minutes. a prison official reportedly ordered the suicide watch as a precaution. powerful reaction from his angry defenders and fans and from the alleged victim. first a look at the other stories we're drilling down on tonight. the nba is a tough game. >> look at that. >> but the tough es guy in the league may never have scored a point. the guy in charge of the phoenix suns comes out of the closet and into the arena. and want to take on the bad guys? ask a new york attorney general. no, not that one. the new one. that may be the only way to get the wall street banks who thought they got away with it. >> i think it should be unacceptable to everyone in the united states. then, friend or foe? which one is pakistan? as new revelations emerge, e.d. hill asks can our enemy's enemy ever be trusted again? now for our headliner segment. what happened inside that hotel room? only two people know. one is sitting in a jail cell. the other one-a hotel maid, is in hiding. she is a widow and single mother from guininuinea with no formal education and little english. her lawyer spoke to cnn a few hours ago in his first national television interview. he described her version of what happened behind closed doors. >> she was instructed to go in the room to clean the room, and while she was in there she was sexually assaulted by this man. she escaped, managed to escape, and when she did, she reported it to security and it was then reported to the police and the events took place after that. she was afraid for her life. she was being physically and sexually assaulted. and her whole idea was to get out of there and get away from this man, which thank god she was successful in doing. there wasn't any aspect of this encounter which in any way could be construed as consensual or anything other than physical and sexual assault of this young woman. her world has been turned upside down. this is a person who was a hardworking woman, a single mother supporting a 15-year-old young woman. they live together. and she was grateful to have a job for which she could provide food and shelter for her, the two of them. since this has occurred, she's not been able to go home. she can't go back to work. she has no idea what her future is going to be. this is a person who assaulted her and raped her, and she's -- any television program that she turns on is -- he's pictured on it. and she has to relive this. it's a nightmare that keeps recycling in her mind. and she can't escape from it. what i think this case is about is a man who apparently believed that he could do whatever he wished to do to whomever he wished to do whenever he wished to do it. and perhaps there are places in this world where he could do that, but fortunately, new york city isn't one of them. >> meanwhile, people who know dominique strauss-khan say this is nothing more than a witch-hunt, that these allegations could not possibly be true. moments ago i spoke to one of them, bernard henri levy, prominent french writer. i asked him why he's so certain of dominique strauss-khan's innocence. >> why? because i know dominique strauss-khan. i know him since a very long time, and i am -- in the depths of my soul, i am convinced that he cannot be the man who is depicted in some of the american and european medias today. he is a man who loves his family. he is a man who has no brutality in him. he is a man who, of course, likes life, women, but i cannot imagine him committing such a crime iras an act of rape. rape -- for me, and i really choose my words, is contradictory. this is the reason why i wrote this piece. >> in what way do you believe he has been treated unfairly so far? >> you know, it is always unfair when the press, and not the most serious press, takes the place of the judge. dominique strauss-khan will have a fair trial. i know that. when i see some of these things, it is true in america, but also in france. we have the same sort of press, depicting him as a pervert, depicting him as a sort of a serial criminal without having no element, no evidence is not acceptable. so there is a sort of manhunt which is absolutely opposite to the values of the european and american system of justice. you have two potential victims, the woman who says that she has been raped and the man who says that he did not commit the rape. it's a very serious situation. you cannot rely on this tabloid press and on these popular permanent criminal trials where every man in new york, every man in paris acts as if he was a judge. no. >> certainly set aside the media and the excesses of the media at different times, you also wrote in your article -- and i want to quote here for a moment -- you say i am troubled by a system of justice modestly termed accusatory, meaning that anyone can come along and accuse another fellow of any crime. that is, in fact, the foundation of our judicial system. people level accusations. they then have to swear to them. and, in fact, that is what the complainant, the victim, so alleged victim in this case has done. do you have any reason to doubt the veracity of her complaint? >> what i say is that in this system, which is the american system, there is good side and bad side. the bad side is that for someone like dominique strauss-khan, if it appears that the claim is false, if it appears that he did not commit the crime of which he is accused, the current moment, the moment of today will be something terrible which will follow him till the end of his life. something so violent, so cruel, so brutal in these images which have been showed of him, and really worldwide. i know that it is a case of any man and that there is a sort of democratic obligation to treat each man as if -- equally. but the problem is that this is hypocrisy. everybody knows that dominique strauss-khan is not exactly anyone. anybody, everybody knows that an average man suspected of having committed a crime goes out of the police station there will be no photograph. there will be nobody. if it is dominique strauss-khan, director of the imf, you will have the press of all over the world. so the apparent equality of treatment between the average guy and dominique strauss-khan turns out to be a real inequ inequali inequality. it turns out to be unfair for him. >> you're saying an accusation once leveled, even if proven the reputational harm is undone, no question about that, bernard. that is true in any accusatory system. again, that's why i come back to the question, do you have any reason not to believe the woman whose accusation is at the heart of this case right now? i have no reason. i have no reason, eliot. i have of course no reason. the