[QUOTE=Capitaine Zombie]
Was that some kind of internal monologue adressed to yourself that, somehow, managed to make its way into your post, cause your “answers” manage to not really be linked to anything I stated.
[/QUOTE]
So, I’ll take that as a ‘no’…you won’t take a reading comprehension course. Sad, but you can’t make people less ignorant.
Again I ask, what should they have done? The man was leaving the country. He was getting on a plane and flying back to France. Should they have just used their magical truth stick to get to the bottom of the story?
It probably reeks of shit because of how far your head is up your ass. You’d think that your head being that far up your ass would help you think a bit better (placing your head in closer proximity to whatever you use for brains and all) but that doesn’t seem to be working out well for you thus far.
The police had evidence that the man had intercourse with this woman. They had her statement that the intercourse was involuntary. The accused was leaving the country. All of that gives them cause for detaining the accused and launching an investigation. Said investigation is what’s turned up the evidence that the accuser’s testimony might be compromised and that the case might get tossed out. You don’t assume the accusers story is true, you launch an investigation to see if it IS true…you know, sort of like what they actually did.
If you are going to try and spin what I’m saying, at least do a good job of spinning it, and leave out the idiotic morality aspects. I don’t give two shits who this guy does or doesn’t fuck. It could be a goat for all I care. If you fuck some woman you never met in a hotel room then don’t be surprised if she turns around and accuses you of rape (and all of this assumes it wasn’t rape in any case…something that still hasn’t been demonstrated as yet). How hard is that to understand? Obviously it’s beyond YOUR ability to comprehend, which is why you resort to idiot morality strawmen.
It must be hard to have your foot in your mouth at the same time your head is up your ass. Quite a trick though.
Well, it’s obvious you are an idiot anyway…or at least have serious reading comprehension issues. Possibly due to the fact that it must really be hard for you to focus on what you are reading with your head so far up your ass.
The only thing clear about this case is that nobody knows the truth yet. He is allowed to travel back to France now. The easing is because the credibility of the woman is being questioned. So we should be patient and wait. We do not know the truth.
AFAIK, he’s not free to travel to France (I think they are still holding his passport), but he’s completely free from house arrest and can travel in the US relatively freely. At least according to this:
No…we don’t know for sure what happened. The accuser has discredited herself pretty much, but it doesn’t really say whether there was rape or not, just that she has done some shady things and lied quite a bit about other things. My guess is the case will get dropped fairly soon and Strauss-Kahn will go completely free. I have no idea whether he still has a chance to become President in France at this point, but he’s probably done with the IMF I should think.
He is a French citizen, and crazy wealthy to boot, though. Could he charter a private flight back to France? I don’t think he’d need a passport to get out of the USA if it’s a private charter, and once he landed in Paris he’d only be detained long enough to prove that he is indeed a French citizen.
I don’t think he’d be that foolish, when simply waiting a few more days should get him his passport back. If he chartered a flight back to France it would be fairly suspicious while they are still holding his passport.
Yes, and what the prosecutors are saying is that she would not stand up to cross-examination. She seems to have been a fairly dishonest person who was involved in some illegal activities, and thought about how to shake money out of DSK. This makes her a poor witness, but it doesn’t change the likelihood that she was raped in any way. Dishonest people who like easy money can be raped just like anyone else.
Not necessarily. A lot of the false allegations could get dismissed long before forensics would become involved. Many false rape claims probably result from domestic quarrels in which the police are able to determine that the charges are bogus and no one ever gets booked. My guess is that the sheriff’s deputy is likely referring to the total number of rape allegations he and his fellow deputies hear in the field vs. those where forensic evidence is collected and the case goes to trial.
One huge difference between this case and the Duke Hoax is that these prosecutors seem to be fair and ethical, while Nifong was a lying self serving worthless sack of shit. As a prosecutor, at least. I’m sure his momma loved him.
He may be. But I’ve never known him to be a BSer. He’s rather low-key, and never tells wild stories or thumps his chest. He said it rather matter-of-factly.
I never followed up on his statement. But we live in a rural county with a sheriff’s department that operates on a shoestring budget. Not sure how aggressively they go after women who admit to lying about rape.
They’re great for one or two more things too - notably, identifying those for whom an accusation is enough to conclude guilt, and never mind any silly process of trial, evidence and all that nonsense.
So far as I can tell, the absolute worst that happens to women for making false claims of rape is that they get charged with filing a false police report. And that doesn’t happen very often. There should be a much more severe punishment, commensurate with the damage such allegations cause.
Why is it against the law to defraud someone out of money but not to bankrupt them with false rape allegations and ruin their lives? Compared to the consequences of phony rape charges, fraud is a walk in the park.
Gotta disagree with this. While it doesn’t prove she’s lying, it certainly affects the likelihood that she’s lying about the rape.
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
One huge difference between this case and the Duke Hoax is that these prosecutors seem to be fair and ethical, while Nifong was a lying self serving worthless sack of shit. As a prosecutor, at least. I’m sure his momma loved him.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe the prosecutor remembers what happened to Nifong’s career.