[Mmccqrtb]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/ny...gewanted=print


By JIM DWYER, JOHN ELIGON and ANAHAD O'CONNOR

A lawyer for the hotel housekeeper who accused Dominique Strauss-Kahn of sexually assaulting her in May said Wednesday that taped conversations, two of them made a day after the encounter, prove that his client had no intention of exploiting the charges against Mr. Strauss-Kahn to make money.

The lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson, and the housekeeper, Nafissatou Diallo, spent much of the day at the district attorney’s office in Manhattan, where they listened to a recording of conversations Ms. Diallo had with a fellow African immigrant in an Arizona jail after she said she was attacked. Law enforcement officials told Mr. Thompson and The New York Times last month that Ms. Diallo could be heard saying on the tape “words to the effect of: ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing.’ ”

But after listening to the recording on Wednesday, Mr. Thompson told reporters at a news conference that Ms. Diallo’s statements had been mischaracterized. He said that at no point did she raise the issue of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s wealth or status in the way that prosecutors had described it. Rather, he said, the man she was speaking with, who initiated the calls to Ms. Diallo, remarked during one conversation that Ms. Diallo could stand to gain money from the case, but she quickly dismissed the idea and said it was a matter for her lawyer.

Of even greater importance, Mr. Thompson said, during the first of the calls, her description of the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn was consistent with what she told investigators a day earlier. In sexual-assault cases, people who hear an early account of an attack are called “outcry witnesses,” and are often used to buttress the credibility of a person making an accusation.

“She told the guy that someone tried to rape her at her job,” Mr. Thompson said in an interview after his news conference. “She said: ‘I didn’t know who he was. We fought each other. Because he wasn’t able to take off my clothes, he put his penis in my mouth. He touched me. They took me to the hospital, and they arrested him.’ ”

In a statement Wednesday, Erin M. Duggan, a spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., said: “This is a pending criminal case. We will have no comment on evidence, or on any meetings between prosecutors and witnesses, civil attorneys or defense counsel.”

According to Mr. Thompson, Ms. Diallo said during her first conversation with the man in jail that her attacker was a powerful person, but that she was now with the government, presumably a reference to protection provided by investigators.
“The first call that the guy in prison made to Nafi Diallo corroborates that Dominique Strauss-Kahn violently attacked her and tried to rape her,” Mr. Thompson said.

It was during the second call that the subject of money came up, the lawyer said.

“The guy in jail called back several hours later, expressing concern, ‘Are you O.K.,’ and she says she is,” Mr. Thompson said. “During the second conversation, she said, ‘People from France keep calling me and saying he’s rich and powerful.’ ”

The man then expressed concern about her, the lawyer said, asking whether she was safe.

“She told him she was in Manhattan, that a lawyer was coming to see her — it was not me,” Mr. Thompson said. “She said, ‘Don’t worry, I know what I’m doing.’ ”

At some point, the man told Ms. Diallo that by moving forward with the case, “you’ll get a lot of money,” Mr. Thompson said. But he insisted that Ms. Diallo made it clear that was not her intention.

“She said, ‘Stop, stop.’ He’s going on and on on the phone about it, she didn’t want to deal with that. She said, ‘Please stop. Wait, wait. The lawyer will get it.’ Meaning, the lawyer would deal with it.”

But prosecutors did not see it that way. Mr. Thompson said that in a phone conversation late on the afternoon of June 30, he was told by a senior prosecutor that the conversations created “big problems” for the case, and that the prosecutor mischaracterized Ms. Diallo’s statements as implying that she intended to exploit the charges for money.

“It is a fact that what they told me and what they told you was not accurate,” Mr. Thompson said. “Ms. Diallo never said, ‘I am going to get this guy’s money’ or anything about scheming to get his money.”

Mr. Thompson was not given copies of the recordings, and described them based on notes he took during an extended meeting with prosecutors, in which he listened to the recordings with a Fulani interpreter hired by the district attorney’s office. The calls were recorded at an immigration detention center where the man was incarcerated.

The meeting with Mr. Thompson came just days after Ms. Diallo broke her silence and granted interviews to Newsweek and ABC News. In the interviews, she disputed the account in The Times of what she said to the man in the Arizona jail, saying, as Mr. Thompson argued on Wednesday, that it was in relation to getting a lawyer.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn resigned as managing director of the International Monetary Fund after his arrest.

Prosecutors are still deciding whether to proceed with the case.

Lawyers for Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Ms. Diallo had discussions in mid-June regarding sharing facts about the case and exploring a potential resolution.

The discussions did not include substantive talk about the case and ended without any agreement, according to a lawyer briefed on the discussions who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because the conversations were private.

But a different person briefed on the matter said that Mr. Thompson had sought a monetary settlement.

