Via Alex Silverman's Twitter.

Earlier this evening, a press conference was scheduled by the Office of the Mayor to announce the arrest of a man yesterday afternoon, an "Al Qaeda sympathizer" of Washington Heights, is facing terrorism-related charges. Jose Pimentel, the 27 year-old man currently under arrest, was building a bomb to detonate in NYPD police cars. Originally from the Dominican Republic, Mr. Pimentel claimed that he wanted to "bring Jihad" to New York City.

The mayor played a video during the press conference of what the bomb would have done if detonated:

Ray Kelly noted that the bomb they found on site was put together from ingredients gathered at various Home Depot stores, and used instructions culled from the Internet to make it. Mr. Pimentel had been tracked by the NYPD since May 2009, and by the time he was arrested, he had planned on assembling three separate bombs, each armed with nails for shrapnel effect. He had planned to test the effectiveness of the bombs by detonating them in mailboxes—"locations outside of New York City," according to Ray Kelly—initially.

The New York Times notes the intelligence gathering effort being Mr. Pimentel's arrest:

“The Police Department basically had an informant with this guy,” said a second law enforcement official familiar with the investigation. “The guy is sort of giving to the informant all of these material on bomb building and talking about building a bomb and ‘supporting the mujahedeen by targeting — he’s kind of all over the place; sometimes it’s targeting servicemen and women returning from Afghanistan, sometimes it’s the police, sometimes its build it and test it, but it’s all over the place.”

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance also announced charges against Mr. Pimentel: conspiring to commit an act of terrorism and terrorism-related charges, as well as possession of a pipe bomb with intent to cause harm with it. The suspect was a "lone wolf" motivated by the presence of troops in Afghanistan in Iraq. He was not part of a larger network.

Protester proclaims the grand re-opening of Zuccotti Park, Tuesday, Nov. 15.

Occupy Wall Street protesters have returned to Zuccotti Park--without their tents, sleeping bags or other personal belongings. Protesters were evicted from the park at about one this morning during a late night NYPD raid. A court denied the protesters' bid to restore their full encampment shortly before 5 p.m.

In the hour before the barricades opened, protesters went through a roller coaster of emotions fueled by false rumors and general confusion. Initially, the atmosphere was electric and celebratory throughout the crowd lining the barricaded park thanks to erroneous reports of a court victory spread via the protesters' emergency mass text alert system, as well as several impromptu bands that had formed among the crowd.

At approximately 5:15 p.m., word began to spread that the protesters actually lost their case. They called an impromptu meeting outside the barricade at the Southeast corner of the park to plan their next move.  A young brunette in a leather jacket addressed the crowd via the call-and-response "people's mic" that has become a signature element of the protests.

"Apparently, there is an emergency G.A. meeting scheduled right over there," the woman said pointing to the opposite corner. The crowd repeated each of her words. "Even if the police were to block us, we will all be in one big location and can figure out where to go next as we are not allowed to meet here to discuss how to move forward."

A group of police wearing riot helmets and wielding batons began to line up behind the protesters who were clearly unsure of what would happen next.

"Can everyone get on social media? We're trying to find out if anything has been posted," the woman said with the crowd dutifully repeated her plea for accurate information.

Protesters also sent an emissary to look for representatives from the National Lawyer's Guild who worked on their case in the hopes they could explain the situation. While they waited, protesters debated attempting to re-take Zuccotti Park, which was still barricaded and being guarded by police officers and neon vested workers from Brookfield Properties, the company that owns the park. A protester discussed the "inspirational" effect breaking through the barricades would have on other Occupy movements around the country. One man suggested they begin discussing other potential locations to avoid having the park become a "golden calf" for the movement.

At 5:33 p.m., as the protesters continued debating their options, police began letting small groups of people through the barricades on the Northwestern side of the park. A protesters ran through Zuccotti waving a sign that read "Grand Re-Opening" and eliciting huge cheers from those still outside the gates. A police officer ensured the group that was meeting on the park's Southeastern edge that they would be allowed to re-enter the park "in an orderly fashion."

