So about the Strauss khan Case.....

[JME2]

My sister's is not taking this news well. She's been denouncing the court system and DSK all morning via the phone and the internet.

And now my sister and aunt are getting into a loud argument, with my sister defending the maid and my aunt playing devil's advocate.

[Stofsk]

As an aside, are calls to prisons routinely recorded? Shouldn't criminals know this?

I don't know what it's like in America. Here, every phone call you make has a legal disclaimer recording go off as soon as the person you called picks up the receiver. It basically says 'You have received a call from someone in x prison. This phone call may be subject to recording and monitoring. If you do not wish to proceed under these circumstances, hang up now.'

Whether they monitor all phone calls I don't know - there would be an upper limit of how many phone calls could go out from the prisoners (limited number of units, limited number of phones per unit, can't make a consecutive call from the same phone, you need to use another one etc). Recording all of them though, seems quite believable. Also you had to put in your prisoner ID number to make a call - so that would give whatever machine they have the ability to go 'ah ha prisoner what's-his-name is calling such-and-such' and if you have red flags on certain numbers that could get people to monitor it.

Of course, this may not all be relevant because American jails might have different systems set up and I'm no expert on them.

[Sea Skimmer]

Prison phone call recording is a matter of state law in the US, so details will vary. But yeah, basically rule of thumb any time you call a prison or the police your call may be recorded, and while some prisons do record 100% of inmate calls most don't because that's just an insane amount of talking to record. Normally they would prioritize inmates, with people like known gang members, drug dealers or people awaiting trial being targeted. Only calls to doctors or lawyers are exempt from monitoring. But plenty of people are dumb enough to think prison phone calls aren't recorded or can't be used as evidence.

[Flagg]

A lot of people don't get the idea of presumption of innocence and don't have the capacity to comprehend the fact that it is valid for both parties. They somehow get the idea that acquittance of one party must invariably mean the guilt of the other. This makes broadly publicized rape cases usually into a lose-lose situation, much to the detriment of actual rape victims.

What the fuck are you talking about? Either he raped her and she's telling the truth or he didn't and she's a lying bitch. There's no middle ground here, dumbass.

[Stark]

Also, regarding the hot coffee incident, McDonald's actually was at fault in that case. I swear, everyone and their mother brings it up as an example of a frivolous lawsuit, but nobody ever bothers to Google it and learn the details of the case.

Do you think that's relevant? Does knowing a criminal or seeking to profit from a crime committed against you make the crime less serious?

Because you missed it, my point is that SEEKING TO PROFIT FROM SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN IT ISN'T WRONG. Frankly, if she's dropped rape charges before, maybe she's been paid off before. I wonder what kind of endemic domestic service rape exists in this level of society.

[Executor32]

Never mind, I was tired and misunderstood the entire idea behind your comment.

[Hamstray]

What the fuck are you talking about? Either he raped her and she's telling the truth or he didn't and she's a lying bitch. There's no middle ground here, dumbass.

The middle ground is that we don't know for sure what happened. The justice system can't determine 100% guilt, if that were the case we would always automatically need to convict the plaintiff for libel if the charges need to be dropped for lack of evidence. Which would lead to no one ever reporting any rape cases anymore.

[CaptainChewbacca]

The woman seems to have a serious credibility issue, with gems such as lying on her asylum visa and lying about how many kids she has for tax purposes.

How much of the case is physical evidence, and how much is just her word?

[Big Phil]

The woman seems to have a serious credibility issue, with gems such as lying on her asylum visa and lying about how many kids she has for tax purposes.

How much of the case is physical evidence, and how much is just her word?

If it was ever JUST her word then the prosecutor's office seriously fucked up.

[ChaserGrey]

How much of the case is physical evidence, and how much is just her word?

Therein lies the real rub. There's physical evidence of a sexual encounter, but that's it, and S-K never denied there was one. The whole case hinges on whether her testimony can convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn't consensual.

Of course, the fact that she has lied about other things in the past does not mean she's lying now. But it does make it harder to ask a jury to convict based on a case that boils down to her unsupported word. As far as I can tell the prosecutors are not saying "We believe S-K to be innocent", they're saying, "We don't think we can prove he's guilty".

[Sea Skimmer]

This case is going to end up depending a great deal on circumstantial evidence from everyone the alleged victim and allege rapist interacted with in between the alleged crime and the time of Strauss Khan's arrest. If how those witnesses say both parties acted doesn't support the victims shifting story then this case may never even go to trial.

[K. A. Pital]

This case is going to end up depending a great deal on circumstantial evidence from everyone the alleged victim and allege rapist interacted with in between the alleged crime and the time of Strauss Khan's arrest. If how those witnesses say both parties acted doesn't support the victims shifting story then this case may never even go to trial.

Indeed. "Lack of substance" - for the prosecutor that equals dismissal before trial. If they establish lack of substance, of course.

