No matter how the court case turns out, whether we put a press ban on the story or not, so on so forth means nothing now. Regardless of the facts, the man's reputation, and his election campaign, have been destroyed by the American press. That's what disgusts me.

i don't believe this type of theory until there is something more than circumstantial evidence in favor of it.

let the law do its work.

His reputation isnt too great to start with, he's the head of evilcorp.
Come on, really. Lets see the IMF/world bank:

1. IMF/World Bank structural adjustment programs have increased poverty around the world.

Structural adjustment -- the standard IMF/World Bank policy package which calls for slashing government spending, privatization, and opening up countries to exploitative foreign investment, among other measures -- has deepened poverty around the world. In the two regions with the most structural adjustment experience, per capita income has stagnated (Latin America) or plummeted (Africa). Structural adjustment has also contributed to rising income and wealth inequality in the developing world.

2. IMF/World Bank "debt relief" for poor and indebted countries is a sham.

Many poor countries must devote huge portions of their national budgets to paying back foreign creditors -- often for loans that were made to or for dictators, wasteful military spending or boondoggle projects. The money used to pay back debt subtracts from essential expenditures on health, education, infrastructure and other important needs.

The IMF/World Bank plan to relieve poor countries' debt burden will leave most poor countries paying nearly as much as they currently do. And all of the debt relief is conditioned on countries undergoing years of closely monitored structural adjustment.

3. The IMF has helped foster a severe depression in Russia.

Russia in the 1990s has witnessed a peacetime economic contraction of unprecedented scale -- with the number of Russians in poverty rising from 2 million to 60 million since the IMF came to post-Communist Russia. The IMF's "shock therapy" -- sudden and intense structural adjustment -- helped bring about this disaster. "In retrospect, it's hard to see what could have been done wrong that wasn't," says Mark Weisbrot of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

4. The IMF helped create and worsen the Asian financial crisis.

The IMF encouraged Asian countries to open their borders to "hot money" -- speculative finance invested in currency, stocks and short-term securities. That was an invitation to trouble. The Asian financial crisis resulted from the hot money brokers' herdlike decision to leave Asian countries en masse.

Once the crisis hit, the IMF made things worse by requiring structural adjustment as a condition for IMF loans. The result was a surge in bankruptcies, layoffs and poverty. In Indonesia, poverty rates rose from an official level of 11 percent to 40 to 60 percent, depending on the estimate. At one point, Indonesia's food shortage became so severe that then-President Habibie implored citizens to fast twice a week. Many had no choice.

5. The IMF bails out big banks.

The IMF bailouts in Asia, like those in Russia and Mexico, directed money to those countries largely for the purpose of paying off loans to foreign banks. Thanks to the IMF, the banks escaped significant losses for imprudent lending decisions. Citigroup, Chase Manhattan and J.P. Morgan were among the beneficiaries of the "Korean" bailout.

6. IMF/World Bank structural adjustment programs devastate the environment.

Structural adjustment demands an increase in exports and foreign exchange earnings. As a result, explains Friends of the Earth, "Countries often over-exploit their resources through unsustainable forestry, mining and agricultural practices that generate pollution and environmental destruction."

7. IMF/World Bank structural adjustment programs contribute to the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Here's how Dr. Peter Lurie and collaborators explained the problem in the journal AIDS: The displacement of the rural sector under structural adjustment programs -- as imports undermine local farmers and the shift to large-scale plantations for exports further displaces the rural population -- contributes to migration and urbanization. Many men leave rural villages for work in big cities or in mines, contract HIV/AIDS from casual sex partners or sex workers, and then spread the disease to spouses in their home village. The displacement of children and young women into the cities has led to a sharp increase in commercial sex work and heightened rates of HIV/AIDS.

8. IMF/World Bank structural adjustment programs harm women.

Cuts in budget spending, mandated by structural adjustment programs, leave women to pick up the pieces -- with government services eliminated, women are forced to provide informal social supports for the sick and disabled. The IMF/Bank emphasis on exports has pushed women farmers to switch from growing food for family consumption to crops for exports -- and left them poorer in the process. The high interest rates associated with structural adjustment have made credit less accessible, undermining the viability of small women-owned businesses.

9. IMF/World Bank structural adjustment programs and Bank project loans have led to deforestation worldwide.

The export orientation demanded by structural adjustment policies has led to more forest cutting. And World Bank forest sector loans to countries around the world have done nothing to improve the situation.

"Although the [1991 Bank Forest] policy had dual objectives of conservation of tropical moist forests and tree planting to meet the basic needs of the poor, Bank influence on containing rates of deforestation of tropical moist forests has been negligible in the 20 countries with the most threatened tropical moist forests." Who said that? The World Bank's own Operations Evaluation Department, in November 1999!

10. World Bank policies have displaced millions of people around the world.

World Bank loans for dams and major infrastructure projects routinely require removal of massive numbers of people from their homes and destruction of their communities. In addition to the emotional hardship of leaving their land, the displaced people almost always find their quality of life diminished after the move. The Bank itself agrees. A 1994 report from the World Bank's Environmental Department found that, "Declines in post relocation incomes are sometimes significant, in certain cases reaching as much as 40 percent for people who were poor even before their displacement."

