NEW YORK, July 1 (Reuters) - Following is a letter New
York prosecutors sent to defense lawyers for former IMF chief
Dominique Strauss-Kahn that details inconsistencies in the
story of the woman who accused Strauss-Kahn of sexual assault.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY County of New York June 30, 2011 People
v. Dominique Strauss-Kahn Indictment No. 2526/2011 Dear Mssrs.
(William) Taylor and (Benjamin) Brafman:
In connection with the above-captioned case, the People
disclose the following information to the defense pursuant to
Criminal Procedure Law 240.20 as well as Brady v. Maryland, 373
U.S. 83 (1963) and its doctrinal progeny.
In an application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal
dated December 30, 2004, the complainant provided the United
States Department of Justice Immigration and Naturalization
Service with factual information about herself, her background
and her experiences in her home country of Guinea. This
information was in the form of a written statement attached to
her application, and was submitted as a basis for her request
for asylum. In her application, she certified under penalty of
perjury that her written statement was true.
In substance, the complainant's statement claimed that she
and her husband had been persecuted and harassed by the
dictatorial regime that was then in power in Guinea. Among
other things, the complainant stated that the home that she
shared with her husband was destroyed by police and soldiers
acting on behalf of the regime, and that she and her husband
were beaten by them. When her husband attempted to return to
what was left of their home the next day, she stated that he
was again beaten, arrested and imprisoned by police and
soldiers. She stated that she also was beaten when she
attempted to come to her husband's aid. In her statement, she
attributed the beatings to the couple's opposition to the
regime. She stated that during her husband's incarceration, he
was tortured, deprived of medical treatment, and eventually
died as a result of his maltreatment. Following his death,
according to her, she began to denounce the regime and finally
fled the country in fear of her life, entering the United
States in January 2004 to seek refuge (she has told prosecutors
that she used a fraudulent visa). She repeated these facts
orally during the course of her asylum application process.
In interviews in connection with the investigation of this
case, the complainant admitted that the above factual
information, which she provided in connection with her asylum
application, was false. She stated that she fabricated the
statement with the assistance of a male who provided her with a
cassette recording of the facts contained in the statement that
she eventually submitted. She memorized these facts by
listening to the recording repeatedly. In several interviews
with prosecutors, she reiterated these falsehoods when
questioned about her history and background, and stated that
she did so in order to remain consistent with the statement
that she had submitted as part of her application.
Additionally, in two separate interviews with assistant
district attorneys assigned to the case, the complainant stated
that she had been the victim of a gang rape in the past in her
native country and provided details of the attack. During both
of these interviews, the victim cried and appeared to be
markedly distraught when recounting the incident. In subsequent
interviews, she admitted that the gang rape had never occurred.
Instead, she stated that she had lied about its occurrence and
fabricated the details, and that this false incident was part
of the narrative that she had been directed to memorize as part
of her asylum application process. Presently, the complainant
states that she would testify that she was raped in the past in
her native country but in an incident different than the one
that she described during initial interviews.
In the weeks following the incident charged in the
indictment, the complainant told detectives and assistant
district attorneys on numerous occasions that, after being
sexually assaulted by the defendant on May 14, 2011 in Suite
2806, she fled to an area of the main hallway of the hotel's
28th floor and waited there until she observed the defendant
leave Suite 2806 and the 28th floor by entering an elevator. It
was after this observation that she reported the incident to
her supervisor, who arrived on the 28th floor a short time
later. In the interim between the incident and her supervisor's
arrival, she claimed to have remained in the same area of the
main hallway on the 28th floor to which she had initially fled.
The complainant testified to this version of events when
questioned in the Grand Jury about her actions following the
incident in Suite 2806. The complainant has since admitted
that this account was false and that after the incident in
Suite 2806, she proceeded to clean a nearby room and then
returned to Suite 2806 and began to clean that suite before she
reported the incident to her supervisor.
Additionally, the complainant has stated that for the past
two tax years, she declared a friend's child in addition to her
own as a dependent on her tax returns for the purpose of
increasing her tax refund beyond that to which she was
entitled. She also admitted to misrepresenting her income in
order to maintain her present housing.
Finally, during the course of this investigation, the
complainant was untruthful with assistant district attorneys
about a variety of additional topics concerning her history,
background, present circumstances and personal relationships.
Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions.
Sincerely,
Joan Illuzzi-Orbon
Assistant District Attorney
John (Artie) McConnell
Assistant District Attorney
(Reporting by Paula Rogo)