A naked man sexually aggressed a room maid in Hotel Sofitel, and Harlem Police arrested IMF Chief taking him for the naked man in Hotel Sofitel.
Posted on May 17th, 2011
By Charles.S.Perera,
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Greece facing a serious monetary problem awaits an aids package from IMF.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The Managing Director of the IMF ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ who was expected in Brussels on the 16 May,2011, for talks to bail out Greece was caught in a virtual ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚«ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ambuscadeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚» the Saturday night.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ A 32 year old room maidƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ at Hotel Sofitel in New York accused ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ that a man occupying a room in the hotel Sofitel forcedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ her to have oral sex, attempted ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ to rape her and imprisoned her.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ DominiqueƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Strauss Kahn had by then boarded the plane toƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ keep his rendez-vous in Brussels.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The police officers of Harlem Police Station ,boarded the plane and ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ arrested the IMF Chief Dominique Strauss Khan to beƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ eventually charged for sexual aggression, attempted rape and imprisonment. They took him awayƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ handcuffed as a criminal.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The Harlem police had not made any preliminary investigation before his arrest accepting the room maidƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s evidence as the truth.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The whole of this episodeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ of takingƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Dominique Strauss Khan off the plane he had boarded and charging him forƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ sexual aggression, attempted rape and imprisonment seems nothing but a fabrication.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ One, ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ even without a legal mindƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ can come to such a conclusion,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ going on the following facts. Firstly, a room maid does not go into an occupiedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ room in a hotel un-announced.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The maidƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s story that ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the Occupant of the room was nudeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ proves that she had penetrated intoƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the room withoutƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ first verifying whether the occupant is in the room or not, by ringing the bell before opening the door with the key she has to enter the room for cleaning purposes.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ She had surprised who ever was in the room ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ when he was taking a shower- nobody takes a shower fully dressed, hence the person in the room was nude.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Her evidence seems to have goneƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ on ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ to show that the naked man forced her on to a bed andƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ made her have orals sex, when she escaped from ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ theƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ naked occupant of the room who was sexually aggressing her, she ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ran out of the room.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ She says that this naked man chased her in the corridor.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ She escaped from him and informed the police.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ A very pertinent question that arises in the mind of one who examines in detailƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ this unfortunate incident is whether the Occupant in the room in the Sofitel Hotel and the room maid who was aggressed were known to each other and whether they deliberately or at some oneƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-commandƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ invented the story to inculpateƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Dominique Strauss Khan the Managing Director of IMF.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The room maid version of the incident was ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ apparently enough for the Harlem Police to arrest Dominique Strauss Khan whoƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ had been occupying the room where the aggression had taken place, was by thenƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ boarded in a plane.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ He hadƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ called the Hotel Sofitel to tell that he had leftƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ behind hisƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ portable telephone in the room.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ That was evidence for the Harlem Police to conclude that the man who sexually aggressedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the room maid was the IMF Chief DominiqueƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Strauss Kahn who had left the roomƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ in haste after the incident leaving behind the portable telephone.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Dominique Strauss Khan is a Frenchman, there is pertinent evidence that the naked man who aggressed the room maid was not him. First because of ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the question of oral sex which the room maidƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ says she was forced to do.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Oral sex is an act done with mutual consent, or at gun point. In this Case the ChiefƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ of IMF,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ is not a mafia carrying a gun with him, so if it had taken place it was on mutual consent, therefore there was no aggression in the performance of that act.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Oral sex is some thing apparently the Americans indulge in doing. And thereforeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ first thing an AmericanƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ police officer thinks of as a sexual aggression is oral sex.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ But French do not indulge inƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ oral sex, otherƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ than as a part of love making.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Oral Sex is more an American practice which ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ became known ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ after Bill Clinton was accused of doing it with an office girl.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Secondly if the ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ naked manƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ who aggressed the room maidƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ was IMF Chief he would not have chased her down the corridor, though some other man may have done so.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ If the maid recognized him later in a police identification parade, how was it that the Police went to the Plane to arrest the IMF ChiefƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ taking for granted that he was the aggressor.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ It shows that the police had come to that conclusion even before the room maid identified him as the aggressor.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Who gaveƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ IMF ChiefƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s name and recognizedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ him as the aggressorƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ? He had been arrested only on the word of the room maid. ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The room maid may not have known him as the Chief of the IMF.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Unless some one told her. Was that some one the nude man who aggressed the room maid in the room ?