11. The World Bank's International Finance Corporation (IFC) provides corporate welfare for environmentally destructive projects.

The IFC finances and provides advice for private sector ventures and projects in developing countries in partnership with private investors. Among its private sector partners: ExxonMobil, BP, Coca-Cola, Kimberly-Clark and Marriott. There's no reason for a public development institution, supposedly working to fight poverty, to lend its support to these well-endowed multinationals. Making matters worse, many of the private sector projects supported by the IFC, especially in the oil and gas sector, are environmentally destructive.

And yet he *was* the highest-rating election candidate in France. With a rape charge to his name (already declared guilty by the general public) I can guarantee you that is no longer the case.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B_SxGmSJP0

You control the debt, you control everything.

And yet, DSK has been praised by none other than long-time IMF critic Joseph Stiglitz for moving it in a more progressive direction.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/05/20115712428956842.html

"You mean you dont trust someone who changes their story?"

hmmm...yes, I've heard this before. The hypocrisy in this thread is ridiculously DEEP.

So what happens in cases like this? The Maid says the dirty old Frenchman raped me. The Frenchman says the silly young maid is lying. Unless he dribbled all over her and she kept samples to remember him by, or there was a member of the French government coincidently in the next room who heard the whole thing, how on earth do you get enough evidence to get past reasonable doubt?

"No matter how the court case turns out, whether we put a press ban on the story or not, so on so forth means nothing now. Regardless of the facts, the man's reputation, and his election campaign, have been destroyed by the American press. That's what disgusts me. "

But that's not really true, is it. If this turns out to be a conspiracy of some sort, or just that the maid is trying to get some money, he can actually get a bump. Arguably one can win an election if they come out on top from this situation.

He's rich, he'll have a solid defense team, if he's innocent he'll be ok.

Wait, did Ivo just imply that in our glorious capitalist utopia the judicial system favors the rich?

What a commie.

"Arguably one can win an election if they come out on top from this situation."

Phrasing...

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2072481,00.html?hpt=T1

I like this article, interesting analysis, says Sarkozy sent him to the Conservative US and IMF to eventually ruin him. Not conspiratorial, but backstabbing political for sure

So what happens in cases like this? The Maid says the dirty old Frenchman raped me. The Frenchman says the silly young maid is lying. Unless he dribbled all over her and she kept samples to remember him by, or there was a member of the French government coincidently in the next room who heard the whole thing, how on earth do you get enough evidence to get past reasonable doubt?

There is evidence, but it seems most of it is circumstantial. You have him hastily deserting his room, leaving his personal effects behind to catch a last minute early flight back to France, There could have been bruising or cuts on him or the maid in the struggle. There could have been witnesses who saw or heard unless that was ruled out. We will all see. I'd say he has a stellar chance at missing jail at least. I guarantee the Defense attorney packs the Jury with White Men and dabbles in character assassination on the African, Female accuser, try to make this look like Duke Lacrosse all over again

"Plus if you are to rape a girl, won't you choose the most attractive one?"

This may be one of the stupidest things I've read on this forum in a long time.

Yes, because we all know Brafman - DSK's attorney, is a racist ahole who only defends white clients like Plaxico Burress, P Diddy, Michael Jackson, Star and Jay-Z. Plus as a person who is Jewish and Orthodox, he has every incentive to cater to white racial chauvinism.

I love how Santa simultaneously whines about anti-American bias while spewing rank Francophobia, and then he whines about character assassination while impugning the character of the defense attorney before the trial has even begun.

People like Dominique Strauss-Kahn aka jerks who think they have the power to manipulate maids or countries should be kept behind bars for the rest of their lifes washing dishes (just to lose some of their fucking huge ego) and getting gangbanged every afternoon.
How is it even possible that the faith of the planet is decided by some horny ape. If he is unable to control his viagra stimulated testosterone why should he be allowed to tell me and my country what to do to repay the debt?
Fuck him.

It's from awhile ago, but

"Do people really think, had he managed to leave the country, Sarko's police wouldn't prosecute him?"

French authorities would have no jurisdiction over a crime allegedly committed in the United States. Perhaps they would cooperate in extraditing him, but if we can't get Roman Polanski to answer to the charges against him after all these years I would guess DSK would be able to remain in France. Really, Putin33, you're smart enough to know things like that.

"Regardless of the facts, the man's reputation, and his election campaign, have been destroyed by the American press."

Well, his reputation was destroyed by having the accusation being brought against him. That's a quite different thing. A person's reputation can be ruined by a court case regardless of the level of press coverage or merits of the case. I'm also in Europe at the moment and I can certify that it is not just the American press ruminating this story by any means.

And (assuming no conspiracy and just a Duke-style lying woman, which I find unlikely) maybe France dodged a bullet here. This man at the very least put himself in a situation where something like this could happen. That's not very presidential.

@hellat: It pisses me off to pay taxes to save the economy of your cheating country. You should be grateful to the IMF and other European countries for bail out.

