« "Can California Save its Death Sentences? Will Californians Save the Expense?" | Main | "The factor of faith in crime reduction" »

July 25, 2011

Accuser tells Newsweek she wants to see DSK in jail

Nafissatou Diallo, the woman whose rape accusations led to the arrest of former IMF director Dominique Strauss-Kahn, has now identified herself and described the incident in this Newsweek story. Here is one sentencing highlight from the Newsweek account:

In her interview with NEWSWEEK, Diallo didn’t disguise her anger at Strauss-Kahn.  “Because of him they call me a prostitute,” she said.  “I want him to go to jail. I want him to know there are some places you cannot use your power, you cannot use your money.”  She said she hoped God punishes him.  “We are poor, but we are good,” she said.  “I don’t think about money.”

It is interesting to speculate whether and how these statements by Diallo might make it that much harder for DSK to make the most serious criminal charges he is facing go away by some offer of a monetary settlement (or even a restitution punishment after a plea to a lesser charge). 

Prior posts on DSK charges:

UPDATE:  A helpful reader forwarded to me this on-point recent commentary by Professor Leonard Orland which appeared in The National Law Journal under the headline "How should an ethical prosecutor deal with a high-publicity rape case?"

July 25, 2011 at 11:55 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Accuser tells Newsweek she wants to see DSK in jail:


This "victim" has no credibility. Knowing that her story has been discredited and facing a near certain dismissal of the charges, she is coming forward now knowing that the media and the left will champion the cause of the brave, minority, immigrant housekeeper who could not get justice in America.

She is also proactively attempting to forstall a perjury prosecution.

Posted by: mjs | Jul 25, 2011 5:46:34 PM

An ethical prosecutor would drop the charges. Any rape case is difficult to prove but when the accuser is an admitted liar with a clear financial motive and no compelling physical evidence that it was anything more than consensual exists then it shouldn't go before a jury.

Posted by: MikeinCT | Jul 25, 2011 6:26:55 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB