Showing posts with label Weigh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Weigh. Show all posts

Sunday, July 31, 2011

Analysis: Former prosecutors weigh in on Strauss-Kahn case (Reuters)

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Even by the standards of a salacious and unpredictable international scandal, it was a whirlwind week in the Dominique Strauss-Kahn sexual assault case.

On Sunday, Strauss-Kahn's accuser, Nafissatou Diallo, 32, broke her silence and anonymity, telling the world in televised and print interviews her version of the incident with the former International Monetary Fund chief. Diallo, a hotel maid, alleges Strauss-Kahn forced her to perform oral sex on him and attempted to rape her at an upscale Manhattan hotel on May 14.

Strauss-Kahn, 62, who had been seen as a possible French president, has denied any wrongdoing.

On Tuesday, prosecutors requested and received a second postponement of the next court date in the case, originally scheduled for July 16. It is now scheduled for August 23.

On Wednesday, Diallo met with prosecutors behind closed doors for more than eight hours.

The next day, a tearful Diallo appeared before a sea of cameras in a Brooklyn church, as her attorney accused prosecutors of abandoning her.

Yet through all the dizzying developments, the case remains in limbo. Despite speculation the prosecution would collapse after significant doubts arose regarding Diallo's credibility, a spokesperson for Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. insisted the office was still investigating.

Interviews with eight former Manhattan prosecutors found agreement the case was an uphill climb, but no clear consensus on whether Vance should -- or would -- continue to prosecute Strauss-Kahn.

"Every juror has to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that she's telling the truth," said Bennett Gershman, a former Manhattan prosecutor and a law professor at Pace University. "The burden is enormous on the prosecutor. Do they want to go ahead with a case that seems so difficult?"

'TREASURE TROVE' FOR DEFENSE

Several former prosecutors said the decision to allow Diallo to speak publicly about the incident could create inconsistencies the defense would try to exploit at trial. Her credibility is already under siege after prosecutors said she lied about her past and about the immediate aftermath of the alleged attack.

"You're creating a treasure trove of material for the defense to dig into," said Jeremy Saland, a defense lawyer who worked as a prosecutor under Vance's predecessor, Robert Morgenthau.

Others have suggested that the media appearances show that Diallo's attorney, Kenneth Thompson, no longer believes the criminal case will hold up. Thompson argued on Thursday that she was forced to come forward to counter "lies" about her, including a report in the New York Post claiming she worked as a prostitute. Diallo has sued the Post for libel over that report.

The publicity could also backfire if it appears to be an effort to extract money from Strauss-Kahn to settle a potential civil lawsuit. Thompson has said she will file a civil claim soon.

Thompson's comments seemed to reflect his own uncertainty over whether the criminal case will proceed.

On Wednesday, following Diallo's meeting with prosecutors, Thompson said the discussion "went well." When questioned on Thursday about that assessment, he appeared to backtrack.

"You know, yesterday when I said it went well, I think that you read too much into that," he said in response to a reporter's question. "It was a meeting, I got out of it, I came outside. I don't know what the district attorney will do."

'PRETTY IMPRESSIVE SHOW'

But some observers say the media blitz could succeed in bringing pressure to bear on Vance's office.

"My sense is that they want to be done with it and they want to dismiss it," said one former city prosecutor who did not want to be named. "But, having said that, the victim has put on a pretty impressive show this past week."

John Moscow, the former deputy chief of the district attorney's investigations division, said the physical evidence was strongly suggestive of a forced encounter. That could be enough to overcome doubts about her credibility, Moscow said.

"Here's how I look at it: if she were run over by a car, would you still have a case?" he said. "Yes, you would. I just don't see any reason at all not to go forward."

Matthew Galluzzo, a former Manhattan sex-crimes prosecutor, said Diallo's story about being gang-raped in her home country of Guinea, which she later admitted was inaccurate, could be devastating to the case.

But Daniel Bibb, another former prosecutor, said jurors could forgive her, since she apparently told it to gain political asylum and entry into the United States.

"In the average rape case, I would say that discovery of a prior false allegation of rape is fatal to the prosecution," he said. "In this case, I'm not so sure, simply because her motives in claiming rape were not malicious."