only thing which i can say is that -- and i know what i'm saying -- i am a friend of dominique strauss-khan since a quarter of a century. and this sort of attitude, this crime of which he is accused does not match with dominique strauss-khan i know. it does not match. it is not him. >> do you think given the current state of affairs, given the integral role the imf plays in world finance, for the good of the world economy he should step down nearly to permit the imf to reassume its position of negotiating the international loan agreements that need to be consummated? >> one thing i'm sure of is that if dominique strauss-khan had to go out of imf, it would not be good for the world economy, and it would not be good for the balance of powers and the check and balances all over the world. >> final question, bernard. do you believe -- do you put any credence in the theories that this was perhaps a setup orchestrated by the party of president sarkozy? >> of course not. this is really conspiracy theory. when people are shocked by events, they do not understand. they try to find a plot because it is comfortable to have a plot. it is comfortable to believe in a conspiracy. it is an easy explanation of something who appears as such a big shock. >> bernard-henri levy, always fascinating and educational to talk to you. thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. so what's next in this case? how does the imf chief at the center of it all plot his defense? joining me now is paul cowan, a former new york city prosecutor and currently a criminal defense attorney who has handled high-profile sexual assault cases from both sides. paul, thank for being here. >> nice to be here. >> let's set the stage. this friday a critical day. until then, the defendant sits in rikers island alone in a jail cell under suicide watch. why is friday so critical? >> well, you know, for this man one of the most powerful men in the world in terms of the economic system of the world, it must be a horrible thing, sitting in that cell, you know, on rikers island. and this friday is of big importance because under new york law, the prosecutor has to hand down an indictment by friday. in other words, 23 members of a grand jury, there's a prosecutor now moving quickly to try to get the case in because the grand jury has to indict by friday or he has to be released under new york law. >> now, it was famously said by a former chief judge of the new york court of appeals, the highest court in new york, that a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich if it were asked to do so. how much evidence needs to be presented, and will the victim have to testify in the grand jury? >> most assuredly, i think the victim will have to testify. there's a low standard of proof. the prosecutor just has to meet a minimum standard to show that there's enough for the case to go forward to trial. it's not beyond a reasonable doubt. it's a very one-sided presentation by a prosecutor. usually the defense rarely in the grand jury, although i must say this -- the defendant does have the right to testify. he could testify if he wanted to. >> now the defense does not have the right to cross-examine the prosecution witness, but as you do witnesses singular or plural, but as you said, the defendant, dominique strauss-khan, could choose to testify if he wanted to. will he do so? >> i think it's highly unlikely, but occasionally, eliot, a defense attorney pulls a surprise, throws his client before the grand jury because if they choose not to indict, case over. and we're dealing with a very egotistical politician here who might say to ben brafman, i'm going in. >> have you ever put your defendants in? >> i did it once in a case. ironically, it was a maid who had defended herself against abuse. i surprised the prosecutor, put her in, no true bill. the case ended there. so it was a gamble by me. >> dominique strauss-khan can't do it yet because he would then be cross-examined. he'd be locked into a story. he may choose never to testify. it is a dangerous, high-risk proposition. >> very much so. >> assuming an indictment is returned, he's then arraigned in front of a supreme court judge and then something important happens, another bail application is made. he could get out friday or after this indictment is handled up. what do you think happens at the next bailout occasion? >> very interesting because the decision not to put bail on this case is very, very unusual. you know, in new york, we see this happen occasionally, almost always in murder cases. very rarely in a sexual assault case. and pretty much everybody has the right to bail. the criminal court judge, though, said he's a flight risk, we're afraid he's going to go back to france, no bail. a new judge now, a supreme court judge, the trial court judge, will take a look at this and possibly reverse that decision and set bail. >> the fundamental tension in this case, everything we've heard, is this going to be an alibi defense where the defendant says i wasn't even there or is he going to say yes, there was sex but it was consensual? how do you read the tea leaves, pros and cons of the defense for either one? >> hard to read these tea leaves because ben brafman, the defense attorney and by the way very highly respected defense attorney, floated a number of trial balloons at the arraignment. he said, first of all, this is not a case of forcible compulsi compulsion. well, that would suggest, then, consent is the defense. you don't say it's not force if you're trying to say your client was elsewhere. but then later in the arraignment he said the time line suggests that he was having lunch with his daughter and maybe he was elsewhere. so he was floating alibi and consent at the same time. inconsistent defenses. i don't think they've settled on a defense at this point in time. and the bottom line on sexual assault cases, only two people in the room, eliot, as you've said. and it comes down really to the physical evidence and other evidence that corroborates one story or the other. is there videotape? is there physical evidence? there's going to have to be something to corroborate her story to support a conviction in this case, and we don't know at this point. >> the tapes, forensics, kind of like a tv setup, i hate to say, because the real world is not tv, but in this case, some will be very much like tv. >> very true. >> thanks for being with us. coming up, the locker room isn't known for diversity or sensitivity. thanks to one nba executive, that could change. but first, e.d. hill jones me. e.d., you've been looking at the growing problem this