We already know the narrative that will play out in the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case. Those who really, really want to catch their Big White Whale will wonder why Naffisatou Diallo would report a sexual assault to police if she was a criminal with a sketchy immigration status. To break down the key developments in the DSK case:
Prosecuters have discovered that DSK’s accuser has serious credibility issues. One law enforcement official called her a “con artist”. There is also a taped conversation she had with a man who is currently in jail. During the conversation, which took place a day after the alleged attack, the two discussed how Diallo could profit from the case. The man and Diallo seem involved in some sort of drug ring or money laundering ring. Diallo has received over $100,000 from several men over the past couple of years, and she has five different cell phones.
There is also the issue of her seemingly misrepresented immigration status. Diallo reportedly claimed to have been raped in Guinea which was seemingly part of the reason she gained asylum in the U.S. While the details remain unclear, the cloudiness surrounding this rape suggests that – if that rape in Guinea was fabricated in order for Diallo to gain asylum here – she is willing to use rape as a tool to get what she wants.
All of this leads me to revisit a few questions and points:
- The media has done a horrible job on this. NSS, right? Where has the investigative reporting been up until now? DSK was chief of the IMF, and he lost his job over this affair. He could have been president of France (and maybe this will actually help his chances after stoking anti-American flames). The implications of these crimes alone should have warranted scrutiny of the accuser. I cannot help but remember that the New York Times was slammed hard by liberals for their coverage of the Cleveland 18 gang rape case. They were seen as blaming the victim; one wonders if that incident and others like it have incubated rape-accusers too much. Reporters are afraid to do their jobs.
- Following from 1. above, this case may have international fallout that was not properly weighed at the outset of the case. Most were enthralled with the idea that DSK should be treated like a regular guy – with the perp walk et al – but we didn’t think ahead to what would happen is DSK was actually innocent.
- This reignites the question that many people pointed out in the wake of the DSK charges back in May: why would a hotel maid enter a guest’s room while it was still occupied?
- DSK was not worried about calling his hotel about his lost cell phone because he had not committed a crime there. I speculated that perhaps DSK just didn’t think that he committed a crime and was aloof about criminal charges; I now seem to have been incorrect in that line of reasoning.
- A lot of people pointed out that the charge that DSK forced oral sex on Diallo seemed circumspect: if DSK put his penis in Diallo’s mouth, wouldn’t she just chomp down?
- If Diallo was so willing to discuss money a day after this alleged sexual assault took place, and pretending that the attack actually did occur as she described it, what does this say about the severity of the sexual assault? We’re taught that sexual assault of any variety is a heinous crime that creates deeply scarred women, but how serious is it if you can talk about money the day after? Either way, this conversation doesn’t look good, obviously.
- After Duke lacrosse and now DSK, when will it be OK to put rape accusers under the microscope as soon as they make their charge? I’m talking about in the mainstream media. The mainstream media still has not named Diallo even after she has been shown to lack credibility. At this point, the likelihood of her guilt is at least equal to DSK’s, but DSK was exposed to the media immediately whereas Diallo hasn’t been.
- The feminist narrative over the past couple of decades has been that women must be protected by rape shield laws because they will be too scared to report sexual assaults if they run the risk of scrutiny. But the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of feminists. They have successfully instilled in our culture that rape is so bad that women are now turning this feature of our culture on its head.
We’re at a point now where discussions of rape allegations are treated like post-Bush/Gore electoral college maps. Everyone’s too afraid to call. I’m still there too in the sense that I’m not going to definitively say that Diallo made up the sexual assault claims, but at the least we can say that feminists won’t get the old, white multimillionaire they had always hoped to post on their mantle. We’ve learned, again, that the media usually does a horrible job of investigative reporting these issues – in part because they’re hamstrung by progressives from being seen as attacking the victim. Either way, stay tuned.
Like this:
Like Loading...
GLP – I know DSK won’t get a single apology from any media outlet. The job is now complete. DSK had been discussing the problem of the US dollar as the reserve currency of the world and threatening the dollar based financial system. He gets accused of rap and is removed from his job as the head of the IMF & smeared for the French election. The new head is now in place to help the banksters and now charges get dropped? Convenient. The elites got what they wanted now. The rape accusation was an excuse to remove him.
SOBL:
this would be of interest to you
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/07/01/dominique-strauss-kahn-rape-accuser-s-african-connections.html
Since DSK’s politics enable the very things that brought this upon him I can’t sympathize with the guy.
Have to agree with Aaron. Philosophically I’m glad he won’t suffer false charges, but DSK is the archetypal elite socialist. He hectors people about inequality while leading a very lavish life, sort of like Obama complaining that the rich don’t pay enough taxes while claiming every available deduction for himself. (OT, I know, but I’m really sick of Obama.)
