Dominique Strauss-Kahn was set to walk free today after New York prosecutors said that while the powerful Frenchman did have sex with his hotel maid, they could not prove an assault because the alleged victim’s lies undermined the case beyond repair.
New York state Judge Michael Obus is due to rule on a motion filed by prosecutors Monday to dismiss all charges against Strauss-Kahn.
The sensational turn around would mean Mr Strauss-Kahn — forced to resign as head of the International Monetary Fund and shelve his French presidential dreams — was free to leave with his millionaire wife back to France.
But the man who had been widely touted to replace President Nicolas Sarkozy in upcoming elections will return with his reputation badly sullied.
The 25-page motion to drop the case concluded that Strauss-Kahn engaged in a hurried sex act May 14 with the Manhattan maid, a Guinean immigrant called Nafissatou Diallo, and that the initial investigation suggested an assault.
DNA testing “established that several stains located on the upper portion of the complainant’s hotel uniform dress contained semen that yielded the defendant’s DNA,” the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office said in the motion.
Evidence was “consistent with a non-consensual encounter,” prosecutors said.
The evidence was not conclusive. For example, there were no injuries or damage to clothing that could only have come from attempted rape.
However, other factors, such as the hurried nature, suggested “that the sexual act was not likely a product of a consensual encounter,” the motion said.
Another important piece of evidence was the discovery of Strauss-Kahn’s DNA “on both the interior and exterior waistband” of the tights worn by the maid, “as well as on the waistband of the panties.”
The motion said: “These findings suggest that the defendant touched the complainant’s undergarments, but they do not controvert or confirm the complainant’s account that the defendant placed his hand inside her underwear and groped her genitals directly.”
In the end, the evidence did not “prove or corroborate that their encounter was forcible or non-consensual.”
That meant Diallo’s testimony was key to the case — and when it emerged that she had lied to investigators and to the grand jury indicting Strauss-Kahn, the case became impossible to pursue.
One issue was her constantly changing story about what she did immediately after the alleged attack, ranging from hiding fearfully in a corridor to returning to the room to clean after Strauss-Kahn left.
Most seriously, Diallo admitted that she had entirely made up a story during her asylum application to the United States about being gang raped in Guinea.
During one session with prosecutors, she repeated the story with so much emotion that “she cried, spoke hesitatingly, and... even laid her head face down on a table in front of her.” (AFP)