Protesters began trickling into the park through small openings in the barricades manned by Brookfield staff who turned away anyone who had large bags or other personal items. A policeman used a megaphone to address the protesters.

"Zuccotti Park is now open," he said.

"Right this way," directed a police officer on the Cedar street side of the park. "Welcome home." An occupier passed out cheap ponchos; it had started to rain.

Protesters re-occupy Zuccotti Park on Nov. 15.

The park has rules now, though. Whereas the N.Y.P.D. had been keeping its distance from the protest, preferring to surround the park rather than walk through it, tonight the police stationed themselves inside. There was to be no standing on the tables. There was to be no crowding around the entrances. "Step back into the park," one policeman admonished when The Observer tried to get a peek at the line of eager occupiers along Liberty from behind the barricade. "Is this the park?" asked the occupier beside us mischievously, pointing at tiles with his toe. "Or is this the park?"

We noticed, however, that the police did not attempt to stop occupiers from smoking.

Just behind us, a Fox news crew was being surrounded by a small but dense mob of protesters. "Boo!" they chanted. "We don't want your propaganda!" Members of the N.Y.P.D. stepped in to escort the pair out.

Representatives from Brookfield Properties, which owns Zuccotti Park, replaced signs with the park rules. The old rules specified the park hours as 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.; the new signs omit the hour limitations, as the park was designated a 24-hour space when it was established.

At the east side of the park, one of the "Legal Observers," the neon-capped witnesses who report to the National Lawyers Guild, fielded questions from irascible occupiers. "If this is our space, how can they give us rules?" a young woman who looked to be about 17 asked in an accusatory tone. "While a lot of that is bullshit because they just don't want people here, it is reasonable not to allow camping gear and the Supreme Court has ruled on that," he explained.

"Isn't it a fire hazard to have people penned in by barricades?" asked a stout protester who looked warm in a mustache and fleece. The Legal Observer affirmed. "There are no fire exits here!" exclaimed the young lady.

Indeed, Zuccotti Park now has three entrances and only one exit, along Trinity Place, where a pair of occupiers carting two boxes of Occupied Wall Street Journals were being ushered out because their cargo was too large. "Beat it," said one of the cops on the line.

But overall, the mood was gleeful. About 200 protesters were in jail and the infrastructure was in storage at 57th St. Sanit Garage. But the General Assembly began shortly after 7 p.m.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg's statement on the re-occupation:

“This morning we planned to re-open Zuccotti Park to the public, including any protestors, at approximately 8:00 AM when the cleaning was completed. The opening of the park was delayed due to legal action taken against the City, but Zuccotti Park is now open to the public. The court’s ruling vindicates our position that First Amendment rights do not include the right to endanger the public or infringe on the rights of others by taking over a public space with tents and tarps. The City has the ultimate responsibility to protect public health and safety and we will continue to ensure that everyone can express themselves in New York City. Zuccotti Park will remain open to all who want to enjoy it, as long as they abide by the park’s rules.”

Last updated 7:27 p.m.

Via Getty.

Yesterday afternoon, news broke that the Manhattan D.A. office was going to request that all criminal charges of sexual assault against former I.M.F. chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn be dropped. This followed a meeting with Mr. Strauss-Kahn's accuser, Nafissatou Diallo, and her lawyer, Kenneth Thompson. Mr. Thompson had requested yesterday that a special prosecutor be appointed to the case; his request was denied this morning. Moments ago, Dominique Strauss-Kahn sat down in a courtroom in Lower Manhattan, and received a verdict on his long-contested innocence: the case against him has collapsed. He is a free man, and the conclusion of his long, strange, epic entanglement with the American judicial system has officially began.