Mr. Thompson plainly denied that assertion. “At no point in time did I ever convey a monetary settlement demand to Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers,” he said later.

One of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers, William W. Taylor III, called Mr. Thompson’s statement “extraordinarily misleading.” But Mr. Taylor declined to elaborate.

The talks apparently broke down because the parties could not agree on whether to use mediation, the lawyer briefed on the discussions said.
Mr. Thompson has said that Ms. Diallo intends to file a lawsuit against Mr. Strauss-Kahn.

Colin Moynihan contributed reporting.

[SkapySisy]

I can't help but think that he did it. Either way, Vance really blew this one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/ny...gewanted=print





August 22, 2011

Strauss-Kahn Case Is Said to Be Set for Dismissal

By WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM, JOHN ELIGON and JIM DWYER

Three months after authorizing Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s swift indictment after his arrest on sexual assault charges, the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., has decided to ask a judge to dismiss the case, a person briefed on the matter said on Sunday.
Mr. Vance’s decision will end one of the most closely watched prosecutions in New York in decades with no determination on whether the encounter between Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who was then the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, and a hotel housekeeper who went to clean his suite was criminal or consensual, several law enforcement officials have said.

While there has been widespread speculation that Mr. Vance would drop the case, it is nonetheless an extraordinary turn of events, for both Mr. Strauss-Kahn, 62, an enormously powerful international banker and a leading candidate for the French presidency before his arrest, and his accuser, Nafissatou Diallo, a 33-year-old immigrant from Guinea.

Her credibility as a witness began to crumble after prosecutors discovered what they characterized as a series of lies she had told, though none bore directly on her version of the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who was led out of a police building in handcuffs in May and held under house arrest until his bail conditions were relaxed last month, would be free to return to France after a judge, responding to a motion from the district attorney, formally dismissed the seven-count indictment.

The outcome would leave Ms. Diallo with no recourse to pursue criminal charges against the Frenchman. But she has filed a civil lawsuit seeking unspecified monetary damages from Mr. Strauss-Kahn for what the suit called a “violent and sadistic attack” that humiliated and degraded her.
Mr. Vance’s office has readied a motion known as a dismissal on recommendation, which one person briefed on the matter said would detail the reasons he and his aides believe that the case cannot be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Mr. Vance’s decision in the highly charged case, which ultimately became a credibility contest of sorts between Ms. Diallo and Mr. Strauss-Kahn, was said to have grown out of prosecutors’ assessment that her repeated lies, including multiple denials that she had given any consideration to Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s money, would open her to withering cross-examination. A day after the encounter, she and a friend who was in jail had a recorded telephone conversation about Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s wealth, a fact that the investigators would not learn until six weeks later, after Ms. Diallo had been asked repeatedly about the subject.

She is the only witness who could testify to the central allegation in the case: that Mr. Strauss-Kahn forced her to perform oral sex.
One law enforcement official involved in the investigation said no single problematic detail about Ms. Diallo’s background, or even all of them put together, had undermined the prosecution’s faith in its ability to present a viable case. Indeed, the official noted, it is common for witnesses and complainants who testify to be vulnerable to attacks on their credibility, either because their accounts have varied, or because they have self-interested motives for giving evidence, like avoiding jail or, occasionally, winning civil settlements.

In the Strauss-Kahn case, the official said, prosecutors came to believe that Ms. Diallo seemed unwilling to take responsibility for telling the truth.

“We deal with witnesses with these kinds of problems every day,” the official said. “With her, we had to drag the details of the lies out of her over weeks. It might have been different if she had let all the air out in a day or two. Every time she was confronted with her lies, she would blame someone else — someone told her to say this for asylum, someone else took advantage of her bank accounts, someone else did the taxes.”

Besides their legal and ethical responsibilities to disclose Ms. Diallo’s untruths, members of the prosecution team could have been called in a criminal trial to testify about her untrue statements to them — possibly transforming prosecutors into witnesses for the defense.
Asking a jury to believe Ms. Diallo beyond a reasonable doubt had become untenable, according to a senior official involved in the case.
“We couldn’t tell the jury that she kept lying to us but that they should believe her,” the senior official said.

But Mr. Vance’s decision will probably draw fire on several fronts, including from black leaders and women’s groups who have urged him to allow a jury to weigh the facts and render a decision.

Ms. Diallo’s lawyer, Kenneth P. Thompson, acknowledged that his client may have credibility issues, but he said that other evidence weighed the case in her favor, including other hotel workers who saw Ms. Diallo in a distraught state shortly after she said she was attacked.