Even if Vance goes ahead with the prosecution, former prosecutors say a conviction of Strauss-Kahn will be hard to secure.

"If what I've read and seen is accurate, it appears to me that this case will ultimately be dismissed," Saland said.

But like most of the prosecutors interviewed, Bibb warned it was impossible to assess from the outside whether the case will continue.

"I don't know what the right decision is," he said. "I don't have all the facts."

(Reporting by Joseph Ax and Noeleen Walder; Editing by Jesse Wegman and Peter Cooney)


View the original article here

Sunday, May 29, 2011

What Does Jared Loughner's Competency Hearing Mean? Three Experts Weigh In (Time.com)

At a competency hearing Wednesday afternoon, a federal judge ruled Jared Loughner incompetent to stand trial. Loughner, who faces 49 federal charges, is the suspect in a January 8 shooting massacre in Tuscon that left six dead and 14 wounded, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Wednesday's ruling will send Loughner to a federal mental-health facility for treatment in an effort to restore his competence. He will be re-evaluated at a competency hearing in September.

(MORE: Loughner found unfit to stand trial.)

To better understand what this means for his case, NewsFeed spoke with three different legal experts. Daniel Gitner is a current partner at Lankler Siffert & Wohl and former Chief of the General Crimes Unit at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. Gabriel Chin is a professor of law at the University of Arizona. Stephen Morse is a professor of Law in Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania.

What does "unfit to stand trial" mean?

Gitner: It means the defendant cannot consult in a rational way with a lawyer to aid in the defense of the case and the defendant does not have a rational understanding of the charges that he or she is facing, the meaning of the charges and the meaning of the proceeding.

Morse: It demeans the dignity of the criminal trial process to try somebody who doesn't understand what's happening. There's too much risk of erroneous wrongful conviction if he's too out of it.

(PHOTOS: Messages for the Tucson victims.)

What happens next?

Morse: If the defendant is found incompetent to stand trial - and Loughner was virtually everywhere - he is going to be committed to a secure medical or psychiatric facility for the purpose of restoring competence to stand trial.

Chin: In a case like this the government will put whatever resources and time as are necessary to restore this person to competency if it's possible to do so.

Can they medicate him as a way to restore competence?

Morse: The Supreme Court has held that under certain limited conditions people who are unfit to stand trial can be forcibly medicated solely for the purpose of restoring trial competence.

Chin: The Ninth Circuit has held that you can't forcibly medicate someone in order to restore them to competency unless government interests are at stake and it will further those interests. It's substantially likely to render him competent and substantially unlikely that side effects could interfere with the fairness of the trial. If it's medically appropriate and if it's the last resort then it is permissible.

(PHOTOS: Mourning the victims of the Arizona shootings.)

If he's found unfit to stand trial at his follow up hearing in September, where does the case go from there?

Morse: If the mental health professionals think they can restore him they're entitled to "reasonable time" to do so. But you heard it here first - Jared Loughner is going to be restored to competence and tried. Nationwide most defendants initially found incompetent can be restored in about six months.

How does this differ from an insanity plea?

Gitner: Incompetent to stand trial means the defendant doesn't have an ability to consult rationally with his lawyer and to aid the defense of the case or to understand the charges they're facing. Legally insane is when somebody claims that they are incapable to determine the difference between right and wrong at the time they committed the crime.

Morse: Rationality can be very context-dependent. The question that we're asking for incompetence to stand trial is does he understand what's happening to him and can he help the person who's trying to help him. The issue with legal insanity is was he responsible at the time of the crime in the past. It's a retrospective mental state evaluation as opposed to a current mental state evaluation.

So Loughner could be legally sane but unfit to stand trial?

Morse: Absolutely. If he is actually tried it would mean he is competent and he may be found to have been not responsible at the time of the crime. In the alternative, it may have been that he was in fact perfectly responsible for himself at the time of the crime but he's deteriorated since and is now incompetent to stand trial.

(PHOTOS: The world of Jared Lee Loughner.)

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


View the original article here