What's Wrong With This Man?
French Presidential hopeful, former head of the IMF and all round serial shagger - Dominique Strauss-Khan (62) - is about to get his passport back - according to news reports.
Prosecutors have doubts about the ability of their one and only witness - Nafissatou Diallo - to stand up to a tough cross-examination in court.
And since they have to prove the charges of sexual assault - 'beyond a reasonable doubt' - the authorities appear to have decided that such a serious criminal charge will not succeed.
So what is likely to happen now is that the ex-chambermaid will bring a civil case against her alleged attacker - where the burden of proof is not so onerous.
Because in a civil court the case will be decided 'on the balance of probabilities' - in which case DSK has much more explaining to do - because his silence can and will be used against him.
The most depressing thing about this affair is how so many French commentators - including lots of 'socialists' say that DSK's hound dog, predatory sex life - is entirely his own affair.
Because at the time of the 'incident' the former head of the IMF was on official business - representing and acting as an ambassador for the IMF.
DSK was staying in a swanky hotel at his (publicly funded) employer's expense - and by even his own admission he had sex with an on-duty chambermaid - whom he had never met before until she stepped into his room - on the morning of the alleged attack.
What's wrong with this man? - is the question all French socialists should be asking.
Instead of turning a blind eye to the old goat's appalling behaviour.
Prosecutors have doubts about the ability of their one and only witness - Nafissatou Diallo - to stand up to a tough cross-examination in court.
And since they have to prove the charges of sexual assault - 'beyond a reasonable doubt' - the authorities appear to have decided that such a serious criminal charge will not succeed.
So what is likely to happen now is that the ex-chambermaid will bring a civil case against her alleged attacker - where the burden of proof is not so onerous.
Because in a civil court the case will be decided 'on the balance of probabilities' - in which case DSK has much more explaining to do - because his silence can and will be used against him.
The most depressing thing about this affair is how so many French commentators - including lots of 'socialists' say that DSK's hound dog, predatory sex life - is entirely his own affair.
Because at the time of the 'incident' the former head of the IMF was on official business - representing and acting as an ambassador for the IMF.
DSK was staying in a swanky hotel at his (publicly funded) employer's expense - and by even his own admission he had sex with an on-duty chambermaid - whom he had never met before until she stepped into his room - on the morning of the alleged attack.
What's wrong with this man? - is the question all French socialists should be asking.
Instead of turning a blind eye to the old goat's appalling behaviour.
