[magkelly]

Mmmm. You know like most people I love my orgasms, but right now if I had to choose between my new K-x and not having sex for a good long while, if ever? I'd probably just embrace celibacy permanently and live with it. I'm in love with my K-x. Who needs a man friend taking up my time when I've finally got shake reduction, fabulous low light capacity, and a dozen shooting modes? ;P

[shooz]

All that and takumars too...............................ecstasy................

[Parallax]

Mmmm. You know like most people I love my orgasms, but right now if I had to choose between my new K-x and not having sex for a good long while, if ever? I'd probably just embrace celibacy permanently and live with it. I'm in love with my K-x. Who needs a man friend taking up my time when I've finally got shake reduction, fabulous low light capacity, and a dozen shooting modes? ;P

Oh, I can hardly wait to see what kind of a turn this thread takes now.

[newarts]

Are we the reason, is it us who demand this type of information. Are we obsessed and titillated by these stories or is it the media believing or assuming that we are obsessed by them?

I dunno if we demand such info but the media knows (or thinks it knows) many people will pay attention to it; and what the for profit media needs above all else is readers/viewers.

Even the not-for-profit media capitalizes on sex and death in the jungles of the world..They are more circumspect regarding people for some reason (unless scandalous tales can be couched as anthropology. )

[stevewig]

I leave this thread with the following observation:

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, due to the American publics excessive greed/need for this type of story has been placed in the position of being GUILTY until he proves his innocence. If he is able to do that, just think how much this will have cost him - never mind the internal trauma!

The worst thing is that nobody from the public sex story, frenzy, team would care less - life continues to move on! There is always the next case.

If he is proven guilty he will then deserve what ever punishment is given to him and this will not be referenced to the frenzy/trauma he has endured prior to that conviction.

If he is found not guilty - PUT YOURSELF IN HIS SHOES!

I am also aware that nobody would give a damn and nobody would believe that result - it will be because "he can afford high priced lawyers".

Lets move on to the next such case - life goes on!

Now imagine that you, yourself, are being forced to deal with this same issue.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn Case Falls Apart: Could He Go Free? - The Daily Beast

"Looks like the case against DSK is crumbling......

Explosive new allegations have nearly destroyed the credibility of ex-IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s accuser—and he could soon go free. John Solomon reports on the wild case’s next steps.
June 30, 2011 11:58 PM EDT

In a shocking turnaround, New York prosecutors in the sexual assault case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn plan to tell the judge Friday they have serious concerns about the credibility of the hotel maid who made the allegations against the former International Monetary Fund chief, two sources tell The Daily Beast.

The sources, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said the district attorney's office disclosed potentially exculpatory evidence to Strauss-Kahn's lawyers during a meeting Thursday and won't oppose a defense request to loosen the defendant's bail at a planned hearing Friday. The sources said, however, prosecutors are not yet ready to ask for the charges to be dismissed and plan to ask the court for more time to investigate the case.

Prosecutors plan to tell the judge, "We have credibility issues with our main witness, and we need more time before we go forward," one source said.

The sources said prosecutors still have significant physical evidence that a sexual encounter occurred between the maid and Strauss-Kahn inside a luxury room of Manhattan's Sofitel Hotel on May 14.

But investigators for the district attorney's office have uncovered several pieces of evidence raising questions about the victim's credibility, much of it unrelated to the alleged sexual assault."

[Pentaxor]

Dominique Strauss-Kahn Case Falls Apart: Could He Go Free? - The Daily Beast

"Looks like the case against DSK is crumbling......

Explosive new allegations have nearly destroyed the credibility of ex-IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s accuser—and he could soon go free. John Solomon reports on the wild case’s next steps.
June 30, 2011 11:58 PM EDT

In a shocking turnaround, New York prosecutors in the sexual assault case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn plan to tell the judge Friday they have serious concerns about the credibility of the hotel maid who made the allegations against the former International Monetary Fund chief, two sources tell The Daily Beast.

The sources, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said the district attorney's office disclosed potentially exculpatory evidence to Strauss-Kahn's lawyers during a meeting Thursday and won't oppose a defense request to loosen the defendant's bail at a planned hearing Friday. The sources said, however, prosecutors are not yet ready to ask for the charges to be dismissed and plan to ask the court for more time to investigate the case.

Prosecutors plan to tell the judge, "We have credibility issues with our main witness, and we need more time before we go forward," one source said.

The sources said prosecutors still have significant physical evidence that a sexual encounter occurred between the maid and Strauss-Kahn inside a luxury room of Manhattan's Sofitel Hotel on May 14.

But investigators for the district attorney's office have uncovered several pieces of evidence raising questions about the victim's credibility, much of it unrelated to the alleged sexual assault."

I don't think so. this is more probably trying to build up a defense for the victim since it seems apparent that the lawyers of Kahn would try to attack every single misdeed done by the victim to weaken her claim even if it is unrelated.

[stevewig]

I don't think so. this is more probably trying to build up a defense for the victim since it seems apparent that the lawyers of Kahn would try to attack every single misdeed done by the victim to weaken her claim even if it is unrelated.

Of course it could, the story isn't over yet!

It could also be that he was set up!

My main point is, and always has been on this topic, that the media jumps all over these cases (especially the 'juicy' sex stories) and finds the man guilty long before any trial and that they do this because that is the type of salacious news that the public seems to want.

---

Last edited by stevewig; 07-01-2011 at 07:59 AM.

[GeneV]

I don't think so. this is more probably trying to build up a defense for the victim since it seems apparent that the lawyers of Kahn would try to attack every single misdeed done by the victim to weaken her claim even if it is unrelated.

Good point. The article stated that the issue with her credibility did not have to do with the incident on which the charges are based.

