There are a few things I have to say about Dominique Strauss-Kahn

Dominique Strauss-Kahn is an accused sexual predator, yet he gets to leave custody to live in a 14 million dollar townhouse (see photo above), which has 7,000 square feet, heated floors, a spa, and most important, daily maid service.

I heard on the news that they chose this location apparently because it can be properly secured. They said it was the only location that had only one entrance. Really? Every apartment I ever lived in in Manhattan only had one entrance/exit.

Why should a person under house arrest get to stay in a place like this? Isn’t the whole point of house arrest that you’re confined and begin to face the things you have done? This is not so much house arrest, but a scaled back version of what he is already accustomed to. In the meanwhile his alleged victim has to be further traumatized by this travesty of justice. And where does she get to live?

When it comes to his trial, I wonder how will they find a jury of his peers? How many have that kind of money? What men are out there that were in amazing positions of power and so callously and violently abused it with their sexual inappropriateness and violence? Hmmm. Well actually I can think of a few. Kobe Bryant and Arnold Schwarzenegger come to mind. Trouble is, they may be tied up in scandals of their own.

What do you think?

  • Linda Grace
    May 31, 2011

    Yah, and his leadership has been great for the world economy. (sarcasm)
    Guess he has been busy elsewhere and couldn’t attend to his job in an adequate fashion.

  • Arthur Indenbaum
    May 31, 2011

    In general I agree with your comments but I will mention a few things. Our system has never been truly fair with moneyed people vs. not. Do we like it when a rich person is accused of any crime and has lots of money for top lawyers vs. those who might be accused of the same crimes who have little or no money? No, but the system is unfair from the get go. Also there’s this idea of innocent till proven guilty. You can’t fault the guy for spending his own money as uncomfortable as that is, its capitalism, perhaps at its worst but its still our system.
    I’m sure the ‘secured’ aspect of the place is pretty certain but if not I seem to have read that he wears an electric ankle bracelet as well.
    If he’s guilty I hope he goes to jail, he’s already spent a week in Rikers and having spent some time (not a lot) in similar places I assure they’re no treat.
    Your line, ” Isn’t the whole point of house arrest that you’re confined and begin to face the things you have done” is incorrect unfortunately. The point is that you’re confined until trial but not to face things you’ve done (after all what if you did not do them), that’s a value judgement on your part.
    Where his alleged victim lives has nothing to do with the charges against him.
    If you define his ‘jury of peers’ as similarly wealthy individuals who have been charged with crimes then might that be who you DON’T want as his jury, besides I believe a jury of peers does not exist in any law we’re only required to have equal protection under the law, which I take to mean that anyone having allegedly committed a crime is entitled to a jury, if they so desire and entitled to an attorney.
    I’m sorry because if this guy has done what he’s accused of they should throw the proverbial book at him, but meanwhile, innocent until…..

    • jenniferblaine
      June 1, 2011

      Hey Arthur!

      Thanks for your thoughtful response to the post.

      Yes, I know the system is not fair.

      Yes, I know the system says innocent until proven guilty. It is unfair of me to be assuming guilt. I am simply speaking from my gut, and it’s a risk to do so, and absolutely unfair. The more I read about him and his history, he sounds rather entitled and has used his position of power in the past to get away with a lot of bad behavior, including sexual harrasment in the past.

      Yes, I know the point of house arrest is so he doesn’t flee. It is absolutely a judgement on my part that this time is an opportunity for him to reflect on his choices. It is also a judgement on my part that as his surroundings become more comfortable, the less of a chance he will have to truly face his actions.

      The last point I made about a jury of his peers, is meant to be tongue in cheek. As people in positions of power abuse it, how can you ever truly have a check on the tendency to abuse and exploit a person’s position for personal gain or license to do whatever they want?

      Peace, J