Strauss-Kahn Accuser Looks Dodgy

Let's see him smear his way out of this one.

"Ms Banon, 32, has claimed that during the interview, Mr Strauss-Kahn said he would only speak to her if she held his hand."

That's pretty cringe-worthy. And the French call him "the great seducer..."

So you posted preemptively on behalf of another poster who may have an issue with the absence with the word please in my post. Right.

No-one ever accused Panda of having a life.

He was desperate to try and get in with fridge magnet and co having a go at me , he just wants to be in the cool gang

I'm surprised boys and girls I leave you lot for the whole day and come back to only one additional page of posts, I am disapoint.

True, still seems pretty strange that she would suddenly have the motivation to pursue it now.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I wanted someone else to say it first

Her mother, Anne Mansouret, a Socialist Party official, persuaded her at the time not to file suit against a man who was close to her family and to their politics, Ms. Mansouret conceded in a television interview on Monday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/17/world/europe/17banonbox.html

So whats the compelling reason now?

Maybe she's looking for publicity, maybe he really did try to rape her and she's not happy with him having dodged the charges in the US.

I think this second claim could just about do in SK's ambitions for the presidency of France.

He has apparently said he will sue her for libel (or slander I can't recall which). Interesting court case that might be.

She (Banon) has been making these allegations publically since 2007, off the record since at least 2006 and may even have intended to put them in a book published in 2003 (the article below claims the relevant chapter was deleted from the published version), though no criminal charges have been filed up to this point, according to her mother she (the mother) managed to persuade her not to.

Its not as if she hasnt been saying this for the past four years, its just that suddenly it is newsworthy now.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...-of-attempted-rape-victim-Tristane-Banon.html

only if you think adultery automatically = cuntdom, or know something about the inner workings of his marriage which no other poster does

isnt being the head of the IMF one of the markers that scientists look for when determining cuntdom / cuntish tendencies?

oh absolutely, and THAT - given the sheer evil of the actions of the IMF - makes him certainly a cunt. However, adultery doesn't, or not automatically.

By his own admission this is not a simple case of adultery.

At the very least he is a john and a trick.

Whether that disqualifies him from the Presidency of France remains to be seen.

She may have been saying it for the last four years however my understanding is that is was not widely reported by the, by and large, supine French media.

No, the difference now is that she's going to file a criminal complaint.

Well yes, maybe that is because someone is listening to her now. In any case, it does tend to suggest that she is not doing it for money, as was suggested by some.

No it suggests she is doing it for the publicity which as a writer will likely generate money.

Not really - for a start, she doesnt have a book out (usually a sign that a writer is generating publicity for the wrong reasons), in fact the only person in this is who does is DSK, or at least DSKs authorised biographer (the biography, in a magnificient piece of irony, appears* to claim that DSK has been the victim of sexual harrassment from women around him).

TBH though its far more likely that, as said above, she has been able to get her story across now because people are interested in it.

* or at least I think thats what it says.

She will.

Thats not how the publishing business works I'm afraid, you are getting the cart before the horse. I find it interesting that her decision to make the criminal complaint was within 24 hours of DSK being arrested.

And she wouldnt have had that coming out anyway, given what DSK was aiming for before this?

I like the way grit has seamlessly and neutrally slipped into making the defences case now. Not even bothering to hide it anymore.

That doesnt hold up though - she said this publically in 2007 (albeit with DSKs name bleeped out, the full details were released in 2008 and she has talked about it since openly). When DSK was arrested in New York, she suggested that she would bring criminal charges when the US process was finished. As that appears to be about to happen, her lawyer appears to have started the process. This does not suggest that she is doing it for the money, or for that matter to raise her public profile in order to make money - it suggests she wants to see DSK face at least some form of justice.

The two motives are hardly incompatible. Indeed one might say that she has fashioned a happy convergence between self-interest and the public interest.

You cant really evidence that until the book / film / US TV special is announced, can you?