And sick of elites and elite socialists in general. They angry my blood and make me lose focus.
I think it is very unlikely a man of his age would be capable of raping a woman in her physical prime. I bet I wouldn’t have much trouble getting away from him and out of the room. Also a man his age doesn’t have a high enough sex drive to even be motivated enough to rape someone. Apparently most rapists are young men.
This African woman is much more likely to get raped back in Africa.
Interesting link GLP. Tom Wolfe couldnt dream up a thicker plot of great white defendant-elite conspiracy. Sarkozy has been in trouble ever since France raised the retirement age. He needed to eliminate a rival and fight a war for cheaper oil. Good to see Obama and the US kleptocracy could help out in both instances. The DSK news on my day off from work allows for some gloating over my wife’s feminist friends starting tonight.
Lara,
I thought the same thing about her ability to get away if she wanted to.
Oh, but she’s a chaste pious muslim who would never ever do such things.
This had huge red flags as soon as the word “asylum” was associated with her (not to mention that she could probably kick the old man’s ass if she had to). The left likes to fantasize that most of those who seek and get asylum are noble victims. I’m sure there are a few who fit the narrative, but I suspect most of them are master system workers.
The left likes to fantasize that most of those who seek and get asylum are noble victims. I’m sure there are a few who fit the narrative, but I suspect most of them are master system workers.
I saw a Law and Order episode about a woman who got asylum. The theme was assuredly “noble victim”.
I wonder what her future is in the criminal justice system. Will she turn in her associates and disappear into the Witness Protection Program?
Here’s an easy standard on rape: If she didn’t fight back and take injuries from being hit or choked, ect and was not drugged or threaten with a weapon then it’s not rape. Yes men overpower women all the time but women can still scratch and bite.
Just have that standard for rape cases and 90% of so called rape is really just bad sex or women changing their mind after the fact.
There’s no way the prosecution can prevail on a “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of proof, which is what applies since this isn’t a college campus.
She had an obvious motive to have consensual sex with him, with or without getting immediately paid, engineer proof of that by having semen remain in her hair or on her cheek for the police to verify, and then to claim oral rape to the hotel management and then police — all so she could hit him up with a civil suit or the threat of one, once he was convicted or criminal rape.
He likely told her who he was as a way of impressing her into wanting to have sex with him, with or without some cash sweetener. So she knew he’d be a whale in a civil suit.
Well, as someone who thought DSK was probably guilty, I retract my horrid, anti-Semitic, anonymous libel of him.
The minute Diallo received any money related to this case I would discount anything she said. It sounds like a set up.
Red: If someone would be holding a knife on my throat, I probably wouldn’t fight. And so that wouldn’t be a rape? This has nothing to do with DSK’s case of course, just saying that it can be rape even if woman didn’t fight.
Being honest here, I thought he was guilty too. I mean he could still have committed the crime, but it surely won’t result in his being found guilty. Diallo has come out and said that she was gang-raped in Guinea. She even cried while telling that fabricated story. As far as I’m concerned, even if DSK held her down and assaulted her, it’s all square after that other admitted lie.
If a woman lies about being raped once I would never believe her again.
When I see her name, I read “Nosferatu.”
Arawn said:
“Red: If someone would be holding a knife on my throat, I probably wouldn’t fight. And so that wouldn’t be a rape? This has nothing to do with DSK’s case of course, just saying that it can be rape even if woman didn’t fight.”
Arawn re-read my comment as I included being threatened with a weapon as a real rape.
The issue here is separating false rape claims from real ones. A women fighting back is a good indication of a real rape. A women who can identify a weapon used to keep her passive is a good indication of a rape and the weapon can often be recovered to help prove it the rape. A women who was drugged can be tested for drugs to indicate it was rape.
Anything else is likely to be seduction or entrapment.
I used to believe in the firm standard that if a women says no, no means know till I dated a few girls who wanted me to push past their rejections and fuck them anyways. You can’t really have a standard that says no means no when the women themselves sometimes want you to ignore the no’s. Still seems fucked up to me but women are strange with their sexual fantasies.
The line feministing is taking is that the NY Times article today is a remarkably victim blamey piece. How outrageous. But even they are no longer at all sure that DSK is guilty.
If he’s guilty of anything it’s possibly paying for sex. Though that of course should not be illegal.
It’s just as likely that he boasted about who he was and that she consensually had sex with him in order to hit him with an oral rape civil suit following a criminal trial. She lawyered up right away with that in mind.
Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: On the Run Edition