Article Image

IPFS News Link • World News

IMF chief may use tried-but-tricky consent defense

• AP
Former International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn has shed little public light on his account of what happened between him and a hotel housekeeper who accused him of sexually attacking her. But in a potentially revealing hint, one of his lawyers has said he doesn't expect the evidence will show a forcible encounter.

1 Comments in Response to

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

      How this case developed tells me that if there was any sex involved at all [yes, it was seen to it that there was evidence of sexual contact], it was consensual. "Prosecutors say he chased down the cleaner in a penthouse suite, groped her, tried to pull down her pantyhose and forced her to perform oral sex." Very unlikely … a 62-year-old former International Monetary Fund Chief, a proud dignitary would chase a janitress who was running for her life as fast the hurdle-champion in the last Olympic race did, caught her and "forced her to perform an oral sex" ??? Hard for any reasonable mind to digest. Anyway, the accused hard-working economist-diplomat most likely is having an osteoarthritis common to desk-workaholics of that age – a very attractive target of stalking females who think money is up for grab. If there was a "chasing" involved, definitely it could be the other way around.

Money and politics are strong motivations on consensual sexual molestations cases where dignitaries stand accused. Money is the strongest while politics ranks second. Trust me. I have some of those cases in my long years of practice of law.

In the Kennedy case, politics was the only motive. But in politics, the Kennedys are much stronger than their accusers … case dismissed.

The alleged Bryant and Tyson "forcible" sexual "assaults" are the same – consensual sex that was cleverly designed for money. For example, the scheming lady accuser went along voluntarily ["willingly", record shows] up to Tyson’s hotel room. What "lady" are you talking about who went inside the boxer’s room at between two to three in the morning other than a scambag up to trap Tyson in a compromising sexual situation? For Tyson’s "conviction" a whooping $2 million award was a lot of money to share.

What I hated most about this kind of legalized robbery is that the bogus court judgment has always to be based on moral ground – to teach the powerful a lesson that because the accused is rich and famous they should not take advantage of gentle ladies who say "no" to sex. I once used this gutter language out of frustration -- C’mon, guys … kiss my ass!

Agorist Hosting