[lbo-talk] Strauss Kahn

Wojtek S wsoko52 at gmail.com
Wed Aug 24 10:39:35 PDT 2011

SA: "I have no idea what happened obviously, but since you ask for a credible alternative theory, I would offer you these completely hypothetical choices: (1) a paid encounter; (2) a paid encounter gone wrong; (3) a misunderstanding over the exact terms of the encounter."

[WS:] Speaking of 180 U turns - I have another hypothetical possibility - (4) she changed her mind between May 14 i.e. until she appeared consistent and credible, and June 7 when she started to be inconsistent, thus undoing her credibility. One may wonder why - perhaps some smart lawyer suggested this course of action to win his client's dismissal in consideration of, say, a substantial to the complainant payment.

I mean, honestly, if she were such a proficient liar, why the fuck did she lie so incompetently so it could be easily demonstrated that she is lying? Why did she have to disclose all the gory details about a gang rape - she did not have to say that since it was not recorded anywhere - only to change the story a few days later and admitting that she was making shit up. I find it hard to believe that someone who is sufficiently competent to fabricate a convincing (to cops, prosecutors, and grand jury) rape story gets so inexplicably stupid a few days later and provides easy ammunition against herself. Something either does not compute here, or this 180 degree U turn in her ability to tell a proficient lie was prompted, say, by a promise of a financial reward.

In any case - we have no way of knowing for sure one way or another. However, my earlier point that the US criminal justice system has a tendency of going easy on the rich leaves plenty of room for reasonable doubt about this case.


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list