yet. But at least it has been shown that you cannot sit at home and decide what actually happened, whether you are a private person, or a journalist.

Comments would be welcome, as I was really knocked out oer the way this whole case has been treated.

[Thorne]

I hope to see some serious self-criticism among those news papers concerning objectivity...

I further hope that some of the fundamentalistic feminists have come to their senses in this

And finallly I hope that some of us, all the rest, will maybe come to doubt the idea that the worst is not always true about other people.
There's an old saying that comes to mind: "Live in hope, die in despair." Roughly translated it means, "lotsa luck".

[denuseri]

Its hard to say based of the media reports. All we can do is speculate. The only people who know what really happened I suspect are the one making the aqusations against him and himself.

[Cold Harbor]

The crowds are always largest when the stones are being thrown, when the taunts are being shouted, when the scarlet letters are being applied. When justice is finally determined and our lusts for punishment are confirmed by the powers that be, the crowds are always smaller. After all, we've already meted out our punishment. Its all just a technicality, isn't it? And, when the courts renounce our public verdicts and vindicate the accused, why, the streets are abandoned, littered only with scraps of paper drifting too and fro over the drying blood stains.

Happens over. And over. And over.

[thir]

There's an old saying that comes to mind: "Live in hope, die in despair." Roughly translated it means, "lotsa luck".

Noone will ever learn?

[thir]

Its hard to say based of the media reports. All we can do is speculate. The only people who know what really happened I suspect are the one making the aqusations against him and himself.

What I am wondering is why is no one discussing the huge political implications? The US wanted him off the IMF. Part of the French wanted him out of the election in France. He was arrested before anyone even knew if there was a case to answer to, and condemned in the papers - immediately.

The results of this accusation has decided the presidential election in France, and possbly destroyed the monetary union in EU.

Why is this not relevant?

On the gender-political front, most articles I have seen are bemoaning the fact that this case will make it harder to bring rapists to court. Yes, that is true. But also what about a man being put in jail for 25 years for something he did not do? (IF he did not do it?)

What about false accusations, if they can be proved to be so? Wouldn't it be justice to sentence the false accuser to the same sentence that the person falsely accused would have got - both for the sake of potential male and female victims?

And why is it suddenly wrong for men to be sexually active?
Why is there suddenly a = between sexually active and rape?

[thir]

Its hard to say based of the media reports. All we can do is speculate. The only people who know what really happened I suspect are the one making the aqusations against him and himself.

What I am wondering is why is no one discussing the huge political implications? The US wanted him off the IMF. Part of the French wanted him out of the election in France. He was arrested before anyone even knew if there was a case to answer to, and condemned in the papers - immediately.

The results of this accusation has decided the presidential election in France, and possibly destroyed the monetary union in EU.

Why is this not relevant?

On the gender-political front, most articles I have seen are bemoaning the fact that this case will make it harder to bring rapists to court. Yes, that is true. But also what about a man being put in jail for 25 years for something he did not do? (IF he did not do it?)

What about false accusations, if they can be proved to be so? Wouldn't it be justice to sentence the false accuser to the same sentence that the person falsely accused would have got - both for the sake of potential male and female victims?

And why is it suddenly wrong for men to be sexually active?
Why is there suddenly a = between sexually active and rape?

[thir]

The crowds are always largest when the stones are being thrown, when the taunts are being shouted, when the scarlet letters are being applied. When justice is finally determined and our lusts for punishment are confirmed by the powers that be, the crowds are always smaller. After all, we've already meted out our punishment. Its all just a technicality, isn't it? And, when the courts renounce our public verdicts and vindicate the accused, why, the streets are abandoned, littered only with scraps of paper drifting too and fro over the drying blood stains.

Happens over. And over. And over.

And this is ok?

[Liushka]

There have been many cases about this man, and how he tried to jump and abuse women, just because he was in politics and had money. All those cases were just kept away from justice in France, and I was hoping that this case in the US would allow this pervert to be judged. While I am not saying he is guilty, I have huge doubts about his innocence given his past. One of the cases that was told to "shh" about his actions before was his own wife's goddaughter.

I'm really disgusted when I see people in France being hoping and praying that he could still take part to his political faction's primary election to designate the presidential candidate. *shakes head* People don't give a damn about what the woman may have gone through, should she say the truth, which really makes me sick. DSK is considered - no matter what - like an amazing political man (which honestly depends on one's view of things *sigh*) by so many that I find it baffling, and that many already see him as the savior of France politics although the accusations weren't lifted yet.