[JME2]

The woman seems to have a serious credibility issue, with gems such as lying on her asylum visa and lying about how many kids she has for tax purposes.

How much of the case is physical evidence, and how much is just her word?

If it was ever JUST her word then the prosecutor's office seriously fucked up.

Yeah, I'm glad I don't work in the NYC DA's office. Where's Jack McCoy when you need him?

[Raj Ahten]

Man, Strauss Khan is the gift that keeps on giving for those seeking sensational court cases isn't he? I say this because a case in France is now getting more serious. Whether this case from 2003 actually leads to any charges is up in the air. What is for sure is that rape allegations against Mr Strauss Khan aren't going away anytime soon. I'd say any talk of his political resurrection is premature.

Strauss-Kahn to face Tristane Banon rape allegation

French writer Tristane Banon is to file a complaint for attempted rape against former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, her lawyer says.

Ms Banon accuses Mr Strauss-Kahn of trying to assault her as she tried to interview him in a Paris flat in 2003.

Mr Strauss-Kahn said he would sue Ms Banon for making false statements.

He was recently freed from house arrest in New York in a separate alleged case. He denies sexually assaulting a hotel maid in the city on 14 May.

It was shortly after Mr Strauss-Kahn was arrested in New York that Ms Banon came forward to say that he had tried to assault her.

She did not go to the police at the time, but did raise the allegation in a TV chat show in 2007, when Mr Strauss-Kahn's name was bleeped out.

Ms Banon's lawyer, David Koubbi, said on Monday that she had instructed him "to file a formal criminal complaint for attempted rape" against Mr Strauss-Kahn. He said the complaint would be filed on Tuesday to a Paris prosecutor.

"These acts are extremely serious," Mr Koubbi said as he announced the legal action in France. "These events were combined with a violence that was absolutely remarkable for these kinds of cases."

He said the alleged incident took place in February 2003, and not in 2002 as previously reported.
'Word against word'

Ms Banon, 32, has claimed that during the interview, Mr Strauss-Kahn said he would only speak to her if she held his hand.

According to her version of events, she eventually had to fight him off as they wrestled on the floor and he undid her bra and pulled open her jeans.

"When I realised that he really wanted to rape me I started kicking him with my boots. I was terrified," she said in an interview published on Monday in French weekly L'Express.

She said she had not pursued the case eight years ago because at the time, "everyone told me it would never succeed".

But she said that following the allegations in New York there was "perhaps a chance to finally be listened to".

"If I want one day to put an end to this hell that has lasted eight years, it needs to be tried in court," she added.

"I'm well aware that in these kinds of cases, where it's one person's word against another - without even mentioning people who are that powerful - suspects are often released."

Mr Strauss-Kahn's French lawyers said on Monday they had been instructed to file a legal complaint against Ms Banon for making false statements about "imaginary" events.
Presidential bid 'unlikely'

Mr Strauss-Kahn had been a leading contender to be the French Socialist Party's presidential candidate before his arrest in May.

Concerns about the reliability of his accuser in New York have left that case reportedly in trouble, and led to speculation that he might return to French politics.

However, on Monday Socialist Party spokesman Benoit Hamon said the idea that Mr Strauss-Kahn could now run for the presidency was "the weakest" of all possible scenarios.

Ms Banon's mother, Anne Mansouret, herself a politician from Mr Strauss-Kahn's centre-left Socialist Party, said she had persuaded her daughter not to file a complaint at the time of the alleged incident.

But Ms Mansouret has said she is "revolted" by the gleeful reaction of many men in France to news the case in New York might fail.

Mr Koubbi told L'Express that he and his client had decided to press charges in mid-June, and that the timing of the decision was not linked to Mr Strauss-Kahn's US trial.

He had previously said it would not be filed until "later", to avoid any competition with the New York case against Mr Strauss-Kahn.

"I have always said that the French case and the American case ought not be linked," Mr Koubbi said on Monday.

Ms Banon is the god-daughter of Mr Strauss-Kahn's second wife, Brigitte Guillemette.

[Thanas]

Let's keep one thing in mind - even if she is lying about the contents of her call with prison and all that other stuff, that does not make her original allegations untrue. It may just be that she asked for advice and how to hedge her options? Given her situation, it would make it even more logical for her to do so.

DSK seems to be a real case of work anyway when it comes to issues as that, so maybe his credibility should also be questioned? And it will, in court, because basically every side will try to impeach the other.

So let us all watch our language in here, guys, and try not to be dicks, alright?

[Sea Skimmer]

Let's keep one thing in mind - even if she is lying about the contents of her call with prison and all that other stuff, that does not make her original allegations untrue. It may just be that she asked for advice and how to hedge her options? Given her situation, it would make it even more logical for her to do so.

The phone call is ambiguous. However nothing is ever logical about lying to the police and a grand jury if you are a legitimate victim.