"If the defense's first arguments were that the act was consensual, what about the possibility that it could be a pre-emptive plea bargain - given what strauss-kahn's lawyers know he is up against and the best bet in the long-term."

When the perp argues TO THE PRESS that the act of violation was consensual, its usually because they left behind EVIDENCE that proves the ACT occured. Before the use of DNA it was a he said, she said, battle in favor of the man; and forget it if the woman was not a virgin. In the 'good old days' a man could get a whole bunch of 'good old boys' to claim they had relations with an accuser, in order to besmirch the woman's character to another set of 'good old boys.'

Thanks to DNA they can no longer say it didn't happen nor can they heed Shaggy's advice and claim "It wasn't me."