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The Harlem Police had not made any investigation prior toƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ charging him.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ He obviously did not leave the hotel in a hurry to run away from the police as he is a resident of New York and works in New York so he wouldƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ have come back to New York.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ His forgetting the portable telephone is no indication that he left the hotel in a hurry.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ This appears to be a is a total fabricationƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ by the police, perhapsƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ there are more powerful people behind it.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ IMF Chief is a Socialist and he wasƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ changing theƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ IMF system?ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Should the IMF allow a further aid package to GreeceƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ? ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Dominique Strauss Khan was the favourite Socialist Presidential Candidate of France for the 2012 Presidential election.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ America would not favour a Socialist President in France.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ These are some of the facts that have to be taken into considerationƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ inƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ searching for the reason why a room maid accused the Chief of IMF for sexual aggression.
May 17th, 2011 at 4:50 pm
You are wrong on this Charles
IMF chairman tried to rape this lady from West Africa ( an imigrant living for 7 years here)
She did not lie
I know this hotel very well. When I worked in Park Av New york city I walk to my office from Port Authority
this hotel is located on 44th street
I never knew it is an expensive hotel .
This guy paid $3000/ day
poor guy is now in Satan Island jail
It is a big story in New York City
May 17th, 2011 at 7:36 pm
@Charles, Pls. get your facts rights before commenting..
This Frenchmen a serial sexual pest that go after women and whole of France knows it.. You cannot condone sexual violence against women just because you are a socialist…
http://www.smh.com.au/world/maids-world-turned-upside-down-over-dominique-strausskahns-alleged-sex-assault-20110518-1es5s.html
May 17th, 2011 at 8:29 pm
Jimmy, You never knew this hotel was an expensive one, why because you never have gone in to hotel to findout. Both you and Sitih are wrong because you do not know why US do not want Khan to be the next president of France. In my opinion this man forced US to attack Libya, then shipped a one hnudred million dollars with of crude oil in a tanker just before the attack on Libya. This crude oil went to France and UK and none to USA. Jimmy tel me how do you know that this West African Room Cleaner is not lieing? Sex is her part time job. Don’t tell me Mr. New Yorker you do not know this!
This what would have happend. It is a norm that the hotel manager gets a commission from the clearners for sex work. If Khan did not pay the money she wanted she would have told the manager that. The manager then thought that he/she could teach a lesson to Khan and cooked up a story. FBI and CIA would have been waiting for such an oppertunity, jumped on it. SIRIH, this has nothing to do with violance against woman. She went in there and offered her services.
May 17th, 2011 at 10:00 pm
Mr Charles Perera, I agree with your view.
This could be a nice story for a major motion picture in Hollywood.
The Statue of Liberty, Please take care of the IMF Chief.
May 17th, 2011 at 11:04 pm
I agree with Charles whole-heartedly.I too dont believe this woman. American women and Americans are very capable of doing things like that. Sorry Jimmy I was there myself so many times it’s true. He may have liked women but at that moment when he was about to go and meet Angela merkel I dont think he will do a stupid thing like that anyhow lets wait and see the outcome. All saw what Clinton did to that woman but see no shame for them. They move around the world as if nothing happened. This is the way of Americans.
I hope they will clear this man and allow him to go free and do what he was doing as the IMF chief. Americans may be the super power in this world but see what they are doing to the world can you learn anything good from them? I dont think so. People hate them for what they do to the mankind around the world. They teach all bad things and they kill innocents indiscriminately going to wars unneccessaraly. People may not agree with me but that’s the fact.This is only my view as I see and read about everything about this world. Maybe I am wrong.
May 17th, 2011 at 11:49 pm
Ranjit,
You are NOT wrong. America and the wild West make misery for the rest of the world. They did and will try to conquer world by organized crime.
May 18th, 2011 at 12:24 am
Thanks Nihal for standing upto the truth.Just now I read in the news Schwarzenegger Califonia former Gov.fathered a child with a member of his house-hold staff. So this is America.They will do anything and say “SORRY” that’s their character. For others human rights violation,war crime, unacceptable, guilty and so on. American democracy bull shit!
May 18th, 2011 at 2:57 am
Charles.S.Perera – an extremely good Defense theory. The man has been brought to trial in the U.S.A. and has to be considered innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law.
But you also have to consider the alleged victim’s story – does it sound bona fide (or plausible) when she states, on one account that she complained to her brother first , and another account that she complained direct to the Police first. This begs the question should she not have first complained to her immediate supervisor or to the hotel management or security; which would have been the most natural behaviour for an employee of the hotel to have done; especially as the charge she makes is so serious. This alone creates a doubt in her in her notorious claim.