I already thought we had hit bottom about morals in France regarding politics, with our current president, but it seems we can still do worse.

[Thorne]

Noone will ever learn?
No, more like some people never learn. And some people think they're never wrong in the first place. Especially in the media.

[leo9]

What I am wondering is why is no one discussing the huge political implications? The US wanted him off the IMF. Part of the French wanted him out of the election in France. He was arrested before anyone even knew if there was a case to answer to

Someone made a very serious accusation against him. When the police responded to the complaint, they found him getting on a plane to France. What would you have had them do? Say "Someone claims you raped her, will you promise to come back in a few weeks to stand trial? Normally we'd lock you up, but we can see you're an important man so we'll let you go off on your important business?"

Police don't have the luxury of waiting till all the lawyers have finished arguing before they act. They have to decide on the spot, and take the shit if they decide wrong. Faced with a weeping woman and a man about to fly away, they did what any honest cop would do and stopped him.


, and condemned in the papers - immediately. And is now being exonerated in those same papers, perhaps just as prematurely, and his accuser condemned. That's the media business.


The results of this accusation has decided the presidential election in France,

From what I read, it may well have decided it in SK's favour. Even before he was released, 60% of the French thought he was framed. That has probably increased massively since the the media were filled with questions about his accuser. If he's cleared, he could gather massive support as the man the might of the US tried to crush and failed.

and possibly destroyed the monetary union in EU. At last report (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/04/business/global/04euro.html) the IMF had approved the new loans to Greece, which the conspiracy theory holds that SK was removed to prevent. The European Monetary Union may still be hanging by a thread, but the IMF's policy towards it doesn't appear to have changed with the change of leadership.

I still say, for a conspiracy, this one seems pretty incompetent.


On the gender-political front, most articles I have seen are bemoaning the fact that this case will make it harder to bring rapists to court. Yes, that is true. But also what about a man being put in jail for 25 years for something he did not do? (IF he did not do it?)
There are two very different things here: a man put in jail after arrest because there is reason to think he might flee justice (and from the way he rushed to the plane, I'd have worried about that in the police's shoes), and him being jailed as the result of a court case. Which seems pretty unlikely unless the prosecution have some killer evidence they have not yet disclosed.

You've seen plenty of crimies where someone looks guilty as hell at the time of the first accusation, but is cleared on investigation. That's why we have courts, and don't let the police decide who's guilty.

What about false accusations, if they can be proved to be so? Wouldn't it be justice to sentence the false accuser to the same sentence that the person falsely accused would have got - both for the sake of potential male and female victims?
The problem is, finding someone not guilty, and finding their accuser guilty of a false charge, are two very different things. Evidence to prove the first doesn't necessarily prove the second, to the standards of a criminal conviction. And a good thing too. Who would dare lodge a complaint, if they knew they would take the rap if the defendant got off?

It now looks as if the accuser is probably going to be deported back to Africa, maybe after serving time for perjury in her immigration application. Regardless of the outcome of the rape case. That should warn other black immigrants to keep quiet about abuse by rich white men.

[thir]

Someone made a very serious accusation against him. When the police responded to the complaint, they found him getting on a plane to France. What would you have had them do? Say "Someone claims you raped her, will you promise to come back in a few weeks to stand trial? Normally we'd lock you up, but we can see you're an important man so we'll let you go off on your important business?"


Yes, I know that is what sensationalist journalists kept repeating. Can't anyone grasp the fact that the man was on his Normal Plan On The Way To a Meeting?? In the IMF?

Should he have said: hey, I'd better cancel my meeting in case someone wants to accuse me of rape?



Police don't have the luxury of waiting till all the lawyers have finished arguing before they act. They have to decide on the spot, and take the shit if they decide wrong.


I may be wrong, but that is not normally what you do. You envestigate a case Before you arrest someone, and I have never heard of a rape case when the alleged perpertrator was taken before you knew if you had a case or not. A lot of cases are refused due to lack of evidence, that is, unfortunately, in the nature of many rape cases. Unless you have some good evidence like serious violence, it is word against word. In this case, after taking looking at the case, they found out that they did not have enough of one to keep him.

We should all be equal in the eyes of the law, but we aren't. In this case politics were heavy in the case: we have a foreign, high ranking politician hauled off to jail Before you even know if there is a case to answer, all because of the poor maid's tears?

I may be naive in some ways, but even I do not believe that. Life should be like that, but it isn't. Can anyone imagine an American president candidate being hauled off to jail BEfore you know if you have any evidence - in france, or in US?