It could be that he is innocent, but this could also just be defending against the inevitable "nut or slut" defense.

[stevewig]

Good point. The article stated that the issue with her credibility did not have to do with the incident on which the charges are based.

It could be that he is innocent, but this could also just be defending against the inevitable "nut or slut" defense.

From todays New York Post:

Dominque Strauss-Kahn's accuser was hotel hooker, insiders say - NYPOST.com

"We have people who have been victimized, who have claimed she ripped them off. Nice working people from her neighborhood," a source said.

The stunning new info surfaced yesterday as the accuser was unmasked as a pathological liar and scam artist by prosecutors whose rape case has unraveled.

Strauss-Kahn -- who was under house arrest with a $5 million bond -- was released without bail after the Manhattan DA's Office admitted that the maid repeatedly lied to them about the alleged attack and her personal history.

Most damning to the case is that she flat-out lied on her asylum application that she was the "victim of a gang rape" in Guinea -- memorizing a cassette tape that coached her on what to say, according to a letter prosecutors sent to the defense.

"She reiterated these falsehoods when questioned about her history and background, and stated that she did so in order to remain consistent with the statement that she had submitted as part of her application," prosecutors said in the letter.

"Presently, the complainant states that she would that she was raped in the past in her native country but in an incident different than the one that she described during initial interviews."

To get tax benefits, she also claimed she had a second child. She only has one, a 15-year-old daughter.

"She also admitted to misrepresenting her income in order to maintain her present housing," the letter said.

Prosecutors said the woman lied to a grand jury by testifying she immediately alerted a supervisor about the assault.

[shooz]

None of this has anything to do with whether or not he raped her.
It's an attempt to discredit the victim.

[Pentaxor]

None of this has anything to do with whether or not he raped her.
It's an attempt to discredit the victim.

exactly.

[stevewig]

None of this has anything to do with whether or not he raped her.
It's an attempt to discredit the victim.

I do not know, and you cannot know what happened between the two of them because neither of us was there.

I am not stating, nor have I ever stated, that the rape did not take place!

You clearly have already made your mind up and do not need any further evidence even though you were not there! That is the whole point of this thread.

The point of the thread is NOT about whether the rape occurred or not. It is about the sensationalizing of these cases by the media, for entertainment purposes and to the detriment of the defendant.

It is about the media obsessing about such cases (because it has SEX involved) and it is about people, such as yourself, who come to a firm and immediate decision on the guilt or innocence of the suspect regardless of any other input or facts.

You also obviously ignored the text from the New York Post that I quoted because the information quoted was from the Prosecution office - not the defense lawyers!

This included the fact that ".....she flat-out lied on her asylum application that she was the "victim of a gang rape" in Guinea -- memorizing a cassette tape that coached her on what to say.".

Again this was again, apparently, information provided by the Prosecution to the defense and not the other way around.

Both of you guys who made the comment "It's an attempt to discredit the victim" clearly have no interest in seeing true justice take place - you just want your pint of blood - and don't wish to be confused by any facts.

[shooz]

So......You think you know all the facts?
Did anyone put a private investigator on the perp?
This whole thing stinks of money trying to protect itself.

[stevewig]

None of this has anything to do with whether or not he raped her.
It's an attempt to discredit the victim.

So......You think you know all the facts?
Did anyone put a private investigator on the perp?
This whole thing stinks of money trying to protect itself.

(sigh!)

I thought I made it very clear in the above that I do not have any facts - just like you!

Therefore I do-not-know if a rape occurred or not - just like you and the rest of the forum participants!

The immediate assumption of guilt, in this type of crime, by the media and the population is a sin against the American Justice system - and everything it stands for!

Look shooz, you are not a stupid guy. I read your posts! Don't allow the media to take over your mind and make your decisions for you.

[Pentaxor]

I do not know, and you cannot know what happened between the two of them because neither of us was there.

I am not stating, nor have I ever stated, that the rape did not take place!

You clearly have already made your mind up and do not need any further evidence even though you were not there! That is the whole point of this thread.

The point of the thread is NOT about whether the rape occurred or not. It is about the sensationalizing of these cases by the media, for entertainment purposes and to the detriment of the defendant.

It is about the media obsessing about such cases (because it has SEX involved) and it is about people, such as yourself, who come to a firm and immediate decision on the guilt or innocence of the suspect regardless of any other input or facts.

You also obviously ignored the text from the New York Post that I quoted because the information quoted was from the Prosecution office - not the defense lawyers!

This included the fact that ".....she flat-out lied on her asylum application that she was the "victim of a gang rape" in Guinea -- memorizing a cassette tape that coached her on what to say.".

Again this was again, apparently, information provided by the Prosecution to the defense and not the other way around.

Both of you guys who made the comment "It's an attempt to discredit the victim" clearly have no interest in seeing true justice take place - you just want your pint of blood - and don't wish to be confused by any facts.

all of a sudden it is now about money and the rape victim's fault for lying on something that has nothing to do with the case?

I remember one incident in France where the victim was gangraped. the case was dismissed because the victim's profession was into pornography. now, here is the argument, was there a rape victim? Yes. is that a fact? Yes. Was the rape victim a pornographer? Yes. does this fact have any merits on the rape case? definitely NO. the point is there are facts that don't mean a thing or unrelated to a misdeed done on a person. and it is not that unusual that a prosecution would seem to back-off in a high-profile case, especially against a very well known figure in the political and monetary arena. who knows what's been going on. either the woman was already paid or the prosecution is or not. you are completely misguided on thinking that I want to see some head rolling but rather opens up a new set of questions or conspiracy in effect. just remember that the accused is in the position of power. that doesn't make him an immediate good guy.