they could make money on books and on the lecture circuit
Printable View
they could make money on books and on the lecture circuit
Because the police detectives (and Internal Affairs) would be the first to have access to the video tape, showing their entry into her apartment. Three times in one night, while on duty. First time escorting a drunken woman to her home, okay that sounds kosher on face value (but don't ask people arrested for public intoxication what they think of that :donkey: )Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Second time meaning....they made a follow-up visit the same night? Is this SOP for NYPD? I doubt it.
Third time meaning.....what? There's probably no SOP justifying a 3rd visit to anyone trying to find their way home, while intoxicated, after they've already been helped home. The cops had options, like arresting her for public intoxication, or calling 911 to get her medical care for possible alcohol poisoning. But that's not what they did, is it.
:donkey:
Clever minx, conflating DSK with NYPD? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Then I suppose suspension with pay is the way to goQuote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Only if there are claw-backs. But what do we do with corrupt or unethical Civil Servants who've spent those paychecks while being investigated? Perhaps spending every paycheck down to its last cent, laughing at the system trying to find a drop of blood in a dried up turnip?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Is this how the IMF views criminal charges against their chairman? I'm guessing not, and that's why DSK resigned. He knew better than to mix money with politics, but only after it was too late. :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
His trial could take a couple of years, and who wants to pay him for doing nothing in the interim? Especially if it contributes toward his first-class Tribeca NYC lifestyle at around $200,000/month, while awaiting trial?
Clever ggt, conflating DSK with NYPD? :p
Hazir did that, all on his own. :p
Bullshit, you are making social mores the equal of criminal charges. What they were found guilty of was going into her home three times. Nothing more and nothing less. Not that this matters to people like you. You already decided you know better than the jury and judge. Same for GGT. And for the peoply who are supposed to uphold the law and make such a travesty of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
DSK resigned, which is not the same as being sacked. But it sure is enlightening to see that even with non-rich people you want to see them bleed before being found guilty.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
No, you are the one making social mores superior to criminal convictions. Do the Dutch really need a judge and jury to tell on-duty Police they shouldn't end up in bed with women wearing only a bra? The same women that called Civil Servants for help finding their way home?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Poor Hazir. You just can't make a cogent argument about the accused or the accusers, the innocent or the convicted, the haves or the have-nots, the Europeans or the Americans.
All you can do is post about how awful things are when powerful European men or NYC policemen are held accountable for their actions in a court of law.
:bored:
He confessed on the record in court to lying in bed with her while she was naked. Did you miss that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
He conveniently ignored or dismissed that, because it did not fit in his pre-conceived belief compartments. Main compartment: Americans are not to be trusted. Second compartment: US police and law enforcement is not to be trusted. Third compartment: women are not to be trusted, especially American women *or women in America* claiming sexual assault/abuse against European men *Or any men in positions of power, like police*Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
:donkey:
Hazir, I've been thinking about your posts the last couple of days. You hold what seems to be a minority opinion, especially regarding charges of rape or sexual assault. At first I thought this was your way of placing Europeans above Americans, because if this had happened in France or Italy you'd say it wouldn't have made the 5 o'clock news. I don't buy that, not at all.
Europeans are just as prone to gossip, reading tabloids, and using social networks for "News" as Americans. Indeed, that's pretty much what you've done this entire thread. How can you maintain this false moral superiority for DSK?
....especially after learning that victims can wait several years for their day of justice in the court room...
You know the difference between telling something during a trial and confessing?Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
If it is not truthful, we call it perjury. What else did you have in mind?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Telling something in court is something different than confessing. You may hear this for the first time but those people in robes in the court room are not priests taking confessions. Talking about a non-crime you weren't charged with is not a confession. İn the case at hand telling about being in bed with a half naked woman would have to count as the 'İ didn't do it'Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Again, do you have to be convicted in court of a crime in order to lose your job?
You're trying to say that "utterances" aren't relevant? Perhaps not, but that's up to the judge to decide. Whether it's deemed hearsay, relevant, or whatever. Are you attempting to use the police testimony about 'cuddling' irrelevant?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
İ am sure that a lot of people who ever had to deal with a person so drunk he or she lost control of himself could imagine a perfectly logical reason as to what happened. No matter how bad it may look to people who were not there. İ had the pleasure once of having to deal with somebody losing it at a club, puking over me in the taxi back home and winding up half naked in my shower. The last thing on my mind was sex. Quite another crime was, it involved throwing him out a fourth floor window, head first.
