Why chambermaid's credibility is so germane in Strauss-Kahn case
In sexual assault cases, like the one against ex-IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, outcomes often hang on the credibility of the accusers, who usually must testify, say legal experts.
(Page 2 of 2)
At the time, prosecutors thought they had a solid case. Now they are asking for more time to investigate.Skip to next paragraph
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
However, the prosecution's request for more time to investigate is mainly to save face, suggests Mr. Cohen. “I think the case is ultimately doomed,” he says.
At the court proceedings Friday, Assistant District Attorney Joan Illuzzi-Orbon said the alleged victim had "a solid work history with her employer" and made a "credible claim" supported by strong evidence.
"The fact of a sexual encounter was and is corroborated by forensic evidence," said Ms. Illuzzi-Orbon, "and the very brief time period inside the hotel suite strongly suggested something other than a consensual act."
However, when the woman acknowledged fabricating information she gave to immigration officials and prosecutors, the District Attorney's office had to reconsider its case.
"All of this has caused us to reassess the position that we have advanced to the court about the strength of the case, an issue that particularly affects the question of bail," said Illuzzi-Orbon.
According to a letter sent by the assistant district attorney to Strauss-Kahn’s attorneys, the accuser has lied about a gang-rape that she said took place in Guinea, lied about what she did immediately after the alleged attack, and has been cheating on her income taxes for the past two years.
“Finally, during the course of this investigation, the complainant was untruthful with assistant district attorneys about a variety of additional topics concerning her history, background, present circumstances and personal relationships,” wrote Illuzzi-Orbon.
Says Mr. Kaufman: “If it is an isolated question of credibility, a prosecutor can live with it unless it is the heart of the case. But if you have a cascade of credibility issues, where not one of them is fatal, but a combination such that you know a jury is never able to accept the testimony of that particular witness, that’s different.”
“If it is an isolated question of credibility, a prosecutor can live with it – unless it is the heart of the case,” says Kaufman. “But if you have a cascade of credibility issues, where not one of them is fatal but a combination such that you know a jury is never able to accept the testimony of that particular witness, that’s different.”
The next step for the DA’s investigators is to make sure they have thoroughly investigated any of the accuser's alleged misstatements, plus any connections she has to people who are accused of illegal acts, says Cohen.
A key issue will be her conversation with an individual incarcerated on narcotics charges. “She was apparently seeking advice from someone she trusted, an inmate, and talked about how lucrative this sort of thing could be,” says Cohen. “It is one thing to consult a lawyer – that is acceptable in society,” he says. “It is another thing to talk to someone in jail.”
After Friday's court proceedings, the woman's attorney, Kenneth Thompson, insisted that his client had been assaulted and that the case should move forward.
"The only defense that Dominique Strauss-Kahn has is that this was consensual. That's a lie," he said.
Mr. Thompson recounted his client's version of the event in graphic detail. He also accused the District Attorney's office of mismanaging the case.
"We don't have confidence that they're ever going to put Dominique Strauss-Kahn on trial," said Thompson.
Asked about his client's apparent lies, Thompson said those were separate from the matter at hand.
"Credibility is important," he told reporters outside the courthouse, "but you cannot discount the powerful physical evidence."