Nafissatou Diallo, the hotel maid who has accused Dominique Strauss-Kahn, is now speaking out publicly–weeks after press coverage took a turn against her, based on the notion that something about her made her allegations less credible.
“Strauss-Kahn Prosecution Said to Be Near Collapse” was the July 1 New York Times headline. One of the strongest bits of evidence was the claim that Diallo spoke to a friend, in prison on a drug charge, about Strauss-Kahn’s wealth–the implication was that she and a criminal associate were plotting out how to profit from the assault.
Newsweek‘s cover story this week is based on an interview with her is a compelling read. The magazine points out that one part of the Times‘ account might not be what the paper suggested it was:
On July 1, the New York Times reported the existence of a taped conversation between Diallo and Tarawally. The article said they talked the day after the incident at the Sofitel and quoted a “well-placed law enforcement official”: “She says words to the effect of: ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing.'” But at the time, prosecutors did not have a full transcript of the call, which had been conducted in a dialect of Fulani, Diallo’s language. The quote was a paraphrase from a translator’s summary of the tape, and the actual words are somewhat different, sources told Newsweek.
In July, Newsweek talked to Tarawally in Arizona. He insisted that the quotation must refer to a later conversation and in any case was taken out of context. Diallo said she no longer talks to Tarawally. He used her bank account to move tens of thousands of dollars around the country without informing her, she said. She denied he ever gave her money to spend. “Like I say, he was my friend,” Diallo told us. “I used to trust him.”
Strauss-Kahn has millions of dollars to defend himself against serious criminal charges. Part of how one does that is by discrediting one’s accusers, and one of the best tools to do that is the press. To take negative information about Diallo appearing in news articles at face value– even when that information is said to be coming from the prosecution’s side– would be naive in the extreme.
Naiveté is the child of ignorance, and the corpress has as much commitment to birth control as the pope.
USans just love to try cases out of court, away from the facts, and totally on speculation. Witness the recent uproar over the not guilty verdict for the woman charged with murdering her kid, I believe it was. Utter morons, armed with information from our pathetic “press”, claim to know more than the jury and become livid when that jury comes to a different conclusion. With citizens such as that — probably part of the crowd that goes all weak-kneed and gaga-eyed when they see a soldier or sailor — it’s no wonder the country has been on a downhill slide since 1968.
After Casey Anthony who knows what constitutes guilt.They may or may not nail his overpriced hide to the wall,but I believe her.Other woman have come forward saying he pulled a similar mode of attack on them.He will hide behind a wall of lawyers as one after another woman steps forward(if allowed).Unless everybody is lying….he is scum
To be fair, lawyers do their best to control the evidence that the jury has access to inside the courtroom, as much as they try to control and sometimes fabricate to the public outside the courtroom. Throw coerced confessions into the mix, and it’s little wonder that justice is so imperfectly served. Just look at how many innocent people have been falsely convicted. It stands to reason that at least as many guilty avoid punishment.
Jeff, how exactly does that stand to reason? Do you have some statistics? Reasoning depends on observable facts, not off-the-wall “common sense”, an overrated way of reaching simple, very often wrong, conclusions on complex subjects.
There is no “to be fair” when it comes to moronic speculation, based on media hyperbole, particularly when it comes to life or death matters (or worship of a brutal military for that matter). Many love to point to the O.J. Simpson case as an example of a jury letting a guilty defendant go free. Yet, as I recall, the LAPD, a gang of thugs if ever there was one, botched the forensics, and the D.A. failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Simpson was guilty. If a jury sees reasonable doubt that a defendant is guilty, then it is their duty to return a not guilty verdict.
I despise our “justice” system, but not because of juries. And, I avoid it ientirely if at all possible. I despise it because, from local courts, up to the disgusting current “supreme” court, it values process and procedure over substance, to the point of not considering guilt or innocence as a factor in death row appeals, limiting arguments to consideration of whether lower courts erred procedurally. That is sickening.
“To take negative information about Diallo appearing in news articles at face value– even when that information is said to be coming from the prosecution’s side– would be naive in the extreme.”
And yet a man was convicted in the press his career & good name ruined based solely on the word of an individual without any physical evidence.
No one even questioned that he might be being set up to protect Sarkozy who would have definitely lost the election to DSK.
WTF – do you know what she said or not? Apparently not, what’s up with that?
H.r reading
Oj………….They did by any measuring stick prove him guilty beyond ANY reasonable doubt.In fact beyond any doubt.There was never any proof ever of any police misconduct in the case to this very day.The prosecution was simply inexperienced and did a lousy job.The Defense did what it needed to do.They speculated(made up)any alternative to the truth they could come up with.They made the trial drag on and on(lessoned the impact of the evidence.)That is their job.
Vincent Bouliosy(Helter skelter)never lost a case.He was offered the oj case.He wanted murder one.He was passed over for Marcia Clark.Later he felt he could of convicted Oj in three weeks with nothing more than Oj’s first interview with Police.He said as much to Shapiro who smiled and agreed(in a resturant meeting).But Ojs Karma and his guilt came back to revisit him.So his abysmal jurors were passed over.Casey Anthony will crop up again in the court system .Bad penny that one.Our accused french rapist has now been ACCUSED by other woman.Here and abroad.He also seems a bad egg.Several woman accused Clinton of attacks as we all recall.Notice this is not just an occupational hazard.I have never heard a word against Bush or Obama along these lines.Although Gore has an assault charge coming along.I tend to think these men lost sight of a simple fact. Sometime…..you may again be treated like every other Tom Dick and Harry.