“You must also consider the overwhelming physical evidence that Mr. Vance and his prosecutors pointed to just weeks ago,” Mr. Thompson said. “Forensic evidence does not lie.” Even one of the controversial phone conversations with her friend in jail corroborated her account of the attack, Mr. Thompson said. Ms. Diallo described the assault to her friend just as she had the previous day to detectives and prosecutors, according to Mr. Thompson.

Law enforcement officials have said, however, that though the forensic evidence in the case shows that a sexual encounter occurred, it does not prove that it was forcible.

Some critics have contended that Mr. Vance’s office is to blame for some of the problems that arose in the case. They pointed to the prosecutors’ decision, shortly after Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s arrest, to reject an agreement under which Mr. Strauss-Kahn would be freed on bail — a decision that forced them to move swiftly to seek an indictment from a grand jury rather than take more time to investigate details of the case.
The more deliberative course, these critics say, would have given prosecutors a chance to learn more about the housekeeper and perhaps avoid their early pronouncements that she was a powerful and “unwavering” witness.

Since Mr. Strauss-Kahn was taken into custody hours after the May 14 incident at the Sofitel New York, the case has played out in an almost carnival-like atmosphere, with legions of representatives of foreign news outlets camped out in front of the courthouse in Lower Manhattan. The drama has dominated the headlines in France, where his arrest and star turn in handcuffs before the cameras sparked outrage.

From his first court hearing, Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers indicated that a sexual encounter did take place in the suite but suggested that whatever occurred was consensual.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn, a leading figure in the Socialist Party who stepped down from his post at the I.M.F. because of his arrest, was charged with attempted rape, sexual abuse, criminal sexual act, unlawful imprisonment and forcible touching.

Prosecutors were initially successful in getting a judge to order him held without bail, saying their case was strong and corroborated by physical evidence. They also said the housekeeper had given a compelling and unwavering account of what happened inside the hotel room.
A State Supreme Court justice eventually granted Mr. Strauss-Kahn bail on $1 million cash and $5 million bond. But he was held under extraordinary conditions in which he remained under house arrest in a town house in TriBeCa, monitored by an armed guard. He could leave the town house only under limited circumstances.

Those bail restrictions were lifted in a stunning reversal by prosecutors on July 1, about six weeks after the encounter.

At a court hearing, the district attorney’s office revealed that it had uncovered several facts damaging to the housekeeper’s credibility. Ms. Diallo had lied in her asylum application to immigration authorities and falsely told prosecutors she had been gang raped in her native country, according to a letter filed by prosecutors. She also was untruthful in her tax returns, the letter said.

Another area was not aired in court, but was discussed with Ms. Diallo’s lawyer before then. On June 29, when prosecutors’ confidence in Ms. Diallo had already eroded, they received summary translations of phone conversations that she had with a man in immigration detention on May 15, the day after her encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. By then, Ms. Diallo had told the authorities on several occasions that she had never given consideration to possible compensation from a man as wealthy as Mr. Strauss-Kahn.

On the night of June 30, Mr. Thompson said that he was called by Mr. Vance’s chief assistant, Daniel R. Alonso, and was informed that the case had serious problems, specifying the phone conversation with the man in detention.

Mr. Thompson indicated that Mr. Alonso “stated the victim said ‘words to the effect’ that ‘this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing.’ ”
Mr. Thompson has vehemently disputed the prosecutors’ interpretation of the recorded conversation, in which the two spoke in Fulani, a language of Guinea.

Later, when he listened to the tape with a translator, Mr. Thompson said the prosecutors had mischaracterized its contents. The district attorney’s office later had several translations from Fulani prepared, and these produced different texts that covered the same subject. The official involved in the investigation said there could be “no question as to the substance of the conversation.”
While prosecutors might have wanted Ms. Diallo to hold off on filing a civil suit, they had no objection to her seeking damages for injuries she might have suffered at the hands of Mr. Strauss-Kahn. But the phone call, the official said, signified another episode of Ms. Diallo’s not being forthright.

During the month of June, as it became apparent to prosecutors that the case was crumbling, lawyers for Ms. Diallo and Mr. Strauss-Kahn, had some discussions about a payment that would settle any civil claims, and presumably also protect Mr. Strauss-Kahn from criminal prosecution.
In late July, in a rare move for a woman who said she was sexually assaulted, Ms. Diallo went public, giving interviews to Newsweek magazine and ABC News.

[Erexecike]

I agree that he probably did do it. I don't know if Vance blew it, or the victim, seeing dollar signs sprouting from her misfortune, just made the case unwinnable for the prosecution by destroying her own credibility.

[Anaerbguagree]

Well either way Vance blew it. He may or may not have been too timid at the end, but he was definitely too aggressive in the begining. He came out looking foolish.