Then one has to consider the period of time of her complaint and the time of arrest of this great personality on the aircraft he had boarded. This timing alone would support or discredit the conspiracy theory. Another question to consider is will a man of this stature about to catch a plane; and check out from a prestigeous hotel resort to sexual molestation of a room-maid with just a couple of minutes to spare? His character and upstanding reputation is well known – but how much is known of the complainant, how long was she is service at this hotel? what is her background etc., any connections or ties or agencies political or otherwise. How will her actions and demeanour hold up in court?
It is very easy to slander a person of prominence just to cause a controversy and prevent his chances of political advancement. Especially as there were no witnesses to the actual assault if ever there was one. Did the complainant have skin or DNA evidence in her nails if she scratched him or other positive DNA of her attacker on her person? Let us say at this stage “Let Justice prevail.”
May 18th, 2011 at 3:46 am
Whole west is full of sex maniacs. Hilary’s husband Bill Clinton, British feudalist man Charles, His ex wife Diana, Sarkozy, Sylvio Berlusconi are few examples and Strauss Khan’s matter is nothing new. They are cheaters and notorious liars. Behaves like stray dogs.
Biggest mistake DSK done is he decided to contest French Presidential election. At this moment French president Sarkozy is a good obedient hunting dog for yankee master. French army invaded Afghanistan with NATO invaders. For the Libya invasion and bombing, French supported American Yankees whole heart.
If Khan contest 2012, France Presidential election Sarkozy get pressure from far right nationalist party Marie Le Pen as well as left parties and from Khan too. To fulfill American agenda against Muslims and Middle East yankees want either Sarkozy or far right Marie Le Pen.
To eliminate DSK from the presidential election, hotel scenario is the best option. With a black pawn they checkmate DSK. This is how five star democracy works.
May 18th, 2011 at 6:11 am
It looks this is something common among French and this guy had tried this woman more than once.
He had a similar case a year before or so too.
Only problem is now European countries are scared they may go bust as the IMF involvement is delayed.
What Sri rohana says is a nice – set-up story. It should have some bearing.
May 18th, 2011 at 6:15 am
Looks very much like a set up for a man who was used to it.
May 18th, 2011 at 11:04 am
Sri Rohana analysis is correct. For all the comment wrters: from MSNBC web site. This is a Penthouse suite at a luxuary hotel. This West African woman does not have a Visa or any other document show that she can work in US. So FBI provided her a instant Visa. What does that say? Now her layer Shapiro say she is in hiding, why? Because her back ground check might revel how she got to New York city and what other things she has done? Yes, EU countries would have gone bust if not for the confiscated Libyan funds.
May 18th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
You have to wonder though, it doesn’t take Hercule Poirot to figure out something in this story don’t add up. I for one am wondering how is it someone as powerful and wealthy as the IMF person. Who could click his fingers pull out his check book and he could have 100 women sleep with him, especially New York where its the one of the world capital for high class professional prostitutes to service the Wall Street crowd, without any of it making the papers or affecting his career. Would risk it all including a possible election victory in France with this episode. Unless he was somehow set up. So that it would somehow discredit him in the French Elections. Although I wonder France being France and the French voter who have a shall we say a more lenient attitude these sort of sexual misadventures of its political candidates. So whoever set this up, to discredit Mr Kahn may have backfired on them. We will have to see how this plays with the French electorate. It is a intrigueing story. Worthy of a who dunnit detective novel.
May 18th, 2011 at 1:39 pm
IMF cheif was trying to challenge Sarkozy, besides he was center-left and he had praised measures that Africa is taking for economic revival. On the other hand, Gadhaffi is personanon grata because he tried to make Africa economically independant.
People have to question how come a room attendant, in a hotel paying $ 3000 a night, come without informing or without any knowledge of the occupant and engage in oral sex (see the charge sheet).
It looks, Sarkozy himself wanted this thing happened.
May 20th, 2011 at 2:39 pm
Latest events have overtaken the imaginative theory mooted by this writer. Have I not read somewhere, according to Pundits, that even the defence lawyer had been considering defending the accusation on the basis of sex with consent? If that’s correct then the theories about a set up or a seocnd man in the room fall flat on their faces.
There is one small detail that I have noted as Providence helping the woman concerned. She was honest enough not to pick up Mr Kahn’s cell-phone and pocket it herself. Had she done so, she would have been the one that would be in jail. For instance, Mr Kahn could well have sticthed her up by deliberately leaving the phone in the room as a trap for the woman, and then pretending that he had quite innocently forgotten the phone in the room. Then he reports the loss to the Hotel Security hoping that they would find the phone in the woman’s possession. Had Security found the phone in her possession, then she would have been in real trouble as nobody would have then believed her side of the story. Mercifully, she had not fallen into that trap, if there was one set up by Mr Kahn. Well, it is my imagination, but then it is even more plausible than Charles’ theory.