That appears to be the case in the New York police force as the verdict was the trigger for dismissal. Technically they trespassed and that was the official reason for firing them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Were they charged with it? İf no then the only meaning that story has that as cuddling is not raping they were denying the crime they were accused of.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
And both cops were found innocent of rape. What's your beef again?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
According to the NYT yes.
It could not be proven as rape, but it was crystal clear that both these cops were guilty of...trespassing, at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Hazir, time for you to come clean. What exactly is your motivation for this thread? Do you want to prove that US justice is corruptible by the wealthy or special interest groups? Do you want to make accusations against our media? Do you want to push and support the French media? Do you have biases either way?
Aw screw it. Ten pages mostly telling Hazir he lost on limited terms, with no group fantasy ratings.....hope you find check-out quick and easy, Hazir. Also hope you read about and connect the dots, for the biggest scam in history.....:sour:
You're missing the fact they were convicted, of multiple charges but just not rape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Cops are not supposed to be convicted of any crime, in the UK (I suspect its the same in the US), if someone has a criminal record they can not even apply to join the Police. If a cop gets a criminal record, then that's a violation of their contract and they can be dismissed.
Not going to lie, I didn't realize so few cases in France were heard by a jury and cases were entirely managed by appointed judges. No wonder important people rarely get prosecuted.
It's an interesting system though.
Quote:
May 28, 2011
French System Tints View of the Strauss-Kahn Case
By SCOTT SAYARE
PARIS — The sexual assault case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn, which continues to crowd out much other news here, is becoming something of a civics lesson in American justice — one that has inspired both biting criticism and some respect.
Legal experts say much of the consternation here over what many consider rough treatment in the news media and the courts is rooted in a general unfamiliarity with an American justice system that differs profoundly — in procedure, tone and philosophy — from the French model.
“There is an aspect of pageantry that we don’t have in our country,” said Judge Marie-Blanche Régnier, who is national secretary of a French magistrates trade union.
While the American justice system has its origins in British common law and involves ordinary citizens at almost every level, the French judicial system is rooted in the Napoleonic Code and is largely conducted behind closed doors. Suspects are typically ushered into courthouses through discreet side entrances, out of view of the public.
State-appointed magistrates prosecute and pass judgment in most trials without the oversight of citizen jurors, who serve only in the most serious cases. In such cases, formal charges come — if they come — only after a lengthy inquest by an investigating judge, who collects evidence on behalf of both the prosecution and defense before determining if a trial is warranted.
And in further contrast to the American system, investigating magistrates are legally bound to secrecy during an inquest.
All too often, critics say, the French system allows cases against well-known people to go nowhere or result in reduced charges without explanation. “For the powerful,” Judge Régnier said, “there is a treatment that can be different.”
Because the magistrates are considered impartial investigators, and are tasked with seeking the truth without bias, the defense typically does not conduct a separate investigation.
Building their arguments primarily on evidence collected by investigating magistrates, and only rarely introducing significant evidence of their own, French lawyers seldom attack the credibility of witnesses or plaintiffs, a common tactic in American court cases.
“We’re going to see the man who could have been the embodiment of the French left obligated — because it’s the American judicial system that wants it — to crush this woman,” Jean-Dominique Merchet, a deputy editor at the weekly magazine Marianne, said on France Info radio. “It’s going to be terrifying.”
Much also has been made here of the 74-year sentence that Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who stepped down as the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, could face if convicted on all counts. American audiences pay little heed to such numbers. But French law puts far stricter limits on sentencing, and discrepancies between maximum terms and sentences as they are handed down are often less drastic.
Noting that the Manhattan district attorney is elected, many French also see the influence of politics in the muscular approach taken toward Mr. Strauss-Kahn, accused by a hotel housekeeper of attacking her in his room.
The “deliberate destruction” of Mr. Strauss-Kahn would probably be a “very winning” electoral strategy, Robert Badinter, a Socialist senator and former justice minister, said on France Inter radio.
Bradley D. Simon, a New York defense lawyer and former federal prosecutor, said some American lawyers also disliked the “theatrics of the criminal justice system.”
But he rejected French assertions that Mr. Strauss-Kahn had been unfairly singled out. Rather, Mr. Simon said, he is being “treated as badly as everyone else.”
The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly criticized the French judiciary as lacking independence.
Writing on his blog after Mr. Strauss-Kahn was arrested, the respected Paris magistrate Philippe Bilger praised the diligence of an American system that “does not hesitate to apprehend even the most emblematic personalities with lightning speed.”
