There are no winners in this case, only losers. Among them, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the (allegedly) raped woman, and even the office of the Manhattan District Attorney, who botched this case.
The alleged rape case of a Mannattan Sofitel Hotel housekeeper by then IMF President Dominique Strauss-Kahn is on the verge of collapse. There are no winners in this sad and sordid story. Dominque Strauss Kahn resigned the presidency of the IMF and most likely forfeited his presumed ascendancy to the French Presidency, succeeding Nicolas Sarokzy.
The poor case that the Manhattan prosecution attorneys put together has shed further doubts on the competence of office the new District Attorney, Cyrus Vance Jr. who succeeded the long reigning 91-year old Robert Morgenthau.
And now, DSK's 'accuser' is most likely going to pay the highest price.
The case started to fall apart when doubts were shed on the credibility of the hotel housekeeper accusing Dominique Strauss-Kahn of rape. (As an aside, all political correctness has been thrown aside, with 'accuser' now a perfectly acceptable term. A google search for 'DSK 'accuser' over two million results).
Among other things, she was accused of being a prostitute by the New York Post, (for which she sued for libel, which also is expected not to go anywher) and
Among the discoveries, one of the officials said, are issues involving the asylum application of the 32-year-old housekeeper, who is Guinean, and possible links to people involved in criminal activities, including drug dealing and money laundering.
Now, instead of being a witness for the prosecution, the 'accuser' stands to be under scrutiny by law enforcement, and possible legal actions, including perjury and deportation.
The housekeeper reportedly lied under oath when she testified to thgrand jury that indicted Strauss-Kahn. In a letter to the defense, the district attorney's office said she told jurors that after the alleged assault, she "fled to an area of the main hallway" on the 28th floor and waited until Strauss-Kahn left before reporting it. But in their letter, prosecutors said the housekeeper "admitted that this account was false," and told them she cleaned another room after visiting Strauss-Kahn's. So far, no news reports have uncovered a perjury charge against the housekeeper, and no city officials have said such a move was in the works. But as the Telegraph's Jon Swaine points out, she did testify "under penalty of perjury," which is a felony punishable by seven years in prison.
According to an immigration lawyer speaking to The New York Times', deportation was a very real possibility, "though for now it is firmly planted in the realm of the theoretical." The prosecution's letter to the defense last Friday said the accuser had admitted to lying in order to gain political asylum in the United States when she immigrated from Guinea.
She could be liable for hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, hard to pay back on a housekeeper's salary.
She could get in trouble with the Internal Revenue Service, for
lying on her tax returns for the past two years, claiming her friend's child as a dependent in addition to her own, and if is audited could be on the hook for back taxes.
Trying to sort this out, who thought this was a good case? The prosecutors, who had little evidence? Did they think she was a more credible witness than what she turned out to be? They had to know all those details of her background, and still went ahead, which leads to Cyrus Vance Jr. being a shitty DA. She certainly had to have concerns about her immigration status and IRS troubles being uncovered, so what did she hope to gain?
So where does this leave us?
The lesson here seems to be the rush to judgement engaged in by all sides.