DSKBack in July I wrote a half tongue in cheek appraisal of my views on the charges against Dominique Strauss-Kahn or DSK as he is known here in Europe. Well now I see all the charges have been dropped, so all is well in the world again.

Unfortunately not. What has happened over the last few months is an absolute disgrace and brings into clear view the dirt and filth that is politics. It also shows not only how flawed the US justice system is, but also how it may have been used by some far away from mainland USA for their own ends. Let’s reflect a little and recall that before May this year, DSK was the managing director of the International Monetary Fund and considered a favourite to win the next presidential election in France. This was not a matter of some little thug from the back blocks of NYC being charged with breaking and entering or stealing a BMW for fun. So what happened?

The arrest of DSK was correct and warranted. If we live in a society where the rich and powerful are above the law, we are finished. However, the parading of DSK in front of the world’s cameras, handcuffed, tired and unshaven shortly after his arrest clearly tells the world that the presumption of innocence in the US does not exist and reminded me immediately of the shooting of Oswald by Jack Ruby. I’m sorry, but this tradition of parading suspects before the cameras in the US disgusts me. In a way, similar to Oswald, DSK was killed as a public servant and politician at that very moment.

Even suspects in the most heinous of crimes in ‘civilised’ societies receive their rights to the presumption of innocence until found guilty by a court of law, and never paraded through a street of flashing cameras like they are on the way to a ‘Wild West’ lynching or a French beheading by guillotine. Secondly, the clearly organised protests at each hearing by ‘black, female hotel workers’ smacks of trial by media, with images contrived for a four years old’s comprehension and five second news ‘grabs’,  and not wanting to offend here, but I wonder how much were they paid to be there to support a now exposed serial liar.

Then there is the small matter of DSK’s reputation being so tarnished now that a Nicolas Sarkozy win in the next French presidential election looks far more promising than it did before May this year. As I made the point in my previous post, it’s rather convenient that Sarkozy’s main rivals in presidential elections end up in court defending themselves prior to the start of election campaigns. Dominique de Villepin may have been cleared of all charges after the last election, but a little too late as Sarkozy had already won the election.

Don’t forget that a little ‘hanky panky’ is not a crime, especially in France. Sarkozy quickly dumped his wife after the last election and was ‘in the cot’ with Carla Bruni (ex girlfriend to the stars) before the final votes had time to be counted. I won’t even bother to recount the Clinton ‘blue dress’ episode, but enough to say that politics and sex are not strange bedfellows.

What has transpired has shown the whole world that the US justice system as little more than a media circus, and from outside the US, it looks like a system that is easily derailed and open to manipulation. It also appears as if its fragilities may have been used to influence politics on a far away shore. Then again, with the district attorney in New York being an elected post, perhaps there was another element of more local politics at play.

So what’s new? Wherever there is politics, there is filth. Just a pity that the US justice system has been made to look like an immature fool in the process.

Corrupt Justice and Politics
Tagged on:                     

10 thoughts on “Corrupt Justice and Politics

  • 24/08/2011 at 12:17 pm
    Permalink

    What better way For Sarkozy and his cronies to discredit a strong opponent for the office of President of France than to trump up bogus charges against him, thereby ending any notion DSK may have had of standing for the position.

    I would dearly love to know how much that hotel maid was paid by the French.

    Just think back to the Rainbow Warrior incident in New Zealand. When the two French secret service agents who blew up the ship were exposed, the New Zealand government were lent on by the French to release them from prison.

    • 24/08/2011 at 12:27 pm
      Permalink

      Too right Jack. When it comes to dirt in politics, the French seem to have made a fine art of it. The Rainbow Warrior bombing was probably the ultimate act of French arrogance. That no one stayed in a New Zealand jail proves there is no such thing as justice in the realm of politics.

  • 24/08/2011 at 3:38 pm
    Permalink

    …. and how about the way the media treated her, the rape victim who is supposed to get anonymity? And she is doubted because of who she is and because she may have lied once before? In a world like this on one is allowed to pursue justice in rape cases. Also, rape isn’t hanky panky.

