So, did he or didn't he?

[Aimless]

Well, you do have a point there, but it is my conviction that one of the worst mistakes you can make in a person - to - person contact is thinking for the other.

I'm generally inclined to agree, except when that approach can risk causing another person significant emotional pain. Sometimes the odds and stakes favour one approach and at other times the odds and stakes favour being cautious and kind even when it may be inappropriate to think you understand perfectly what someone else is thinking or feeling. "Better to be safe than sorry" isn't that outlandish a notion

If your sister comes to you in tears and says she's been raped, do you refer to studies and high profile cases about false rape accusations and explain that one in ten rape accusations are false? I believe the obvious answer is that, at that moment, the only right thing to do is to be kind and gentle and supportive rather than to be skeptical or even "neutral"--no matter what you yourself believe about your hard-nosed amoral mentally ill drug-addicted gold-digging hotel-room cleaning sister. And of course I think that's the only appropriate response if your brother comes to you in tears and says he's been accused of raping someone. It's the only appropriate response for you, for the doctor, for the cop, for the lawyer, for the judge, ideally also for the media but I suppose we'll never have that utopia.

At this point I may be shadow-boxing

[Hazir]

I'm generally inclined to agree, except when that approach can risk causing another person significant emotional pain. Sometimes the odds and stakes favour one approach and at other times the odds and stakes favour being cautious and kind even when it may be inappropriate to think you understand perfectly what someone else is thinking or feeling. "Better to be safe than sorry" isn't that outlandish a notion

If your sister comes to you in tears and says she's been raped, do you refer to studies and high profile cases about false rape accusations and explain that one in ten rape accusations are false? I believe the obvious answer is that, at that moment, the only right thing to do is to be kind and gentle and supportive rather than to be skeptical or even "neutral"--no matter what you yourself believe about your hard-nosed amoral mentally ill drug-addicted gold-digging hotel-room cleaning sister. And of course I think that's the only appropriate response if your brother comes to you in tears and says he's been accused of raping someone. It's the only appropriate response for you, for the doctor, for the cop, for the lawyer, for the judge, ideally also for the media but I suppose we'll never have that utopia.

At this point I may be shadow-boxing

You are a bit.

[wiggin]

If only the retribution that is supposed to come at the end of the trial IF guilt has been established weren't meted out well before by that approach.

Let's assume that DSK is found not guilty; will he be able to recover his old position? Will he head the IMF again? Will he be a serious contender for the French presidency again? Will he be able to recover the money he lost on his defense and/or his present house arrest? You know and I know that his public life is finished no matter what. And the reason for that is that we are being told that rape is underreported and we really therefore should encourage reporting it by respecting the claims of the accuser .

This isn't unique to rape allegations, but nearly any criminal investigation, especially a violent crime. Why specifically doubt the alleged rape victim?

[Hazir]

This isn't unique to rape allegations, but nearly any criminal investigation, especially a violent crime. Why specifically doubt the alleged rape victim?

This one? I told several times already; her story doesn't feel right.

[RandBlade]

Somehow I doubt he'll have been remanded if there were no evidence. Which is not to prejudice his trial, but what exactly is your alternative?

The public impact in this case couldn't really be avoided once he was arrested.

[Crowheart]

Let's assume that DSK is found not guilty; will he be able to recover his old position? Will he head the IMF again? Will he be a serious contender for the French presidency again? Will he be able to recover the money he lost on his defense and/or his present house arrest?

Which one of those trumps the need to investigate a possible serious crime that has enough evidence to prosecute?
You can't just ignore a serious matter to compensate for the pre-conceptions of fools.

[Hazir]

Somehow I doubt he'll have been remanded if there were no evidence. Which is not to prejudice his trial, but what exactly is your alternative?

The public impact in this case couldn't really be avoided once he was arrested.

Given that France would not have extradited him regardless of guilt was more relevant than the question whether or not there was a case.

[Hazir]

Which one of those trumps the need to investigate a possible serious crime that has enough evidence to prosecute?
You can't just ignore a serious matter to compensate for the pre-conceptions of fools.

It is a standing policy, not pre-conceptions of fools.

[GGT]

The assumption that the woman who is accusing somebody of rape is telling the truth. A perverse reversion of the situation where a claim of rape is per definition not taken serious. What is done is replacing one type of innocent victim (rape victim) with another type of innocent victim (falsely accused man). The underlying logic would be that there is such a gross underreporting of rape in society that if somebody is brave enough to report it must be thruthfully doing so. It destroys the life of a person accused in a way that we would find unacceptable in any other situation.

That's the FEMINIST SHIT about rape you meant? The perverse reversion of who's the victim is being done by you; automatically dismissing her claims because you're concerned DSK's life may be destroyed. Convinced she's a lying gold-digger making false accusations that will ruin DSK's future. Somehow unreported/underreported rapes turned into too much credibility for victims' claims, and leads to millions of men being falsely accused, their lives ruined.

The Roman Catholic church used the same approach to protect abusive priests, and maintain their hierarchy of VIPs. If feminists helped turn that around, they should be thanked, not mocked.

If only the retribution that is supposed to come at the end of the trial IF guilt has been established weren't meted out well before by that approach.

Let's assume that DSK is found not guilty; will he be able to recover his old position? Will he head the IMF again? Will he be a serious contender for the French presidency again? Will he be able to recover the money he lost on his defense and/or his present house arrest? You know and I know that his public life is finished no matter what. And the reason for that is that we are being told that rape is underreported and we really therefore should encourage reporting it by respecting the claims of the accuser .

Yeah, it's because of all the unreported rapes and frightened victims not coming forward....that DSK was charged with sexual assault. Let's do a re-cap of your "gut feelings". The maid was looking for hush money, the hotel management is involved somehow but it's not entirely clear, the police wanted a perp walk to show how tough they are on crime, the DA wants to show they'll take on a powerful man so the little people will vote for them, and the feminists just want to destroy men's lives.

If he's found not guilty his life won't be ruined, and you know it. If there's a conspiracy, or false claims, his defense will file counter charges and ask for monetary compensation. If that fails he'll write a book, maybe host his own political talk show, or do the highly-paid speech circuit. His reputation will be salvaged, and he'll make enough money to retire in comfort. The IMF will continue on, with a new chairman and leadership.

[earthJoker]

If he's found not guilty his life won't be ruined, and you know it. If there's a conspiracy, or false claims, his defense will file counter charges and ask for monetary compensation. If that fails he'll write a book, maybe host his own political talk show, or do the highly-paid speech circuit. His reputation will be salvaged, and he'll make enough money to retire in comfort.

While I don't agree with Hazir, this is simply untrue. There are several examples (Andreas Türk pops into my mind) where the career of people where over even after proven to be innocent.

[GGT]

I'm not familiar with that name. The US has plenty of men who were involved in scandals, even found guilty of some crimes, and were able to carry on just fine. Clarence Thomas (SCOTUS), Eliot Spitzer (CNN show host), Bill Clinton....not to mention Hollywood types like Pee Wee Herman, Robert Downing Jr, Roman Polanski....

Europeans may think Americans are puritans, but over here there are always second chances.

[Ominous Gamer]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...h3G_story.html

America definitely has a problem with sex subjects, I'd say second chances are the exception, not the norm.
Hell, we fire teachers based on how well they are able to hide their past professions.


Does that justify the stance Hazir has displayed? Nope.

[GGT]

[America definitely has a problem with sex subjects, I'd say second chances are the exception, not the norm.
Hell, we fire teachers based on how well they are able to hide their past professions.

Does that justify the stance Hazir has displayed? Nope.

We have a problem with accused child molesters. People assume there's been a rigorous process before filing those charges, but depending on the area---maybe not. The police in that case didn't even talk to the accuser....quick jury decision and outrage at lack of evidence! That reflects a problem with their local police and DA. Sounds like VA has problems in general.

