Cyrus Vance published a 25 page report to justify his decision not to prosecute DSK after Ms Nafissatou Diallo alleged that he tried to rape her.
This allegation awoke the indignation of billions of people around the world. The details of what may have happened in the SOFITEL hotel room 2806 appeared in newspapers everywhere and made avid reading.
The Prosecutor Cyrus Vance interviewed Ms Diallo on several occasions and was also in contact with DSK 's lawyers. After a great deal of detective work on the past of Ms Diallo it became clear that she had not always told the truth and this became a problem now. Could she be believed when she recounted what had happened to her in the Sofitel hotel room at the hands of DSK ?
DSK, through his lawyers, indicated that anything which happened was consensual. DSK was never interviewed by Cyrus Vance.
After an investigation which lasted three months, the decision not to prosecute DSK and to drop the whole case came as a surprise to all the avid followers of the case. The basic reason given was that Cyrus Vance was not sure that he could obtain a unanimous verdict from the Jury.
In fact the 25 page justification for this decision raised doubts as to whether sufficient importance had been attached to the allegations made by Ms Diallo, i.e.
1) In the space of 10 minutes her genitals had been injured, and her clothes had sperm from DSK on them.
2) Her panties had DSK's DNA on them at the crutch.
3) A stain on the carpet tested positive for the presence of semen and amylase and contained a mixture of DNA from DSK and Ms Diallo.
4) Before their encounter in room 2806 DSK and Ms Diallo had never met before.
5) After their encounter Ms Diallo was in a distraught state according to hotel staff.
Due solely to the fact that she was judged by Cyrus Vance to be an unreliable witness he was not sure that he could obtain a unanimous vote from the jury for a conviction against DSK. For that reason he decided not to prosecute DSK.
In so deciding, Cyrus Vance the Prosecutor was also the Judge and Jury. Is a prosecutor obliged to ensure a 100% success rate ?
In the circumstances, because many years ago Ms Diallo lied to be able to immigrate into the USA and then, perhaps through confusion, lied about some details when she was sexually aggressed, it would seem that Ms Diallo has lost all her Human Rights in the USA.
On the other hand DSK was never interviewed because his lawyers said the relationship was consensual. Could anyone imagine consent for what appears to have then happened ?
What this case lacks is a court hearing in which both parties explain what happened. The facts that are known are such that a Jury could come to a unanimous decision, one way or the other.