May 21st, 2011 at 6:52 am
Granted Radha, your imagination is not bad. But if the aggression took place and the woman ran away and complained to the Hotel, the naked man- the aggressor, had a short time to wash, dress and get away to check out from the Hotel.
But a woman in the “lift” who spoke to the man she recognized as IMF chief did not show himself in a state of agitation, but was relaxed and engaged with her in a short conversation.
The room maid who ran out of the room, down the corridor and made the complaint to the hotel, would not have come back to collect what ever was left behind by her aggressor. She would not have been in a state of mind to come back to that room to steal some thing belonging to the aggressor. The aggressor would have known that , and he would not have called the Hotel because he would have been in a state of agitation and wanted to forget the incident…… and did not want the Hotel to know where he was.
If she made a complaint at the same time IMF Chief checked out , he could not have been the aggressor. Because the interval between the aggression and the IMF Chief checking out of the hotel would have been too short if he was the aggressor.
If she recognized the aggressor as the IMF Chief later at the police identification parade , it may be because she had already seen him before in that room, and thought the aggressor could have been him……. How about that Dr. Watson ?
May 21st, 2011 at 11:49 am
Well, Mr Sherlock Holmes, you are just testing me, like a Devil’s Advocate …… are n’t you?
You see, Mr Holmes, that you are making a presumption that people who commit certain misdeeds behave according to a certain stereo type pattern. That’s one fallacy that falls into a whole range of fallacies called “Representativeness”. The specific one that has played in your mind is the “insensitivity to prior probabilities” in that you, Mr Holmes, got misled by past patterns of criminals, let us say rapists for argument sake, to form a streotype image of the culprit who perform this type of misdeed.
Despite the presumed pattern, under the rules of probabilities, the next person that does this sort of thing could behave quite differently. A person who does it for the first time might panic as you suggest, but the ones who habitually do it in their lives might well have developed the art of remaining extremly cool and composed before and after such a deed, that no one would even suspect that such a cool, dignified person could commit such a deed.
Then, some others may be born as cool guys that have the capacity to penetrate through someone’s ear and come out of the other ear (as we say it in Sinhala) without that someone even noticing the passage. I guess you got what I am trying to say. Things are not exactly what we are led to believe. It is all to do with the difference between the true personality and the mask or the “aarudha” that they wear for the others to see. Is n’t there a saying that you should always watch the cool and composed ones in a team or in an office that may be plotting against you, and not the one’s who make the most noise. The latter, you could watch, but the former, they could be the most dangerous.
A similar fallacy applies to your idea of the woman’s behaviour. If the woman had panckied and run out, as you rightly say, she would not probably come back to survey the scene or to see what Mr Kahn might have left behind. You are saying that Mr Kahn might have known that behaviour, implying that he would not have taken the gamble to set her up. Yes that is a possibility, whereas, there is that equal other possibility that he gambled on the fact that the woman would cut her losses and take the phone. We never know what was in Mr Kahn’s mind; I am simply looking at other possibilities instead of jumping in the band wagon and branding the woman as an opportunist or a decoy placed by enemies of Mr Kahn.
For argument sake, let us say that Mr Kahn did not leave the phone deliberately, then certainly he had forgotten this technological appendage of the modern executive that they cannot live without even one minute. What was in Mr Kahn’s mind at the time to forget his Man Friday. Was his mind panicking despite his cool appearance?
Even in his own reckoning, Mr Kahn considers that women were his achilles heel. That is part of his personality, he knows that, but he has reconciled and lived with it; the other much larger part of his life, which is full of charm and virtue in most respects had allowed him to protect himself and sail through the occasional storms relating to the weak area of his life. But sooner or later ones deeds catch up with one. There is a saying in Sri Lanka that a Kottoruwa might peck from one tree trunk to another, but the day he pecks on a banana trunk, then he would have it, he would get trapped.
Please don’t misunderstand me Mr Holmes, I don’t gloat over Mr Kahn’s misfortune. He has been a great asset to the French nation and to the world in general, but now trapped by his own life style and the darker side of his character. I just hope that there would be a happy ending for him and his family, and in future he stays with his family when he is New York, and not alone in a Hotel.
But at the same tone, I trust that the woman who is complaining as wronged by the mighty would not be put down by the powerful people, just because she is relatively poor, powerless and (in my opinion) most likely telling the truth.
May 21st, 2011 at 12:36 pm
Agree Radha
July 1st, 2011 at 7:31 am
Charles is correct after all
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/questions-about-accuser-leave-strauss-kahn-sexual-assault-case-in-limbo/2011/06/30/AG7uOysH_story.html