"And the district has refused to pay his $125,000 in legal fees, even though Virginia law allows reimbursement for employees who are cleared of wrongdoing on the job."

[earthJoker]

I'm not familiar with that name. The US has plenty of men who were involved in scandals, even found guilty of some crimes, and were able to carry on just fine. Clarence Thomas (SCOTUS), Eliot Spitzer (CNN show host), Bill Clinton....not to mention Hollywood types like Pee Wee Herman, Robert Downing Jr, Roman Polanski....

Europeans may think Americans are puritans, but over here there are always second chances.

Türk was a German show host.

You can't list Roman Polanski, he didn't got a second chance in the US (he lives in France). On the others, I didn't found information that any of those was accused rape. About the "Always a second changes" I don't believe this theory.

[GGT]

Well, Polanski continued to film or direct movies, didn't he? If he'd returned to the US he'd have faced charges (which looks like admitting guilt, in a way). The men I listed were involved in sex-related scandals, some charged with crimes and some not. There are corporate men (sometimes women) charged with work-place sexual harassment, and even when found guilty they find other jobs.

No idea how many very-important-men have been charged with attempted rape and been exonerated, but unable to re-start their careers or private lives. Our press would be right on that, following their ruined reputations with undeserved leper-status, scraping by on pauper's wages.

[Aimless]

ffs what if he doesn't want to host a talk show, what if he's always dreamed of being president? dismissing lifefucking negative events by saying, "sack up, you can always fall back on shitty undesired alternative x," wtf

[GGT]

ffs what if he doesn't want to host a talk show, what if he's always dreamed of being president? dismissing lifefucking negative events by saying, "sack up, you can always fall back on shitty undesired alternative x," wtf

Huh? I'm saying that a man like DSK, if found not guilty of the charges, stands to do just fine after it's all said and done. Maybe the IMF will hire him again, even though he's 62 years old and well within France's retirement age. Maybe he'll run for elected office, the highest office. A not-guilty verdict in an American court could actually propel him to public hero status in France. (Those puritanical yanks, trying to bring down an important and powerful public French figure with false rape charges....we'll show them how barbaric their judicial system is.)

If the French (or the IMF) decide to cast him aside after being found not guilty of attempted rape or sexual assault, then that's a dilemma the Europeans have to answer, not Americans.

[Hazir]

Huh? I'm saying that a man like DSK, if found not guilty of the charges, stands to do just fine after it's all said and done. Maybe the IMF will hire him again, even though he's 62 years old and well within France's retirement age. Maybe he'll run for elected office, the highest office. A not-guilty verdict in an American court could actually propel him to public hero status in France. (Those puritanical yanks, trying to bring down an important and powerful public French figure with false rape charges....we'll show them how barbaric their judicial system is.)

If the French (or the IMF) decide to cast him aside after being found not guilty of attempted rape or sexual assault, then that's a dilemma the Europeans have to answer, not Americans.

Are you really this stupid or are you just bullshitting? There is no way he could go back to the IMF, also there is no way he can ever run in the French presidential elections with as much of a shot at actually winning than he appeared to have 2 weeks ago.

It's not so strange so many people saw the whole affair as a sinister complot; DSK was the candidate to beat for Sarkozy to stay in the Elysée.

[Aimless]

dear ggt,

a few weeks ago i posted a couple of articles about how voters seem to think and behave. did you know that the impact of being accused of doing something bad never really goes away? Even if the accusations are shown to be false? Swiftboats, muslim unamerican Obama, death panels, etc.



And, er. I hope you're a little more understanding when it comes to innocent soccer coached.

[GGT]

Are you really this stupid or are you just bullshitting? There is no way he could go back to the IMF, also there is no way he can ever run in the French presidential elections with as much of a shot at actually winning than he appeared to have 2 weeks ago.

