Saw that.
One could almost make a case that DSK was hoist in his own petard. Knowing his predilection for roughing up women and an inability to hear the word “no”, his enemies sent in bait and he went for it. In other words, yes; Ms Diallo was sent to his room, and yes, DSK attacked her.
Except for there being no evidence worth a shit that he attacked her.
And plenty of timeline evidence that would make it pretty unlikely.
I saw the timeline ‘evidence’ as well, but it still leaves as many questions as answers. Obviously sex happened, since they found his and her DNA mingled…right? So, to me it seems a bit unlikely that in the 6-7 minutes (from memory) available that this woman just dropped to her knees and started scrumpin’ on seeing DSK come out of the bathroom (or bedroom). Or does that seem likely to you?
Regardless, I’d say he WAS hoist on his on penard, since regardless of whether he attacked her or she did just drop to her knees with her mouth (or whatever) open and inviting, it was pretty fucking stupid of him to do what he did AND leave evidence behind (leaving aside the whole unprotected sex with some random maid part of all this)…no?
Or am I missing something here?
-XT
[Moderating]
I’ve edited the thread title to make the subject clearer.
[/Moderating]
You’ll make more clear the title of a six-month-old thread, but you won’t add an “r” to my year-old-thread that keeps getting resurrected?
Tee hee.
Clear evidence that Miller is an -acist.
I haven’t been following this that closely recently. But doesn’t the time line make more sense if he was set up? A simple sting operation. Wouldn’t take time at all, especially since he just came out of the shower.
'Course, that raises other questions. Why wait until the very last day he was in the country? Why wait until the last minute? The article notes they seem to take their own sweet time to call the police - that delay means DSK’s flight very easy could have left before they arrived to arrest him.
The whole thing is kinda bizarre.
As noted earlier in this thread, the NY Post reported, citing prosecution (& defense) sources, that the woman is a part time hooker. The timeline is consistent with that. (As is the notion that this was a set-up.)
The whole thing is bizarre, as you say. Bottom line is unless this chick forced him to let her suck his dick or whatever at gun point (:dubious:) then the guy was a fool to do what he did.
As for the possibility of a set up, I can’t say. Again, though, he could only be set up like that if he actually was stupid enough to let some random cleaning maid seduce him coming out of a bathroom. If you are old and nasty looking (as he is), and some young black girl feels compelled to drop to her knees to suck your dick then you should at least consider the possibility that all may not be as it seems. And even if it IS as it seems, that perhaps letting her suck your dick isn’t the wisest course, since you have no idea where that mouth or other parts have been, or who else might have availed themselves to those services in the past.
-XT
[QUOTE=Fotheringay-Phipps]
As noted earlier in this thread, the NY Post reported, citing prosecution (& defense) sources, that the woman is a part time hooker. The timeline is consistent with that. (As is the notion that this was a set-up.)
[/QUOTE]
AFAIK, DSK hasn’t mentioned any exchange of money with this woman. Of course, if he had then he might have been open to charges of pandering(?). Even if she was a hooker (full time or part time), I don’t see how that really changes anything, unless, again, she made him fuck her at gun point. It was still his choice, right? It was an incredibly stupid thing to do.
-XT
AFAIK DSK hasn’t publically described his actions. And his lawyers have confined themselves to the mininum necessary for his defense.
I thought your point was that it’s hard to understand how things progressed so quickly if DSK used no force. If she was a hooker it would explain that.
As for whether DSK is stupid, that’s beyond the scope of this discussion. OK, so he’s stupid. I would note, though, that by all indications he’s been doing these types of things for many many years. It’s a high risk behaviour, but you can’t look at this one incident in isolation. He gets to have his fun with many many women and on some occasions he pays the price. Not a lifestyle that I personally recommend, but his choice. Whatever.
[QUOTE=Fotheringay-Phipps]
AFAIK DSK hasn’t publically described his actions. And his lawyers have confined themselves to the mininum necessary for his defense.
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps, though it’s hard to believe that if money did exchange hands for sexual favors that this hasn’t come out. I’d have thought that if this were the case it would have been a slam dunk for the defense, and they could perhaps have copped to a lesser charge for whatever you get for having sex with a prostitute in New York.
I guess it could, though again I’ve heard nothing about an exchange of money, just an exchange of DNA. It’s such a weird situation, all things considered, that I have trouble wrapping my head around the various motives here, at least as far as DSK is concerned. I could see someone setting him up this way, and I guess I could see getting some part time hooker type to do the setting up, but if that was the case all along then why hasn’t the DSK defense brought up the fact that he paid for the pussy? That seems to be a key aspect if that’s what happened.
Sure, and I agree…it’s his decision and his choice. And if you risky stuff like that you have to know that eventually you’ll get burned. The risk is actually part of thrill…I know, since I have done some fairly risky things myself in the past. Pretty much that’s what I’ve been getting at in this thread (at least that’s my recollection…I seem to recall responding to this thread quite a while ago). If you do stupid shit then you have to be prepared to pay the bill at some point. DSK, whether he was set up or whether this all just happened, fucked up both literally and figuratively. So sad, but there you go.
Anyone know what his political prospects are these days? I know the French pretty much turn a blind eye towards sexual shenanigans in their politicians, and since this doesn’t seem to be rape they are perhaps willing to gloss all this over?
-XT