OK, let's get this over with. DSK: victim of conspiracy, or not?

Very, very simple question: Is DSK, who is accused of sexual assault in NYC, simply a victim of a conspiracy?

I voted 'yes'. He could be both of course and there was no option for that.

Is it possible for you to stick to facts without making personal statements about other DUers, your above post being an example? That post is about ME, not about the subject at hand, and it is grossly inaccurate. I am not the subject of this discussion.

I ask because I am interested in facts, not personal opinions about other posters and if you cannot refrain from making allegations without any substance, such as the one above, there is no point in discussing this case with you and I won't waste any more time. Instead I will discuss facts with those who are capable of sticking to the facts.

I pointed out FACTS about those claims. They are CLAIMS, ALLEGATIONS and they HAVE been contradicted by others. What about those facts bothers you?

A whole town full of families were accused of child abuse a few decades ago in this country, in one of the most infamous examples of 'rush to judgement' ever, with the help of the media in this country. And the more who were dragged out of their homes, the more the public said 'see, look at all those 'witnesses'. Well, now we know how completely wrong those allegations were and how tragic the results were for hundreds of families.

You jump to all the conclusions you want, I will stick to facts.

you would not consistently be presenting conspiracy to rape charges. whereas there is a lot of facts pointing to rape and previous abuse.

on edit... luv yas.... truly, lol. just wanted to add, since i address your posts harshly on this subject. and will continue. not personal at all.

Same to you :-)

However you are wrong that there are no facts to suggest a conspiracy. There are just as many facts to suggest that as there are regarding the case itself, in fact maybe more. Eventually you'll probably realize that. Which doesn't mean he is not guilty of the charges, it just means that both can be true.

no way... yup. lol

off to read a book

:shrug:

Perhaps the trial will tell. Quaint notion that "trials" are.

Is he a candidate on American Idol?

Since the United States doesn't trust its justice system to arrive at a verdict anymore, let's just put things to a popular vote. How much is required for conviction? A plurality? A majority? Or just the say-so of one anonymous person with an itchy trigger finger? Whatever it is, we'll call it justice!

works

i didnt know.

But there are a disturbing number of folks who think that summary execution of an unarmed man by an anonymous gunman (for example) constitutes justice, including the President and the Secretary of State. So, since we don't trust our justice system to ascertain guilt, it seems that a poll somewhere is as valid a substitute as any. I was just looking for a few procedural rules, but considering the direction the country is heading, perhaps it's best not to get too bogged down in any "due process" entanglements.

i tend to believe it works hard at just, though not perfectly and better than most. but nowhere do i see that means i... a erson that has nothing to do with the case, .... cannot have an opinion, nor discuss it.

Apologies to Mr. Rogers (Will, not Fred).

Don't know.

If you admit any sort of ambiguity, you're the worst kind of person there is -- a (gasp) LIBERAL!

Therefore, the OP could never include such an option. That would make Nordic Baby Jesus cry.

Who wants DSK to be guilty of rape
without further investigations?

:sarcasm: just in case!

"DSK is not the victim of any kind of conspiracy."

Must be omniscient, one and all.

An old German proverb comes to mind:

"Thus he concludes decisively
There cannot be what must not be."

...than someone put her up to it.

demands absolute certainty of the respondents. If you didn't mean exactly what you said there, you can change your post to "...more convinced..." bla bla blah. But then the whole purpose of this poll falls apart.

:)

Fortunately, we have a system of justice that does not include DU (or FR) polls.

Evidence, testimony, that sort of stuff.

Of course the system also has coersion and bribes, public humiliation, and that's just for the family members.

:hi:

Or, we could just throw him in a pond. If he floats, he's guilty.