country has with pakistan. >> that's right. pakistan has just said they'll take immediate steps to prove to us they are working with us in the world against terrorist organizations. but a former cia director will join us, and he'll tell us what they aren't offering that we need to help our national security. >> all right. thanks. all that and more. stay right here. ocid most calcium supplemts... t adththod it's dif - alcium crhea host: could switching to geico 15% or more on car insurance? host: does the buck stop here? sfx: buck's blustery exhale. host: could switching to geico 15% or more on car insurance? host: does it take two to tango? ♪ now for our "heart of the matter" segment, the last frontier. if you're in pro sports you can't be openly gay. think about it, you can't name one current player who is in any sport. so when the ceo of an nba team came out as gay, it was front-page news in "the new york times" and sent shock waves through the sports world. rick wells, ceo of the phoenix suns, have been involved in pro hoops since his teenage years as a ball boy for the seattle supersonics. as a marketer, he reinvigorated the nba brand, helping create the olympic dream team, the wnba, the all-star weekend. but through it all he kept his private life a secret. until yesterday. welcome. >> thank you. >> welcome. congratulations. so why now? that's the question everybody wants to know, why did you wait this long and was there something specific about the sports world that forced you to keep this inside? >> well, for me it was a culmination of a long personal journey. it wasn't until this moment in time today sitting here with you that i was i thought prepared to do that. certainly the fear that drove that was that if that aspect of my life became public, it would limit my ability to follow what was really my passion, to be a part of team sports and to be a part of everything that i love about it. and i was concerned that that disclosure could limit what i would be able to do in my career. >> what was it that you saw in the locker room, in the executive suites, in this sort of psychology of the nba that persuaded you that you couldn't be openly gay and successful in that arena? >> well, certainly nothing you noake unique to the nba and nothing i would characterize as a hostile environment. something i was say is a conspiracy of silence. it's a topic that's not discussed. it is nothing that is comfortable to be a part of our work environment, you know, totally out of step with where our society is today but it still exists. >> that's what i want to pursue. why is the sports world out of step? in other environment, legal profession, the acting professi profession, the arts, science, academia, there don't seem to be these inhibitions, yet in sports it's part of that culture day in and day out. why? >> it's interesting. some say it's no big deal what i've done, but i don't think i would be sitting here with you today if it wasn't a big deal. and i don't know. it's something i think about the team, the sports culture where you depend upon the trust of your teammates, you depend on their confidence in you as somebody who can do what they're supposed to do, and i think the culture of team sports goes into the front office as well. we're competitive. we're all there for a reason. and it's just something about that environment that breeds it. >> just as you were making this decision to announce to the world what had been a secret, a tough secret to carry with you, kobe bryant and the incident where he let loose a slur towards an nba referee. david stern, the commissioner, immediately slapped him with a $100,000 fine. he then apologized. did that make you question whether this was the right thing to do or that that much more certain you should do it? >> the irony of the timing it was the day before i had been sitting in david stern, the commissioner's office, to kind of discuss this with him. the next night kobe went off. you know, i think it reinforced that probably it was the time because i think that will probably be remembered also as a teaching moment. and i think he's apologized for it. i think he regrets doing it very much. but it was a conversation starter, for sure, and led to another step in the dialogue. >> and were there unique moments over the course of your career that it was harder than others? when magic johnson, for instance, came out and told people he had hiv and there was pushback and conversations in the early '90s, i think, in the nba. was that a moment you said, gee, i'm carrying a secret here, i want to be part of this conversation and discuss what it means to be hiv positive? how did that affect you? >> well, you know, i'm not even sure that the issues are related, but it was -- you know, it was a scary time for us, absolutely, and it was a time i was very proud of the nba's response in trying to educate people. but i wasn't ready. and i think that's what this is about, is when someone is personally ready to be table to take this step. i wasn't ready then. >> so it's clear, the response within the nba has been what? >> just spectacular. you know, i've heard from several of the nba owners in the last 48 hours, so many of my co-workers. today actually in the green room i was just reading an e-mail from somebody who's an executive in sports who i don't know who just said thank you, you know, this is going to make a difference in my life. and that's really i guess the motivation, not i guess, it was the motivation for choosing such a public route to do this. >> let me ask you a tough question. can you name publicly other gay men in the sports world? >> no, because -- >> what does that tell you? >> well, in the 40 years that i have been in sports, no one has ever asked me, and i've never asked anyone. >> charles barkley. charles barkley put out a statement today saying it's inevitable there have been gay men on the teams he' placed with and to his credit he says, who care, we all play basketball. what does it tell you you know there are other gay men but nobody's had the will power to cross the line you just crossed? >> just that it is a huge commitment personally to decide in some cases to put at risk everything you feel you've accomplished. whether that's true or not i think we'll learn a little bit by the aftermath of what's happened with me. >> look, i know the nba has been putting together psas, public service announcement, with an array of players, and that's wonderful. but the only thing that will solve this is others following your example. when it becomes part and parcel of daily life. a psa on tv doesn't do it. >> i think