A New York judge refused bail for DSK, stating that he was a flight risk, and noting that he had boarded a plane shortly after the alleged incident.
However, a New York Post article tends to point to DSK's innocence. Here are the salient points:
1. DSK had lunch with his daughter (a university student living in New York) immediately after leaving the hotel, and before boarding his plane to France. At the same time, DSK made a number of phone calls to conduct business as usual. This behavior seems unlikely for someone who had just committed a serious sex crime.
2. DSK believed, erroneously, that he lad left one of his cell phones in the hotel, and called the hotel to ask them to look for it. NY police asked the hotel staff to call DSK and state (falsely) that they had found the cell phone and would bring it to him, if he would tell them where he was. DSK then told the hotel that he was just arriving at JFK for a flight to France. (If he thought he was guilty of a crime and attempting to flee, this scenario makes no sense at all.)
3. DSK's flight to France had allegedly been scheduled for sometime in advance of the alleged incident, and was business as usual and not an attempt to flee a crime.
4. DSK was examined by police and found to have no scratches or bruising that would indicate a forcible struggle with the maid (as she has alleged).
5. DSK admits to sex with the maid but claims it was consensual.
It seems there is enough doubt as to DSK's guilt that we should avoid drawing conclusions until all facts are known.
4. DSK was examined by police and found to have no scratches or bruising that would indicate a forcible struggle with the maid (as she has alleged).
5. DSK admits to sex with the maid but claims it was consensual.
It seems there is enough doubt as to DSK's guilt that we should avoid drawing conclusions until all facts are known.