Why not? If he's acquitted of the charges, why would France or Europe hold that against him? After all, isn't your suggestion that Europeans are more sophisticated and 'enlightened' than the US? Why would they hold it against him for being an innocent victim?

It's not so strange so many people saw the whole affair as a sinister complot; DSK was the candidate to beat for Sarkozy to stay in the Elysée.

And? If you want to imply a nefarious conspiracy going on, wouldn't that be against the French and not the US?

[Aimless]

Why would they hold it against him for being an innocent victim?

Perhaps for the same reason you don't trust anyone ever? Perhaps because they can't shake the feeling that he may have been guilty of something somewhere sometime and they're governed by their guts? etc

[GGT]

dear ggt,

a few weeks ago i posted a couple of articles about how voters seem to think and behave. did you know that the impact of being accused of doing something bad never really goes away? Even if the accusations are shown to be false? Swiftboats, muslim unamerican Obama, death panels, etc.

And, er. I hope you're a little more understanding when it comes to innocent soccer coached.

Accusations that are proven wrong in a court of law are viewed differently than campaign ads. Sure, marketing ads can appeal to people's suspicions and doubts, hopes and ideals. That's why they run them, and create those ads to be just shy of sensationalism.

Just take a look around the US political landscape, and you'll find legislators connected to all sorts of illegal activity; fraud (McCain/Keating Five), perjory (Clinton), bribery (Ensign), sexual harassment of staff or pages (too numerous to mention), adultery and infidelity (Edwards, Gingrich, too many to name).

Of course I'm sympathetic to innocent people accused of crimes they did not commit! Soccer teachers or international bankers! IMO the only truly destructive thing to people are false convictions of guilt, not false accusations. Yes, it sucks that sometimes average or poor people can't always pay for the best attorneys to get them acquitted, especially for charges that "brand" them as sexual predators. It's not fair they may have to wait in prison for private Justice foundations, Southern Poverty Law Center, or the ACLU to prove their innocence. It's not fair that sometimes the wealthiest can buy the best lawyers, or get special plea agreements. (Recall the Kennedy kid accused of date rape?)

I'm not going to cry any pity tears for DSK. He'll have the best defense money can buy, they'll use the media to their advantage, they may even avoid court altogether if a plea agreement can be made. While he waits in a posh NYC apartment with his wife, instead of Riker's Island.

Come to think of it, if he's such an important international figure, so smart and sophisticated a businessman.....why was he in NYC without an aide or secretary? That's usually how very-important-people travel internationally. Too bad he didn't have an aide or secretary, or even a dedicated driver, that could be his alibi. Now he has to rely on Sofitel's hallway cameras, check-out computer entries, and phone records. And it's his word against hers, until the forensic science is introduced.

[GGT]

Perhaps for the same reason you don't trust anyone ever? Perhaps because they can't shake the feeling that he may have been guilty of something somewhere sometime and they're governed by their guts? etc

Dear minx,

American lawyers weed out prejudiced prospective jurors fairly well. If they can't be relied upon to make non-gut judgments, if they can't follow a judges directions to ONLY consider the evidence and our LAWS, then they get kicked out. Sometimes judges have to change jurisdiction, because too many jurors interviewed have "already made up their minds".

I don't think it will be too difficult to find a non-biased jury in this case, if it even sees the inside of a courtroom. I spent last weekend with Long Island people who had no idea who DSK was, hadn't heard the charges, don't read newspapers or watch cable news. They know what the IMF is, but that's about it.

[Dreadnaught]

I don't think a horrific false molestation charge really suggests that "America definitely has a problem with sex subjects"

[Ominous Gamer]

Its an example of, not a justification for.

