Quote the defense on that, and provide a link.

The POLICE started with "it happened at 1 PM". DSK was not there. Then the police revised the timeline and there was a statement that the defense did not believe there would be evidence of forcible contact or something to that effect.

None of which has anything to do with what, if anything, would be offered at trial as a defense.

Quite frankly, the defense hasn't "start[ed] off" with anything. The defense begins when it is their turn at trial.

Because he doesn't think as fast as Res Ipsa.

BTW, I think the maid spoke French. I also read (but don't know for certain) that they were getting DNA from where she spat on the carpet and the walls. If they found his semen mixed with her saliva, it would suggest the "it was consensual" might make a better excuse.

Res Ipsa is just playing devil's advocate, and doin' a hell of a job of it.


But I'd like to see him argue in sidebar that DSK can testify that "she thought I had other intentions."

Like your other arguments, this is probably the best the defense could hope to come up with. And it still sucks. These facts reflect some pretty bizarre behavior for someone in a hotel who is familiar with hotels, and the existence of hotel maids. Especially when the competing version of facts, that the maid is telling the truth, is a lot more credible.



How, if there was no sexual contact, would a misunderstood phrase be relevant?

So he yanked down her pantyhose when he was "helping" her. Good one. So you've explained the semen on her shirt. They didn't say it was just semen. Could be it was mixed with amylase from her saliva. Wait till the DNA comes back on what's in the spit the witnesses saw her spit repeatedly on the floor, the walls her shirt, when she called for help or was found in the hallway. What, She sucked on the sheets when he pushed her onto the bed? His dick accidentally got near enough her mouth to leave his spunk there? While he was helping her? Yeah. Good one Res.

This is one and there were others that spoke of 'consensual' contact as a possible defense.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/ ... DB20110518

Like others have said, Res is playing Devil's Advocate. Everyone deserves competent representation in a court of law, even scumbag asshats like DSM.

I agree that this story is probably the best defense anyone can come up with. I wouldn't buy it if I were on a jury, but who knows? I've seen stranger things happen.

All kinds of things can happen in a struggle. When she fell down, she started flailing her legs at him because she thought he was trying to attack her. Naturally, he put up his hands and tried to grab her legs to get her to stop kicking.



Could be lots of things. It could be that a passing tourist came in and made a video of the whole event. But until such evidence turns up, there you are.



Well, I suppose that she must have fell right on it while she was yelling for help because she thought he was trying to attack her. If you fell on that with your mouth open, wouldn't you spit it out?



Sorry, I didn't say "provide a blind link that quotes un-named sources", I said "quote the attorney". No attorney working for DSK has stated any defense at all. The only quote you'll find is Brafman saying that they are confident the evidence won't be consistent with the charges. People have made an inferential leap that his statement means "consent", but objectively his statement does not necessarily imply such a thing.



Well, for one thing, hotel maids knock at the door. However, the maid in this instance was let in by another hotel staff member who was removing service items. So, naturally, DSK was surprised by the presence in his suite of someone he had not admitted. And that is what precipitated this unfortunate misunderstanding.

Will the State of New York be able to introduce into evidence DS-K's attempts to "seduce" (in his sleazy way) the hotel and airplane staff members?

I literally LOL'd, right there.

Res, I admire your passion, which DSK will be lucky to have in his expensive lawyers as they throw this hail-mary into the end zone. Here's a prize for you:

Which does not make sense until it is revealed that she is "from Guinea" because she obtained political asylum status in the US. So, yes, clearly she is some sort of political activist who saw an opportunity to damage the IMF and she took it.

As his TFB-appointed defense counsel, I certainly hope we can get that testimony in, yes.

Indeed, he propositioned two other members of the hotel staff. Both of them turned him down, and he went no further and did not raise the subject with them again. That's the polite sort of guy he is, and again demonstrates that the maid's accusations are totally out of line with his character.

And, I mis-spoke earlier, the reason his wallet appeared on the dresser was because he did catch her in the act of stealing his wallet, and he had to force it out of the pocket of her apron. During the struggle, she tossed it away, and that's where it landed.

After he got the wallet out of her, he realized his cell phone was still missing, and that's why he chased after her. The maid had someone else return the stolen cell phone to the room later, so that she wouldn't be caught with it.

As we know, he had been looking for that cell phone all day.

There is much LOL in this photograph:

Oh, Res, you've got me loling like crazy. "Give 'em the old razzle dazzle, the old hocus pocus" you Billy Flynn usurper you.



No, Brafman said more in his letter complaining about leaks of evidence.



http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43184950
Ah yes, when faced with the possibility that razzle dazzle, hocus pocus, "don't you know who this man is" might not work, smear the victim. Next up: " She was askin' for it walkin' on the wrong side of town dressed like that."

Further to Res Ipsa's theory --

And being the gentleman that he has always been, DS-K doesn't bother to tell anyone downstairs in the hotel -- and he scuttles off in a hurry -- about his encounter with the criminal maid who burst into his room, stole his cell phone and tried to steal his wallet. In fact, he misremembers what happened and later calls the hotel to see if anyone "found" his phone. (Wink, wink.)

Res - I think there is an opening as a staff writer on House next year. Or, if not House, The Event.

And went out for Thai food.

The hotel conduct is in, as it demonstrate his propensity and desire to have sex in his hotel room during that specific trip. The airplane conduct is out as any barely probative relevance it has to his sexual appetite is outweighed by the prejudicial effect of such conduct, far away from the hotel and in a completely different setting, in public no less.

Not at all. Rather than embarrass the maid whom he believed to have stolen his phone, he expected that she would think he WOULD report her theft to the hotel, and that in all likelihood she would attempt, as she apparently did, to have it "turn up lost" somewhere. This is the thanks he gets for trying to keep her out of trouble.

Or perhaps he was mistaken in the belief that she stole the phone. But, in any event, he was in NY to visit his daughter, and wasn't going to let a trifle like that ruin his plans by engaging in some argument with her and the management.

Either way, little did he know that the reason she was trying to steal his cell phone was that her cell of anti-IMF activists wanted to retrieve information from it.

And demonstrates that he takes "no" for an answer.

Imagine that - a man staying alone at a hotel had a desire to have sex. Who woulda thunkit?

But, one does occasionally fall victim to scheming hotel or household staff. Take a look at how that employee of Schwarzennegger not only retrieved his vital fluid from his bed or bath, but then went and impregnated herself with it!

Did the anti-IMG activists arrange to get her hired by the hotel? Did they even conspire to make up the facts that would lead to her being granted political asylum? What good would come of framing the IMF chief anyway? Don't they have other people who can take the chief's place if he is arrested, resigns, dies, etc.?

So, Res Ipsa - Did you watch Casey Anthony's defense attorney's opening statement the other day?

Sometimes opportunity comes calling. Did Sirhan Sirhan get a job at the hotel for the purpose of shooting RFK?

No. He just got lucky.

Did Oswald get a job at the Book Suppository so that he could shoot JFK?

Who can really fathom the thinking of these kinds of people with their crazy agendas.

Unless she's alone in his room. Then her "no" turns into an invitation to rape. Seems perfectly consistent with the prosecution theory to me.



Res seems to be getting fatigued.

The VIP receptionist was, AFAIK, alone with him.

But your point is that he has a habit of not raping women whom he propositions, except when he does. Is that it?



Nope. I love following crime stories, but not any that involve the death of a child. I don't even read those stories. Can't do it.

Res - the point is both more subtle and more sinister. DS-K thinks he is entitled.