Read news from:
Austria
SHARE
COPY LINK

DSK

DSK accuser in key talks with prosecutors

The hotel maid who has accused former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn of sexually assaulting her will meet with New York prosecutors on Monday for key talks that could lead to a dismissal of the case.

Published: 22 August 2011 09:48 CEST
DSK accuser in key talks with prosecutors
WTO

Nafissatou Diallo, a 32-year-old immigrant from the West African country of Guinea, says the man once seen as a favorite for the French presidency forced her into oral sex and tried to rape her on May 14 in his New York hotel suite.  

She and her attorney Kenneth Thompson are due to meet New York prosecutors at 3pm (1900 GMT), for a meeting which Thompson himself said he believed was called to tell Diallo that all or some of the charges would be dropped.  

“My interpretation of that letter is that they’re going to announce that they’re dismissing the case entirely, or some of the charges,” Thompson told The New York Times on Saturday, referring to the letter summoning Diallo.  

“If they were not going to dismiss the charges, there would be no need to meet with her,” he added.  

Speculation that the explosive case would come crashing down heated up at the weekend, with the New York Post, citing sources close to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, reporting that he would move for a dismissal.  

Strauss-Kahn is due in New York state court on Tuesday, when Vance is to tell the judge how he wants to proceed.  

The Post said that in his motion to dismiss, Vance will review the findings of his months-long investigation, including previously undisclosed information, that raised questions about Diallo’s credibility.  

Prosecutors refused to comment on the swirling speculation over the weekend.  

Thompson nevertheless said on Sunday that Diallo’s court battle was not over yet, telling AFP: “I am not sure what is going to happen, but we hope the DA will stand by Mrs Diallo.”  

He added: “She is still very depressed over the turn of events… She wants justice in this case.”  

Unless there is a postponement, two main options remain for Tuesday’s hearing: prosecutors telling the judge they plan to go ahead with the case, or prosecutors moving to dismiss charges.  

If there is a motion to dismiss, and it is immediately granted by the judge, the 62-year-old former managing director of the International Monetary Fund could be free to return to France.  

Strauss-Kahn has pleaded not guilty to all charges against him including “criminal sexual act, unlawful imprisonment, and attempted rape.” He is currently free on bail, but his passport has been confiscated.  

Earlier this month, Diallo filed a civil suit against Strauss-Kahn seeking unspecified damages.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

ECONOMY

World unprepared for next financial crisis: ex-IMF chief Strauss-Kahn

The world is less well equipped to manage a major financial crisis today than it was a decade ago, according to Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a former chief of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Published: 9 September 2018 14:08 CEST
World unprepared for next financial crisis: ex-IMF chief Strauss-Kahn
Former French Economy Minister and former managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Dominique Strauss-Kahn , poses during a photo session in Paris on Thursday. Photo: JOEL SAGET / AFP
In an interview with AFP, the now-disgraced Strauss-Kahn — who ran the fund at the height of the 2008 financial meltdown — also said rising populism across the world is a direct result of the crisis. 
 
Strauss-Kahn resigned as head of the IMF in 2011 after being accused of attempted rape in New York, although the charges were later dropped. He settled a subsequent civil suit, reportedly with more than $1.5 million.
 
Q: When did you become aware that a big crisis was brewing?
 
A: When I joined the IMF on Nov 1, 2007, it became clear quite quickly that things were not going well. That is why in January 2008, in Davos, I made a statement that made a bit of noise, asking for a global stimulus package worth two percent of each country's GDP. In April 2008, during the IMF's spring meetings, we released the figure of $1,000 billion that banks needed for their recapitalisation.
 
Q: Did the Bush administration grasp the danger of Lehman Brothers going bankrupt?
 
A: No, and that is why Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson decided not to save Lehman, because he wanted to make an example of it in the name of moral hazard. Like everybody else, he considerably underestimated the consequences. Allowing Lehman to go under was a serious mistake. Especially because only a week later they were forced to save the insurer AIG, which was much bigger.
 
Q: Ten years on, are we better equipped to deal with a crisis of such a magnitude?
 
A: No. We have made some progress, particularly in the area of banks' capital adequacy ratios. But that is not nearly enough. Imagine Deutsche Bank suddenly finding itself in difficulty. The eight percent of capital it has at its disposal are not going to be enough to solve the problem. The truth is that we are less well prepared now. Regulations are insufficient.
 
Q: How so?
 
A: After 2012-2013 we stopped talking about the need to regulate the economy, for example concerning the size of banks, or concerning rating agencies. We backtracked, which is why I am pessimistic about our preparedness. We have a non-thinking attitude towards globalisation and that does not yield positive results.
 
Q: Do we still have international coordination?
 
A: Coordination is mostly gone. Nobody plays that role anymore. Not the IMF and not the EU, and the United States president's policies are not helping. As a result, the mechanism that was created at the G20, which was very helpful because it involved emerging countries, has fallen apart. Ten years ago, governments accepted leaving that role to the IMF. I'm not sure it is able to play it today, but the future will tell.
 
Q: Do you believe that Donald Trump's election is a consequence of the crisis?
 
A: I believe so. I'm not saying that there was a single reason for Trump's election, but today's political situation is not unconnected to the crisis we lived through, both in the US with Trump and in Europe.
 
Q: Connected how?
 
A: One of the consequences of the crisis has been completely underestimated, in my opinion: the populism that is appearing everywhere is the direct outcome of the crisis and of the way that it was handled after 2011/2012, by favouring solutions that were going to increase inequalities.
 
Quantitative easing (by which central banks inject liquidity into the banking system) was useful and welcome. But it is a policy that is basically designed to bail out the financial system, and therefore serves the richest people on the planet.
 
When there's a fire, firemen intervene and there is water everywhere. But then you need to mop up, which we didn't do. And because this water flowed into the pockets of some, and not of everyone, there was a surge in inequality.
 
By AFP's Antonio Rodriguez