    • 24/08/2011 at 3:47 pm
      Permalink

      Amy I have to disagree. Her anonymity was fully protected and she had that at the beginning of this case. The authorities acted correctly in protecting her identity.

      But she broke that herself by appearing on television and wanting notoriety. It was her who sought the media attention. Not the other way round.

      I agree that rape is a very serious offence and take nothing away from that at all. But she lied, plotted and exposed herself to scrutiny. If she had stayed silent and stayed under legal anonymity, the case may well have proceeded.

      I’m sorry, but a liar is a liar, and perjury is also a very serious offence. In this case, I firmly hope that she faces the consequences of her action.

      • 24/08/2011 at 3:51 pm
        Permalink

        Her identity was first leaked by newspapers. She didn’t appear until her reputation had already been smeared by the news media. She tried to remain anonymous and wasn’t allowed to. If your reputation is being thrown around and everyone is calling you a liar and making stuff up about you, then you don’t really have a choice but to defend yourself. But she didn’t do any of that until after everyone was talking about her.

        Given that medical evidence said she was, why is it only she is called a liar and he isn’t? A lot of evidence has come out against him and on her side. Sadly we live in a world where to pursue rape charges you have to have zero blemishes on your character. At all.

        Welcome to rape culture, where none of us are perfect and no one can get justice.

      • 24/08/2011 at 6:01 pm
        Permalink

        Until society moves past the puritanical notion that a crime involving sex requires anonymity for either party, both sides in alleged incidents will remain at risk of being victimized.

        As Derek pointed out, what better way to discredit someone in high office than claim an attack? And as Amy pointed out, none of us is perfect and no one can get justice when human nature is involved…as, of course, it always is.

        As I’m sure Amy would point out, rape is about violence, not sex. No other crime of violence requires victim anonymity.

        And please don’t suggest I can’t possibly understand the situation; believe me, I do.

        Did he do it? Probably. Was she wrong to play to the media circus? Yes. As usual, no one wins.

        • 24/08/2011 at 7:47 pm
          Permalink

          Thanks for your balance view Cyndi. There is no doubt that a ‘sexual encounter’ took place. Neither side denied that. And as you say, rape involves a violent element but in this case I think this the missing link. (Apart from the perjury.) There was no medical evidence of a violent event at all.

          However, I feel pity for the woman involved, as I really have the suspicion that she was used to further more powerful people’s ends. And in the process she has made it more difficult for women who suffer genuine sexual assaults to be believed.

          The ‘cry wolf’ syndrome is very powerful, and in this episode, it seems to have been very much the case.

          I have little sympathy for DSK as he has been well known for having a weakness for women for many years. But if this is a crime, I should also be in jail right now serving a life sentence.

  • 24/08/2011 at 4:23 pm
    Permalink

    Jack’s example of French arrogance is pretty impresive but I still cast my vote for Charles de Gaulle. After Canadian soldiers died to liberate his country, he had the nerve to go to Montreal (before Ottawa – on a state visit) and make his famous “Vive le Québec libre !” speech. Just for fun…

    Perhaps they were itching to “get their empire on” once they were out from under the occupier’s boot?

    “Brittany to the Bretons!”

    • 24/08/2011 at 4:42 pm
      Permalink

      Don’t forget Andrew that he also fled and hid in England, allowing the allies to do all the hard work driving the Germans from France before returning in triumph to Paris proclaiming himself hero. What a fraud he was.

      • 24/08/2011 at 6:17 pm
        Permalink

        Can’t argue with that, Jack. Many heroes turn out to be frauds raised by the sacrifice of others. While de Gaulle sat out the war in England, a lot of real French heroes risked their lives in the resistance.

        He came to Montreal with a full-blown hero complex. He actually said, before embarking for Canada, that he would ‘hit hard and make waves’. He later said that he could have smoothed things over but “When one is Général de Gaulle, one does not get away with those kinds of expedients.”

        Good plan for a hero. Spend a few years complaining about the hospitality of the English, then go spit in the eye of a nation that bled for his people. Enlistment was unpopular among French Canadians and I can’t say I blame them. They had little inclination to fight for a country that abandoned them in the 18th century.

        Strauss Kahn, at least, can keep his politics in his pants.

Comments are closed.