- Join the France 24 community here
- Log in
Latest update: 27/05/2011
- Dominique Strauss-Kahn - justice - rape
Strauss-Kahn lawyer hires private investigators
Dominique Strauss-Kahn's lawyer has hired a team of private detectives to help build the former IMF boss’s defence case.
By Yann BUXEDA (text)
Accused last week of attempting to rape a hotel chamber maid in New York, former IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn (known as DSK in France) can now rely on Guidepost Solutions detective agency, in addition to his top-flight legal defence team.
According to the New York Times, Guidepost Solutions’ directors include a former head of the criminal division at the New York prosecutor’s office, a former head of security at IT giant IBM and a former federal prosecutor who has worked closely with the US Secret Service.
Finding the slightest fault
These investigators have been hired to uncover any elements that could discredit the alleged victim. In the coming weeks, the detectives will rummage through the young woman’s entire history to find the slightest detail that could
undermine her case.
Private detective Lawrence Frost told FRANCE 24 the defence team’s questioning of the plaintiff’s credibility as a witness would be relentless.
“Is it true you beat your children? Is it true you stole a loaf of bread? It it true you cheat on your husband?” he said, outlining the kinds of questions the detectives would likely pose. “What you try to establish is that the complainant is capable of lying.”
The victim's dealings with authorities - no matter how inconsequential - will be put under the microscope, said Matthew Galluzzo, a New York defence lawyer with experience of sexual assault cases.
“One thing one might look for is whether she has ever made false complaints in the past,” he said. “Maybe she has claimed she was raped once before and it turned out to not be true and she has a history of making false allegations. That would be helpful.”
DNA and forensics experts
Guidepost Solutions will not limit its activities to looking into the alleged victim’s past. The agency will also go through all the prosecution's material with a fine-tooth comb.
Forensic crime scene reports will be closely scrutinised, and experts will be called upon to give their own conclusions on the evidence and the accuracy of the analyses. Guidepost has a special department with DNA experts.
The agency’s detectives could even ask for access to the hotel suite where the alleged crime was committed.
Different strokes
In France, an investigation is “inquisitional” – an investigating judge weighs the indictment against the defendant following an investigation by the prosecution and defence, then decides whether the case will go to trial.
In the US, the system is “accusatory”. The prosecutor must gather evidence against the defendant in order to build a valid case. It falls entirely on the defence to prove their client’s innocence.
In this context, all the evidence gathered by private detectives won’t necessarily have to be presented to the court.
Strauss-Kahn’s defence lawyer Benjamin Brafman may use elements of the evidence to negotiate a deal with the prosecution outside of court and/or have certain elements removed from the indictment.
But in the US, not everyone has access to such services, due to the prohibitive cost of employing a detective agency. Private detectives cost at least 1,500 dollars a day, and expenses can add up to 700 dollars per hour.
By most estimates, the cost of DSK’s defence is likely to be measured in the hundreds of thousands - if not millions - of dollars.




























Comments (7)
Criminal Investigations
If you look at the Private Investigation Team they have assemble you will see that they are all big wig former attorneys, that do not actually do street work investigations. How this team(unless they sub this work out)will ever be competant to accomplish this investigation will be very interesting to observe. Attorneys are NOT investigators and vice-a-versa...See our artile in the LeParisien of criminal investigative procedures. www.ConsultAPI.com
it seems to me like media bubble and political complot
I am interested only how does famous people do their main jobs,not their sexual live,becouse my opinion that's political case and political complot and media bubble is only logical consequence and sex was consensual accusation is false and they will prove it,DSK will gonna be released and fully morally rehabilitated.Diferent system of law does not matter if he is innocent and I belive so .Verdict would be the same before european court and i believe in the american law .That may not be fair only if you haven't enough money for equally good lawyer than your accuser counterparty and fortunately that isn't his case,but i wouldn't be rather on his position with media and politicians rather against him to prove that he is innocent and that sex was only consensual is hardship and something dishonesting which discredits him even when if he will prove his innocence.
leave DSK alone
france and the united states of america know what they want from DSK. they want to destroy his political career and to be the president of france to be specific.
Kahn
Well our peasants in western media and broadcasting,just confirm to any human who is not inferior intelectually, how our collective pile of white garbage at the top have rallied around.If this person was joe blogs in the public this pile of human shit in our media and broadcasting would be having a different agenda.IE the lowlife charateristics of joe blogs.
"In the US, the system is
"In the US, the system is “accusatory." It falls entirely on the defence to prove their client’s innocence." This is patently untrue. The system is "adversarial." The prosecution is pitted against the defense, but the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. The standard for conviction is "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."
Who wrote this garbage? Please write accurately.
"It falls entirely on the
"It falls entirely on the defence to prove their client’s innocence."
I don't think this is an accurate statement at all. In the USA
it is the prosecution which must prove, "beyond a reasonable doubt," that the person is guilty. The burden of proof is most definitely on the prosecution, not the defense. All the defense has to do is create "reasonable doubt" of guilt in the minds of a majority of the jurors. That is a long, long way from "proving innocence."
dsk guilt
France 24 writes
"In the US, the system is “accusatory”. The prosecutor must gather evidence against the defendant in order to build a valid case. It falls entirely on the defence to prove their client’s innocence."
That is not correct.
In the US, the defence does not have to prove their client's innocence. It just has to raise reasonable doubt about the case as presented by the prosecutor, because the jury can only convict if guilt of the defendant is proven beyond reasonable doubt to each and every juror. (a jury does not convict by majority vote: one lone juror can "hang" the jury.)
Post new comment