Dominique Strauss Kahn: Doubts on maid's credibility

[Rosamund1980]

It's looking like DSK will get off, as doubt is placed on the maid. Why do these stories repeat themselves?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13986970

Even if you spin the very best (and yet utterly unlikely, to my mind) scenario he propositioned her, she accepted, she later regretted and "cried rape" then how can this man run for President? Violent sex with a random stranger in a hotel room, before calmly joining his daughter for lunch and flying home to his faithful lapdog wife.

Oh, that went wrong. Sorry

dittany- interesting point. I suppose I typed 'accuser' as that is the language of the US media, which is where much of the info about the case is coming from.

Words commonly seen together:
Victim, perpetrator
Accuser, accused.

Accuser is the correct term. She's not a victim until he is proven guilty by the courts. I could even except "alleged victim"....but to call her a victim right off the bat is irresponsible. They did the same thing with Magnum, and you see how that turned out. Every group out there calling her a victim had to eat crow.

So all those women who have been raped but don't report it to the police aren't victims then? They just imagines being raped I suppose?

My previous post should have read :
The accuser is the state, not the individual citizen.

@HDS
Did I say that? No..I don't think, and I don't think that's even the spirit of what I said.
I'm talking about people who have reported, in response the the OP's thread start.

I suggest if you know anyone who has been harmed that you encourage them to report it.

I'm merely pointing out that the semantics from the beginning of this case have off the mark.

this seems pretty clear however the assange buisness never sat right with me

On R4 now pm at 5pm. French journo to press charges for 2003 (?) attack.

At the risk of inflaming anyone for suggesting a rape victim is in fact a lying prostitute... (ow! Hey that hurts, let me finish!)

I wasn't there, but lots about the whole story never made much sense, from straight rape (he'd have to have been crazy, maybe he is, but you know) to conspiracy theories that he was set-up (bit fanciful, but what do I know) and since the latest info came out, it does cast doubt on her character, but also it totally doesn't mean she wasn't raped - and he changed his story too. So when I read this version of events, I've lost the source, maybe I'm late with it and it's in another thread, i don't know. And as I say, I wasn't there and don't know what happened. But the story suggests she was a maid/prostitute, who knew exactly who he was and just planned to get a nice pay day. Except he didn't pay. Maybe he didn't realise that was the deal? Maybe she wanted too much? So they argued and she left and concocted the rape story instead.

Now none of that may have happened. But it makes more sense than any other version of events I've had presented to me so far.

Mary - oh, my sides! Stop, please stop!

The maid would have been better off if he'd just beaten the crap out of her, she'd be believed at least. She would have been a victim too, not an accuser.

The prostitute thing makes sense, to be fair, but the press do love a false rape claim....seems to make more sense that a rich powerful man likes it rough and a poor immigrant maid made it all up.

We know he lied about what happened, there isn't any evidence she did.

fixed..I think lol

Ok, he's a liar (first said nothing at all happened, then said it was consensual) and she's a liar (asylum application, exact events on the day in question.)

Why does her being a liar negate all herother claims, but his change in his story - to a story "everyone" can understand and yes, I'm talking to you, Mary - is acceptable and now everyone believes him again, but she has lost all credibility?

Sorry I meant the press prefer the rich man, lying woman story.

And I wasn't saying that prostitutes don't get raped....Jesus Christ.

Okay.....so now I'm paranoid. Great.