Dominique Straus-Kahn Beating Rape Rap

I was just thinking yesterday about how he was probably going to beat the rap, based on sliming the accuser/victim. Today the news hits that the prosecutors' case is falling apart, and they're changing bail conditions to free on own recognizance (he gets the bail money back, he's not under house arrest, he can fire his guards), because the housekeeper was caught in a number of lies. Lies about her activities, and about her asylum application.

Worse, she's mixed up with drug (marijuana) dealers. She called one in jail the day after the incident, which was recorded of course, during which she made a comment about turning it to her advantage. And $100,000 was laundered through her bank account. And she had 4 or so cellphones she hid from the prosecutors, claiming she had only one phone. So her credibility is shot.

None of which doesn't mean she wasn't assaulted. The fact is, there was no time delay between her "encounter" in the hotel room and her reporting it, apparently upset so her managers and the police and prosecutors all found her credible. She probably didn't know who he was. And he apparently didn't tell the police that he had consensual sex with her. Recall that his lawyers were saying IF there was sex, it WAS consensual. Doesn't sound like a consensual situation.

Imagine if instead the case was being mugged in the park, No witnesses, just the word of the victim vs. the robber. The robber says the victim 1) didn't give him any money, or 2) gave him a handout, or 3) gave him a loan. Show that the victim "has a history" of giving people money doesn't cause everyone to disbelieve the robbery victim! In such a case, the victim's word is believed, even if the victim isn't a perfectly pristine, upstanding, totally "respectable" citizen. Likewise with most crimes where there are no third party witnesses.

Somehow rape is different. The victim is always on trial.

Of course, it's possible that the sex was "consensual." That is one crafty, quick-thinking African hustler in that case. She would have immediately had to think to herself, "I'll have sex with him and then say I was assaulted." But why wouldn't she have had intercourse with him in that case? Wouldn't she figure it would be easier to prove sex occurred with his semen in her? I think so.