America has always had a problem with sex. It makes people uneasy. We have games like Postal, Manhunt, GTA, but not a single game that hints at sex (and when we did, it ended up in a multi-million dollar lawsuit). The same for movies. Its not just how far false accusations can go legally, but also socially and financially. Sexual professions can chase people their entire lives, some how making them unfit for certain careers farther down the road. Tying someone's name to rape is a black mark on their name, their organization, no matter how false it turns out to be, especially in this digital age. The Duke lacrosse case still comes up in google when you search for rape. One of my libraries experienced a violent attack after hours, and even though it had nothing to do with the location, that library is still considered the rape library.
For a lot of people, a rape claim is the only reason their name would show up in search engines to begin with.

[GGT]

Let's not confuse search engines with background checks. The Duke Lacrosse team is a particularly good example of how false accusations WILL eventually be proven and legally adjudicated.

[Dreadnaught]

Scandals involving rape and sexual abuse tend to be remembered for being scandals about rape and sexual abuse. When I search on Google for rape I see nothing about Duke.

[wiggin]

Minx and Hazir: I agree with both of you that DSK's career is effectively over, especially in political office (I don't doubt that if he's exonerated he could probably find a lower profile job in finance, but that's not exactly his ambition). So what? There was an accusation made, and it looks like the police felt there was enough evidence to indict him. In that context, I couldn't care less what it will do to his career. There are no special protections under the law for people who want to hold public positions, nor should there be.

It also gives no credence to the case that DSK is innocent because the maid is clearly lying. Just because DSK has a lot to lose from even the accusation of rape doesn't make the case any more or less compelling. Otherwise any career-ending scandal for a public official should be assumed to be an elaborate character assassination plot. History doesn't really seem to bear that assumption out, I'm afraid - unfortunately, plenty of famous people actually did the things they are accused of doing. This isn't to say DSK is guilty, but it does mean we have no reason to believe it's a setup either.

[Hazir]

Minx and Hazir: I agree with both of you that DSK's career is effectively over, especially in political office (I don't doubt that if he's exonerated he could probably find a lower profile job in finance, but that's not exactly his ambition). So what? There was an accusation made, and it looks like the police felt there was enough evidence to indict him. In that context, I couldn't care less what it will do to his career. There are no special protections under the law for people who want to hold public positions, nor should there be.

It also gives no credence to the case that DSK is innocent because the maid is clearly lying. Just because DSK has a lot to lose from even the accusation of rape doesn't make the case any more or less compelling. Otherwise any career-ending scandal for a public official should be assumed to be an elaborate character assassination plot. History doesn't really seem to bear that assumption out, I'm afraid - unfortunately, plenty of famous people actually did the things they are accused of doing. This isn't to say DSK is guilty, but it does mean we have no reason to believe it's a setup either.

I would agree that not every scandal should automatically be discarded as a complot. You'd be indeed putting yourself in a corner where I don't care to be. Neither seeing the entire world as the playground of illuminati nor seeing 'the elite' incapable of doing bad things is my way of looking as things.

Still, I can't help myself thinking in this particular case that this was really a convenient scandal to break. Too convenient? I don't really know.

And of course this type of damage should not be a reason not to raise an accusation against the guilty. But I also think we should come down a lot harder on people who falsely accuse somebody, given the extensive damage this does and keeps doing. GGT is behaving like a stupid ass acting as if a not-guilty in court alone is enough to get back your life. All I need to do is point out how people think about the not-guilty verdict that came at the end of the case against O.J. Simpson. If there is anybody who truly believes he didn't do it, I still have to meet that person.
It has already been suggested in this thread by Loki that the same could happen to DSK just because he can afford the best lawyers.

All that given, I do believe that giving any sort of higher level of credence to a person who claims to be a rape victim gives the accused (especially the falsely accused) a deal way too bad to consider it justice.

[Aimless]

Wiggin, the only thing I was concerned with in my posts to GGT is her casual dismissal of the possible effects of a rape accusation on a person's life just because he happens to be rich and powerful. I certainly think that if there is cause to charge him then that's what should be done. I just don't like the way GGT and much of the media ignores the impact of these things. The innocent have nothing to fear etc.