In France, he said, such people “would have had the time to prepare their truth or their lie.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/29/wo.../29france.html
If you would bother to read something you would know they were convicted of tresspassing. The rest was not relevant to the conviction, only to them being acquitted in the rape charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
SourceQuote:
French minister accused of rape resigns
Two women allege he attacked then between 2007 and 2010
PARIS — A minister accused of sexually assaulting two women he once worked with resigned Sunday in an apparent bid to spare the French government the kind of notoriety the opposition has faced since its leading man, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, was charged with attempting to rape a Manhattan hotel maid.
A preliminary investigation was opened last week against George Tron, who served as a junior civil service minister, after two women alleged that he had attacked them between 2007 and 2010.
One of the women said she was inspired to come forward after a housekeeper at a luxury Manhattan hotel claimed she was sexually assaulted by Strauss-Kahn, 62, a leading presidential hopeful in next year's elections for the rival Socialist Party. He resigned his post as International Monetary Fund chief after charges were filed in New York.
Tron, 53, is a member of President Nicolas Sarkozy's conservative UMP party who joined the government just over a year ago.
Tron's resignation appeared to be damage control as Sarkozy primps his image for a likely re-election bid in the presidential race in a year's time. The popular Strauss-Kahn had been expected to run as the Socialist candidate for president.
Both Tron and Strauss-Kahn have denied any wrongdoing.
No replacement for Tron was immediately announced. It was widely reported that Budget Minister Francois Baroin would absorb Tron's functions, seamlessly filling the void in a move to keep the spotlight off the government.
A statement from Prime Minister Francois Fillon's office noted Tron has denied the allegations and praised him for acting in the "general interest."
Tron's lawyer, Olivier Schnerb, has said the allegations against him are "unjust" and he has received instructions from his client to sue the women for "malicious slander."
He claims the women were both fired from their jobs at the town hall of Draveil, south of Paris — where Tron has been mayor since 1995 — suggesting that they had a personal vendetta.
A preliminary investigation for rape and sexual assault was opened Wednesday against Tron. This initial probe allows prosecutors to decide whether to pursue or drop the case.
The two women, aged 34 and 36, have claimed that foot massages administered by Tron evolved into assault.
Tron is adept at foot reflexology, an alternative medicine based on the notion that zones of the foot correspond to certain body parts and pressure on those points can promote health.
The women told the newspaper Le Parisien last week that Tron assaulted them behind locked doors at the town hall.
One said she was too ashamed to tell anyone at first, but that she spoke out after the charges were brought in New York against Strauss-Kahn.
"When I saw that a chambermaid was capable of taking on Dominique Strauss-Kahn, I told myself I didn't have the right to keep quiet," said the woman, who was not identified by name.
"Other women may be suffering what I suffered. I have to help them. We have to break this code of silence."
In its online site, the newsweekly L'Express quoted Tron as vowing in his letter of resignation to "make (his) innocence known by combatting the vindictive allegations of two former colleagues," one he claimed was dismissed for allegedly pilfering funds in her care, the other for unfit behavior.
More fuel for the fires.
Is it normal in Europe for employers to administer foot massages to their subordinates?
If you would you would realise that was not the only charge and they were CONVICTED. Law makers must not be law breakers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Not that I know of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith
I don't know about France, but it's not normal in Holland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith
Acquitted of the main charge. Outside the DA's office this should count as a heavy defeat. They tried to prove that a guy who was said to have been in bed with a semi-naked woman while on duty had raped her. And they couldn't. The connection with DSK is that it's bloody hard to prove rape.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Indeed it is hard to prove rape, which doesn't mean we shouldn't try if we have reasonable grounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
However that has no bearing on whether they should lose their jobs or not. They were convicted of crimes, which means they can not be cops. Criminals can't be cops, cops can't be criminals.
It sounds so much better if you use the wide term 'crime' doesn't it? The real conviction was for 'official misconduct misdemeanors' i.e. trespassing.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
But I guess we can count you (and GGT) with the people who know better than the jury so these guys are really guilty as hell rapists. Funny they didn't get 25 years in prison. It boggles the mind doesn't it?
Which brings me back to my original question: 'are all cops in the US held to such high standards that they are sacked for trespassing?' Or are only the ones that are accused of rape the subject of this special treatment?
I should hope all cops are held to high standards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Still doesn't answer my question if every cop found guilty of tresspassing is fired.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I guess it would depend on how corrupt a county/city system is, but I'm sure if a cop is caught doing something illegal, especially while ON DUTY!, then I would hope that they would be fired.
If anything, this thread has really been enlightening; apparently women, especially lowly poor ones, should just keep their mouths shut and let powerful men do as they please to them. At least that's how Europeans feel? I always thought they were so much more equal rights than Americans could be. :(