Skip to main content

DISTRICT ATTORNEY VANCE ANNOUNCES INDICTMENT OF DOMINIQUE STRAUSS-KAHN ON SEXUAL ASSAULT CHARGES

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., today announced the indictment of DOMINIQUE STRAUSS-KAHN, 62, on two counts of Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree, one count of Attempted Rape in the First Degree, one count of Sexual Abuse in the First Degree, one count of Unlawful Imprisonment in the Second Degree, one count of Forcible Touching, and one count of Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree.[1]Today’s indictment in Supreme Court signifies that a New York State Grand Jury has voted to indict the defendant on all of the charges he faced following his Criminal Court arraignment on May 16, 2011. Today’s hearing in Supreme Court voids the need for tomorrow’s court date in Part F, and the next court date in this case will be June 6, 2011.

“The Grand Jury, an independent body comprised of impartial jurors, considered the evidence presented by prosecutors from my Office, and found it sufficient to file an indictment,” said District Attorney Vance. “Under American law, these are extremely serious charges, based on the Grand Jury’s determination that the evidence supports the commission of non-consensual, forced sexual acts. During the course of the criminal process, this defendant will receive all of the protections available to ensure a fair trial, protections guaranteed to everyone charged with a crime in America, including each of the more than 100,000 defendants who come before my Office each year. A fair and impartial criminal justice system has been the bedrock of our democracy for more than 200 years, and will continue to be rigorously upheld in New York courts, and by this Office.”

According to the documents filed in court, on May 14, 2011, STRAUSS-KAHN shut the door of his hotel room, thereby preventing the victim, a member of the hotel’s room attendant staff, from leaving. He grabbed the victim’s chest without consent, attempted to remove her pantyhose, and forcibly grabbed the victim’s vaginal area. His penis made contact with the victim’s mouth twice through the use of force.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s website is an excellent resource for those who have questions about the criminal justice process in New York County. “Criminal Justice System: How It Works” (http://manhattanda.org/criminal-justice-system-how-it-works) features a guide on the Arrest-to-Sentence process, as well as a legal glossary.

Assistant District Attorney John (Artie) McConnell is handling the prosecution of this case under the supervision of Assistant District Attorney Lisa Friel, Chief of the Sex Crimes Unit; Assistant District Attorney John Irwin, Deputy Chief of the Trial Division; and Chief Assistant District Attorney Daniel R. Alonso.

Defendant Information:

DOMINIQUE STRAUSS-KAHN, D.O.B. 4/24/1949
Charges:
  • Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree, a class B violent felony, two counts
  • Attempted Rape in the First Degree, a class C violent felony, one count
  • Sexual Abuse in the First Degree, a class D violent felony, one count
  • Unlawful Imprisonment in the Second Degree, a class A misdemeanor, one count
  • Forcible Touching, a class A misdemeanor, one count
  • Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree, a class B misdemeanor, one count

A class B violent felony is punishable by up to 25 years in prison, a class C violent felony is punishable by up to 15 years in prison, a class D violent felony is punishable by up to 7 years in prison, a class A misdemeanor is punishable by up to one year in jail, and a class B misdemeanor is punishable by up to three months in jail.


[1]The charges contained in the indictment are merely allegations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...