The NYT reports that the case against DSK may be unraveling because the credibility of the housekeeper is in doubt. Judith Thurman says that the "the emerging information about the woman, who is sticking to her rape accusation, does not necessarily exculpate D.S.K":
It will now be very difficult, if not impossible, to put this woman on a witness stand. And it may well be that a gross injustice to Strauss-Kahn has been perpetrated. But, as it stands now, the moral of this murky story is that bad things happen to all kinds of people. He was convicted by public opinion on the basis of his prior sexual history as a roué. She is now being convicted on the basis of her “inconsistencies.” But I find it depressing that, in 2011, a woman is presumed guilty if she isn’t innocent.
McArdle makes related points.
(Former International Monetary Fund leader Dominique Strauss-Kahn and his wife Anne Sinclair leave New York State Supreme Court for a hearing on July 1, 2011 in New York City. The Manhattan district attorney's office agreed to release Strauss-Kahn without bail after the credibility of the alleged sexual assault victim had come into question. By Daniel Barry/Getty Images)
The Dish 