French authorities absolutely have jurisdiction to charge their own nationals for crimes committed overseas, according to their own legal code - Article 113-6 & Article 113-7

http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/html/codes_traduits/code_penal_textan.htm

ARTICLE 113-6

French criminal law is applicable to any felony committed by a French national outside the territory of the French Republic.

It is applicable to misdemeanours committed by French nationals outside the territory of the French Republic if the conduct is punishable under the legislation of the country in which it was committed.

The present article applies although the offender has acquired the French nationality after the commission of the offence of which he is accused.

ARTICLE 113-7

French Criminal law is applicable to any felony, as well as to any misdemeanour punished by imprisonment, committed by a French or foreign national outside the territory of the French Republic, where the victim is a French national at the time the offence took place.

@ Santa
"I guarantee the Defense attorney packs the Jury with White Men and dabbles in character assassination on the African, Female accuser, try to make this look like Duke Lacrosse all over again "

I've never understood the American custom of attempting to get the most biased jury possible. Over here (UK) it is possible for the defence to object against a couple of members of the jury, but it is rarely done. Out of interest, why do you think white American men would have a pro French bias?

A little Google scholarship does not a legal argument make. From the two clauses you quote, it could be interpreted that the criminal law doesn't apply since the victim was from Guinea and lived in the US (I don't know her citizenship status). It is far more complicated than the few lines of text you've thrown out there. What's the precedent for cases like this? What are the other related laws on crimes committed overseas? Answering those questions would take several skilled lawyers at least a week. Don't pull a Sicarius and pretend to have knowledge beyond your means.

Again I point to the Polanski situation. If the simplistic scenario you present were true, shouldn't Roman have been tried in a French court for the accused statutory rape? If not, why not? Also, extradition treaties might supersede French domestic law depending on how the French legal system works. While the United States (or rather, New York) totally has jurisdiction, giving France the jurisdiction to prosecute DSK would be a whole rigamarole of international law. You do no know the specifics and neither do I, but the safe bet is definitely on France not being able to do it.

But literally none of this matters since he's still in America and could spend quite a lot of time there in the future.

Octavius, there is no American custom of getting the most biased jury possible. It's a crazily convoluted process to select a jury. If the defendant can prove bias that's grounds for a mistrial and the whole damn thing starts again. No prosecutor wants that. If there's a bias, it's to get the most stupid and gullible jury possible so that they swallow what's told to them.

""Plus if you are to rape a girl, won't you choose the most attractive one?"

This may be one of the stupidest things I've read on this forum in a long time."

yeah it's pretty dumb but its comforting in some way.

it means that whoever said it is probably never going to be a rapist, because they dont understand rape.

it's when the illicit sexual desire morphs into a kind of... expectation that a woman *should* be *made* to do something to you/for you that you become a rapist. and once you are like that, attractiveness is a secondary concern.

when it comes to DSK... why don't we, you know, suspend judgment until he has actually been acquitted or convicted?

Yes Invictus, because there's 30 ways to interpret "applicable to any felony committed by a French national outside the territory of the French Republic". 113-7 says that the law also applies if the victim is French. You're the one who said I should be "smart enough to know" that France doesn't have jurisdiction. Now your defense is "we don't know", pretending that I'm the one who is acting like a know-it-all.

Anyway, your bogus interpretation of the code is wrong. Damn that "google research".

"16. Where personal jurisdiction is concerned, French criminal law applies to a very large number of offences committed by or against a French individual or legal entity outside France. Where the perpetrator has French nationality, extraterritorial jurisdiction applies to all offences classified as "crime" (felony) and, subject to double criminality, to those classified as "délit" (misdemeanour) (Article 113-6). If the victim has French nationality, extraterritorial jurisdiction extends to any "crime" and to any "délit" punishable by imprisonment, with no double criminality requirement (Article 113-7). For less serious offences (délits), a prosecution may be brought only on the initiative of the prosecution service and also requires a complaint by the victim or an official accusation by the authorities of the country on whose territory the offence was committed (Article 113-8)."

http://www.business-humanrights.org/media/documents/ruggie/extraterritoriality-as-instrument-ascensio-for-ruggie-dec-2010.pdf

It goes on to list examples of this occurring, but I'm sure you'll find some new excuse to dismiss it.

"But literally none of this matters since he's still in America and could spend quite a lot of time there in the future."

It was relevant to the point I made about how he could be prosecuted under French law. Yes I realize he is now in NYPD custody. Jesus.

I don't know the details of the Polanski case. But are you going to do the Sicarius thing where what applies in one case applies to all? Anyway he pled to a deal in the original case, did he not? Was there a sense that the terms of the deal had been met?

Polanski's case was one where he fulfilled the requirments of the plea but the judge threw out the deal made by RP in good faith with the prosecutor so he refused to return. I'd have done the same and even the "victim " (a very willing and attractive 13 year old at the time) has asked the court to let it go. Here is a picture of what he hit.

http://www.curtisneeley.com/Polanski/images/samantha%20geimer%20polansky%20rape%204.jpg

And this was statutory rape, not the violent forcing of oneself onto another.