At 03:53 PM 8/25/2011, Mark Bennett wrote:
>Most telephone conversations from jail or prison are recorded. The parties
>speaking on the prison system waive all right to privacy in their
>conversations by using the system. The prosecution may simply have asked
>Diallo to provide them with access to her financial records, in light of the
>fact that the primary defense was to be extortion or a shakedown. Nothing
>very sinister about either of these items.
>
>On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 9:13 AM, shag carpet bomb <shag at cleandraws.com>wrote:
>
> > admittedly, i have a fever from strep throat so I might not be reading this
> > correctly, but why do they know so much about her past?
> >
> > why were they listening in on her conversations? why did they know about
> > her bank account.
> >
> > somewhere i read an anti-rape activist say that a woman's past doesn't
> > matter in a rape trial, but apparently it does in this case. how can it
> > possibly be OK for either the prosecution or defense to have access to her
> > financial transactions?
> >
> > shouldn't that shit be off limits?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 11:11 AM 8/25/2011, shag carpet bomb wrote:
> >
> >> i didn't pay attention to the case at all, but reading through this
> >> thread, i'm trying to understand why DSK would have not paid the tab
> or why
> >> Diallo would have increased the tab after the fact - or whatever happened.
> >> Does he have a history of not paying up. i read somewhere in the
> thread that
> >> he has a history of using prostitutes. I'm trying to picture someone
> >> "storming out" of the room because DSK didn't pay up. if she had lots of
> >> "dates" while in protective custody, she probably has a "pimp" - an
> agency -
> >> in which case the transaction is happening through a third party, and
> >> enforced as such. which is precisely why, historically, women have
> often had
> >> pimps in the past - as "protection". that has all changed with the
> internet,
> >> as audacia ray documents in her book about internet sex. but in such a
> case,
> >> wouldn't there be ample evidence (outside of leaks) that she had a
> >> internet-based sex business going.... not that it is even worth worrying
> >> about whether or not she is a prostitute.
> >>
> >> i think what creeps me out is the weird desire to root out left shiboleths
> >> and say, "see! see! i've found it. there it is. I so KNEW that all lefties
> >> were fucked up. i'm so special because i see the problem and most of the
> >> rest of 'em don't. what is WRONG with these people anyway. i'm just
> not even
> >> sure i want to be part of that gang. ugh!"
> >>
> >> that used to be the Wojtek's territory. *spit*
> >>
> >> At 08:49 PM 8/24/2011, SA wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 8/24/2011 8:36 PM, Wojtek S wrote:
> >>>
> >>> SA " they agreed on a paid encounter, but afterward there was a
> >>>> dispute over money"
> >>>>
> >>>> [WS:] Don't you pay beforehand for this kind services precisely to
> >>>> avoid any disputes afterwards?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> 1. Again - totally hypothetical scenario.
> >>>
> >>> 2. Something tells me that in the history of the world this wouldn't be
> >>> the first dispute over payment for sexual services.
> >>>
> >>> 3. Let's not engage in reverse-BHL-ism. here Remember how the philosophe
> >>> was certain that such an assault could *never* happen because "everyone
> >>> knows" all upscale hotel maids work "en brigade." And he was
> *certain* the
> >>> allegations must be a fraud because *surely* someone about to run for
> >>> president would *never* do something so reckless. We all shook our
> heads at
> >>> this sophistry. But there are also some who are *certain* that a poor
> >>> immigrant could *never* make up a story about being raped by a
> powerful man.
> >>> A bit less certainty all around would benefit everyone.
> >>>
> >>> SA
> >>>
> >>> ______________________________**_____
> >>>
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/**mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk<http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> http://cleandraws.com
> >> Wear Clean Draws
> >> ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
> >>
> >> ______________________________**_____
> >>
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/**mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk<http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > http://cleandraws.com
> > Wear Clean Draws
> > ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
> >
> > ______________________________**_____
> >
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/**mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk<http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk>
> >
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)