[slimfifa]

He can't control what his witnesses do. She decided to try to profit from this case. As soon as she did that, the case was doomed, because it was largely based on her credibility. Now she won't likely make very much. Ironically, if she didn't play with her story, and didn't talk about trying to make money off the case, she probably would have.

[Buildityrit]

BBMW, it is unclear whether she was trying to profit from this, or was simply aware that she could if it was done correctly.

Needless to say, it was NOT done correctly. I feel bad for her, but morally confused all in all...... She did not deserve to have the entire case thrown out, but that does not mean that he had the right to do what he did to her either.....

[XKAgustin]

^
Deserve? No (maybe, depending on what she actually did/said).
Made inevitable? Yes.
Was that Cy Vance's Fault (going back to the original issue)? No.

[BWJfEkOB]

I don't have time to post the article here, but the Times just ran a story (last 2 hours or so) indicating that her attorney is petitioning to have Vance removed from the case.

BTW it is not at all clear to me that her intent was to 'try to profit' from the case. Her credibility 'issues' seem to stem to events not connected with the alleged attack.

EDIT: Cy Vance mishandled this from the onset beginning with holding him over without bail and pushing for a quick trial.

[zCLadw3R]

He was on a plane, about to leave the country. Generally, if a suspect is about to go abroad, they arrest them. What are the chances the French would have extradited him, if he was indicted here after he left.

If he were a US citizen, who did not give an indication he was about to flee the country, it might have been investigated quietly before they lowered tghe boom. They didn't have the opportunity to do that.

[Enalsebeerkawl]

This guy's a pig.

October 13, 2011
French Prosecutor Drops Strauss-Kahn Case

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS[/h]PARIS (AP) — The Paris prosecutor's office on Thursday dropped its investigation into a writer's claim that Dominique Strauss-Kahn tried to rape her, though it said the former IMF chief admitted to behavior that could qualify as sexual assault.

In a dramatic legal twist for the high-profile Strauss-Kahn, the prosecutor said it couldn't put Strauss-Kahn on trial for the lesser sexual assault charge because the incident occurred too long ago. The statute of limitations on that charge is three years; on attempted rape it's 10 years.
During questioning into the French case, Strauss-Kahn admitted to what prosecutors described in a statement as sexual assault against writer Tristane Banon, during a 2003 interview for a book she was writing.

"For lack of sufficient elements of evidence, prosecution cannot be undertaken on the charge of attempted rape," the prosecutor's office said. However, it said, "facts that could be qualified as sexual assault have been acknowledged."

Strauss-Kahn's lawyer, Henri Leclerc, told The Associated Press that the ex-IMF chief admitted that he tried to kiss Banon without her consent and she refused.

"He admitted no assault, no violence of any kind," Leclerc said. He said he didn't understand how the prosecutor could have interpreted the attempted kiss as sexual assault.

Under French law, sexual assault is an attack that does not involve an attempt to penetrate the victim.

The announcement marked a victory for Strauss-Kahn but revived questions about his behavior toward women. The suave economist saw his reputation and French presidential ambitions dashed when he was jailed in New York on charges he tried to rape a hotel maid earlier this year. Prosecutors later dropped that case, too.

Strauss-Kahn, considered a top contender for France's presidency before his New York arrest, called Banon's attempted rape claim imaginary and slanderous.

Banon has said that Strauss-Kahn invited her to an empty apartment for the book interview, and they ended up tussling on the floor, with the politician trying to open her jeans and bra and putting his fingers in her mouth and underwear.

Banon's lawyer, David Koubbi, called Strauss-Kahn an "untried sexual assailant" and that even though the investigation was dropped, Strauss-Kahn still faces "a legitimate suspicion about his behavior toward women."

Koubbi said that other women had told him they were also victims of Strauss-Kahn's sexual behavior but were afraid to testify.

Banon filed her complaint in France in July, after doubts about the New York maid's credibility emerged.

Banon has defended her decision not to file charges against Strauss-Kahn at the time of the alleged incident. In 2003, she was 23 years old and Strauss-Kahn was an eminence grise of France's Socialist party, and her own mother advised her against filing a complaint.

The New York maid, Nafissatou Diallo, has filed a civil suit. Banon has said she would do likewise if Paris prosecutors decided not to go forward with a criminal case.

One of Diallo's lawyers, Douglas Wigdor, said the French prosecutors were swayed by the New York prosecutor's decision to drop the U.S. case.
"We have supported and believe that Ms. Banon was sexually assaulted by Mr. Strauss-Kahn and are pleased that the prosecutors in Paris, as has been reported, have found evidence supporting a sexual assault," he said in a statement.

The Associated Press does not generally name accusers in sexual assault cases unless they agree to be named or identify themselves publicly, as Banon and Diallo have done.
___