Faced with a weeping woman and a man about to fly away, they did what any honest cop would do and stopped him.


Yes, it is really touching, isn't it? They did not even stop because they were causing an international crisis.



And is now being exonerated in those same papers, perhaps just as prematurely, and his accuser condemned. That's the media business.


At least some of the media have the grace to blush at this point.. They acknowledge that the man was slaughtered in press with no way of defending himself, and all reason to believe a jury influenced. Everybody was on his case with such hate and glee it was disgusting. That was another thing that caught my attention with this case.



From what I read, it may well have decided it in SK's favour. Even before he was released, 60% of the French thought he was framed.


Yes, odd, isn't it? But that did not help him stay in the election.



That has probably increased massively since the the media were filled with questions about his accuser. If he's cleared, he could gather massive support as the man the might of the US tried to crush and failed.


Actually the Frech are apparently divived on this, now. And since the US courts are more interested in saving their buts than doing the right thing (being apparently of a less moral fibre than the police), he is not free of charge although they realize they have no case, and he may never be compeltely exonerated.



At last report (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/04/business/global/04euro.html) the IMF had approved the new loans to Greece, which the conspiracy theory holds that SK was removed to prevent. The European Monetary Union may still be hanging by a thread, but the IMF's policy towards it doesn't appear to have changed with the change of leadership.


We shall see. There might also be other reasons besides. I any case, the US wanted him out, and he is out.



I still say, for a conspiracy, this one seems pretty incompetent.There are two very different things here: a man put in jail after arrest because there is reason to think he might flee justice (and from the way he rushed to the plane, I'd have worried about that in the police's shoes), and him being jailed as the result of a court case. Which seems pretty unlikely unless the prosecution have some killer evidence they have not yet disclosed.


Whatever happens he is out of the IMF, and too late for the French election, unless they prolong the deadline for candidates? Can't you see that unless he is compeletely declared innocent his career is over, and even if he is, there will always be mud on him? And he as not fleeing, he was going to a scheduled meeting.



The problem is, finding someone not guilty, and finding their accuser guilty of a false charge, are two very different things. Evidence to prove the first doesn't necessarily prove the second, to the standards of a criminal conviction. And a good thing too. Who would dare lodge a complaint, if they knew they would take the rap if the defendant got off?


So, false accusations are just part of the game? Who exactly is being raped here?



It now looks as if the accuser is probably going to be deported back to Africa, maybe after serving time for perjury in her immigration application. Regardless of the outcome of the rape case. That should warn other black immigrants to keep quiet about abuse by rich white men.

A white man - even a rich, powerful one - is not guilty by default. A black women - not even an immigrant one - is innocent by default. Justice for Loke as well as for Thor.

And personally I do not feel very sorry for a person who is lying about stuff that can destroy other people's lives. Rape is a despiceable crime. Lying about rape is just rape in court.

[MMI]

Lying about rape is just rape in court.

I agree with most of what you have said here, thir, but the final sentence sums up my feelings about false rape claims more succinctly than I could have put it myself. I had been thinking of asking here whether people thought a false rape claim was just one more rape that went unpunished, or if it was so serious it should carry the same penalty a rapist would suffer.

[thir]

I agree with most of what you have said here, thir, but the final sentence sums up my feelings about false rape claims more succinctly than I could have put it myself. I had been thinking of asking here whether people thought a false rape claim was just one more rape that went unpunished, or if it was so serious it should carry the same penalty a rapist would suffer.

I think it is all about PROOF. If you can prove absolutely that people have Lied, and that the lie, had it been believed, would have cost someone 25 years, then yes, I think it harsh but just to give a false accuser that same sentence.

But I fear that in many cases it is word against word, and how do you find the truth then? I am certainly not in faviour of a rapist getting off either. No one is, I think. And you cannot punish the accuser simply because you could not prove the case.

[thir]

I agree with most of what you have said here, thir, but the final sentence sums up my feelings about false rape claims more succinctly than I could have put it myself. I had been thinking of asking here whether people thought a false rape claim was just one more rape that went unpunished, or if it was so serious it should carry the same penalty a rapist would suffer.

I think it is all about PROOF. If you can prove absolutely that people have Lied, and that the lie, had it been believed, would have cost someone 25 years, then yes, I think it harsh but just to give a false accuser that same sentence.

But I fear that in many cases it is word against word, and how do you find the truth then? I am certainly not in faviour of a rapist getting off either. No one is, I think. And you cannot punish the accuser simply because you could not prove the case. They are too hard to prove for that.