Dominique Strauss-Kahn's appearance in court on Tuesday, his first since July 1, has turned out to be his last trip to the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse. In the weeks since the latest hearing over his alleged sexual assault of a chambermaid at a midtown Manhattan hotel, in which Judge Michael J. Obus freed Strauss-Kahn and vacated his bail because of questions about the accuser's credibility
"For a trial jury to find the defendant guilty, it must be persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant is credible," the motion to dismiss says. "Indeed, the case rises and falls on her testimony." The motion explains, "The physical and other evidence does not establish forcible compulsion or lack of consent," meaning that the case would hinge on a jury's believing the accuser's testimony over Strauss-Kahn's assertions that the sexual encounter was consensual. (See pictures of Dominique Strauss-Kahn during the case.)
In court Tuesday morning, Assistant District Attorney Joan Illuzi-Orbon spoke before Judge Obus and explained their reasoning for the motion to dismiss charges. Illuzi-Orbon said that Strauss-Kahns accuser, Nafissatou Diallo, was untruthful with us in virtually every substantive interview in matters of large and small significance. Illuzi-Orbon explained that while the physical and forensic evidence in the case suggests a hurried sexual encounter, it did not answer questions of force or consent. For a jury to believe an assault took place, jurors would have to rely on Diallos credibility. Indeed, the case rises and falls on her testimony, said Illuzi-Orbon in a direct quote from the dismissal motion.
Judge Obus agreed and dismissed the charges, but the legal proceedings had one more act. On Monday, Diallos lawyers filed a motion to appoint a special prosecutor, arguing that Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance, Jr. had not fulfilled his duties. Judge Obus denied that motion, and just hours before the hearing, Diallos lawyers appealed that ruling. When Judge Obus dismissed the charges, he placed a stay on the ruling for 30 days, meaning that the ruling would not go into affect for that time, allowing the appellate court to rule on Diallos appeal. It turns out the court didnt need much time at all. Less than two hours after the hearing ended, the appellate court denied the appeal, leaving Strauss-Kahn free to go.
Outside the courthouse, lawyers for Strauss-Kahn said they were pleased with the decisions. It is impossible to understand the full measure of relief Dominique Strauss-Kahn is feeling, his lawyer Benjamin Brafman said. You can engage in inappropriate behavior perhaps, but that is much different than a crime. When asked if Strauss-Kahn would be free to leave the country, Brafman said, He can go now if he wants to, but hes not.
The decision to end the case altogether comes after weeks during which the accuser and her attorneys tried to publicly pressure the prosecutors into continuing the case. On July 25, Diallo went forward in interviews with Newsweek and ABC News and told her side of the story of the alleged attack. Two weeks later, Diallo filed a civil suit in the Bronx, asking for unspecified monetary damages for what the complaint called a "violent and sadistic attack." (See "The Double Standard of Sex Crimes.")
Yet on Aug. 19, Assistant District Attorney Artie McConnell sent a letter to Thompson, inviting Diallo to a meeting on Aug. 22. According to the letter, which was obtained by the New York Times, the purpose of the meeting was for McConnell to "[explain] to her what I anticipate will occur in Court on the following day" which Thompson said he interpreted to mean they would be dropping the case or altering the charges.
In an interesting twist, Thompson himself gave the letter to the Times after criticizing the Manhattan DA's office for press leaks in the complaint filed for the civil lawsuit. "There have been leaks to the news media of false information about Ms. Diallo, apparently by members of the Manhattan District Attorney's Office," the complaint states, "that have severely damaged Ms. Diallo's credibility, reputation and character."
The civil suit ensured that Diallo's version of the story remained in the public eye; however, it may not have been the best legal move in her push for criminal prosecution. "If they have any hope for the prosecution going forward and resulting in a conviction, then it's a very foolish move," Bob Bennett, a leading criminal-defense attorney and former federal prosecutor who represented Bill Clinton against Paula Jones in her sexual-harassment suit, tells TIME. "This just confirms the theory of the defense that this is just all about money. What better evidence than the fact that she filed a suit for money?"
In particular, the timing of the civil suit before the criminal prosecution had ended appeared to be a hedge against the prospect that the case would be dropped. But by initiating the lawsuit weeks before the possible announcement that criminal charges would not proceed, Diallo's lawyers may have hurt their cause. "If it were dropped, you would have a perfect opportunity to stand up and say, 'She's not getting any justice in our criminal courts. We have no choice but to file civilly to try to get justice,' " Bennett says. "They can't make that statement now."
The lawsuit may also have been an attempt to keep Strauss-Kahn from returning to France, but it's unlikely that a civil suit would be enough to keep him in the States.
On July 1, prosecutors admitted that the case was weakened because of issues with Diallo's credibility. The motion to dismiss details instances in which the DA's office contends Diallo was not truthful. The papers describe three different versions of the incident, which the DA says Diallo provided at different times. The motion also explains falsehoods Diallo said to prosecutors, including that she had been raped in her native Guinea. In the end, the motion says, "The complainant's testimony at trial cannot be relied upon to establish proof beyond a reasonable doubt," although its first footnote explains that the motion "does not purport to make factual findings. Rather, we simply no longer have confidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty."
See how DSK could save his political career.
See the 25 best blogs of 2011.
View this article on Time.com
Most Popular on Time.com:
exchange rate calculator exchange rate calculator peter pan ketamine alice eve salvia ringworm
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.