After 8 hours, DSK maid can't convince DA she's not after cash
By REUVEN FENTON, LAURA ITALIANO and DAN MANGAN
Last Updated: 8:59 AM, July 28, 2011
David McGlynn
The hotel maid accusing Dominique Strauss-Kahn of sexual assault and her lawyers spent nearly eight hours yesterday huddled with Manhattan prosecutors -- but failed to convince them she was not out to get money from the ex-IMF boss, sources told The Post.
Note that police took DSK off of the plane in order to effect the arrest. This is a strong indication that they believed they had a strong case and would not likely have taken such drastic steps without first speaking to the DA's office.
In DKS's initial statement, police saw that he was lying; this is critical to understand. They looked at a rape allegation and saw the alleged perpetrator lie. This was enough to raise suspicion. DKS did lie: he claimed to have not been with the maid (see analysis) but dining with his daughter. Police had video that said otherwise.
Police believed her allegation and would need reason to think otherwise. Here, they gave her 8 hours to prove she wasn't after the money and to explain her own lies. Police believe they are dealing with two liars. They were predisposed to believe her, so whatever it is that she said to them was likely drastic. What makes this complicated is that she could have been assaulted and after money.
The evidence her lawyers had counted on were audio recordings of calls between accuser Nafissatou Diallo and a jailed friend.
The conversations, in the African dialect of Fulani, made it clear "she never said one word about his money," her lawyer, Kenneth Thompson, told reporters after leaving the meeting.
Note that which is stated in the negative. Note that "never" should not be accepted as "no" in any denial. Note that she never said one word about "his" money, not about money. This is an example where an extra word can change things. Lawyer lie with impunity and his denial is not a straight denial. His emphasis has meaning:
But The Post's sources disagreed with the defense interpretation of the tapes, and said they prove she thought she could "make money" from the case.
The calls, recorded by jail officials a day after the alleged Sofitel attack, reportedly included her saying words to the effect of, "Don't worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I'm doing."
We have since learned that she knows him well.
Unable to win over prosecutors, Thompson immediately tried to convince the media crowd waiting outside the courtroom.
The lawyer said that thanks to a translator fluent in the dialect who was there as the recordings were played, it's now plain "that [the] tape shows that the victim never said the words, 'He has a lot of money and I know what to do.' " Thompson said. He was referring to a quote attributed to her in a July 1 New York Times article.
Note that he does not say what she did say. Statement Analysis' grandfather, Scientific Content Analysis, not only looks at what someone says, but what someone does not say. Note, however, that his next statement will shed light upon his thinking:
The story "made it seem like Ms. Diallo, a day after she was almost raped by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, was solely interested in getting his money," Thompson said.
Note that her attorney now says she was not raped, but "almost" raped. This changes the dynamics of the investigation entirely and it may be something he regrets saying, especially since the negative wording regarding seeking his money. This is why, even with pre-thought, words still give the subject away.
"I'm telling you that some things were said that were merged together in this quote that was given to The New York Times. She never said, 'I know what to do,' when it came to Dominique Strauss-Kahn's money."
He still does not say what it is he believes she said, on the tape.
The day of the Times story, prosecutors publicly disclosed that Diallo, 32, had been caught in a web of lies and inconsistencies that threatened to cripple the case.
The accuser gave conflicting statements, and the Manhattan DA's Office said she previously lied about a rape in her asylum applications and invented a child for tax benefits.
Strauss-Kahn's lawyers met with prosecutors Tuesday and again argued for the case to be dismissed.
Diallo staged a media blitz this week as she pleaded for the prosecution to continue, telling ABC News and Newsweek that Strauss-Kahn forced her to perform oral sex after she entered his suite May 14.
On May 15, she and her friend, jailed in Arizona on drug charges, spoke on the phone.
Thompson yesterday said that in her first phone call, Diallo told him that "someone tried to rape her and that he's a powerful big man, and that they fought and that he tried to take her clothes off and that he pushed her, and that when he could not take her clothes off, he made her do something against her will."
Here we have another admission. The word "tried" in the past tense, means to attempt, but fail. Here he says that someone "tried" to rape her; but failed to do so.
He "tried" to take her clothes off but failed to do so.
This does not mean that an assault did not take place, but that she was not raped.
It should be noted that "they" fought. Often times we find that the victim fought off her attacker, but we don't expect to see the word "they" in a statement like this. It simply should be noted in context.
"The discussion about his wealth never came up," Thompson said.
Please note that he does not say "a discussion" but "the" discussion.
It is likely a reference to "the" discussion about his money or wealth, that they had.
He said that during the second call, it was the guy in jail who said, "He's powerful. He's a rich man.
"She did not say, 'I know what to do,' " Thompson recalled. "When he asked her if she had a lawyer and if she was OK, she allegedly then said, 'I know what to do.' "
Note that he can say what she didn't say, but can only affirm what she "allegedly" said. This may be called 'lawyer speak' but it is simply deception. The more times he says that she didn't talk about his money, the more that the media (and public) will be convinced that she did talk about his money.
The lawyer noted that Diallo might end up suing Strauss-Kahn over the attack in a civil case.
DA spokeswoman Erin Duggan said, "We will have no comment on evidence, or on any meetings between prosecutors and witnesses, civil attorneys or defense counsel."
No comments:
Post a Comment