The motion to drop the charges against Mr. Strauss-Kahn—a French presidential would-be, prior to the allegations against him—came in the form of a 25-page confession that detailed the Manhattan D.A.'s case unraveling following what they report as inconsistencies and suspect motives in Ms. Diallo's case. Among them were a story about what Ms. Diallo reportedly characterized as rape at the hands of soldiers in her native Guinea and a denied motive to profit from the case (despite what prosecutors noted as a recorded conversation with her fiance—detained in an Arizona holding jail for immigrants—discussed profit motive).

In an unusual moment of commentary, The New York Times noted the D.A.'s statement as something maintaining a stripe of broadcast intended for readers outside the judicial system:

The prosecutors’ treatise on the case seemed meant for an audience beyond Justice Obus. The case has attracted worldwide attention, largely because of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s stature, as the leader of the fund and the front-runner for the Socialist nomination for French president, and the lurid story line of a privileged man being accused of taking advantage of a hotel housekeeper. In laying out the circumstances in such detail, [Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance] also was giving a domestic audience, including Manhattan voters, an explanation for his decision. He may also have sought to address criticism from black leaders and women’s groups that he should proceed to trial.

Mr. Vance won an election in the middle of the trial; this is the second high-profile sexual assault case in Manhttan involving a controversial acquittal this year (the first was that of the infamous "rape cops" of the NYPD). The meeting between Ms. Diallo and the Manhattan D.A.'s office during which she and her lawyer were informed that a motion to drop the charges would proceed lasted a reported 30 seconds.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn's indictment was nothing if not a firestorm from the start: tabloids sought to convict him with strong language alluding to his reportedly sordid past of womanizing (another sexual assault accusation aimed at Mr. Strauss-Kahn stemming from a 2003 incident involving French journalist Tristane Banon has come to light since his arrest).

The arrest, "perp walk," and subsequent prosecution of Mr. Strauss-Kahn—reaction to which ranged from surefire conviction to reluctance to outright conspiratorial charges against Manhattan prosecutors—renewed a tension to Franco-American relations otherwise latent since the days of 'Freedom Fries' (yet, here in Manhattan, French sexual mores took a backseat to unwieldy real estate porn over where the accused would reside: a gauche Tribeca townhouse). In the beginning of July, the prosecution's case started to become unhinged: details of his accuser began leaking out along with what were reported as deep inconsistencies and questionable motives in her story. Mr. Strauss-Kahn—then under house arrest on a $1 M bail and a $5 M bond—was released on his own recognizance.

A few days later, the New York Post—who only a few weeks prior had all but characterized Dominique Strauss-Kahn as a sociopathic sex fiend who should be reputationally and, why not, physically castrated—used a single source to run a cover story alleging that Ms. Diallo was prostituting herself while under police protection. She responded by suing the New York Post for libel.

Towards the end of July, Ms. Diallo—once an otherwise anonymous maid at midtown Manhattan's Sofitel hotel—took her case to the press, with a Newsweek cover story and a three-part ABC News special interview to go with it.

The strategy backfired: it was another breaking point for both prosecutors (spurned by a plaintiff who's taken her case to the press, and a civil lawyer ever-outraged at their shortcomings) and defense lawyers for Mr. Strauss-Kahn (ever eager to find inconsistencies in her case, be they microscopic or glaring).

Since then, public support for the office of Manhattan D.A. Cyrus Vance has backfired—today, protesters waited for him outside the courtroom where Mr. Strauss-Kahn's final criminal hearing in the matter took place—while judicial support of Ms. Diallo's case (which now includes a civil suit) has not fared much better. On Monday afternoon, when the motion to dismiss charges was announced, it would seem the case against Mr. Strauss-Kahn came to a head. Her lawyer, Kenneth Thompson, noted the prosecutors' motion to dismiss the charges as "a hatchet job on Ms. Diallo’s credibility."

This morning, in Manhattan Supreme Court, at 11:57 AM, Justice Michael J. Obus had heard enough. All criminal charges against Dominique Strauss-Kahn were ordered to be dropped. While he still faces a civil suit against him in The Bronx and the claims of Tristane Banon in France (to which his lawyers responded with a counter-suit of slander), the former I.M.F. chief's most heinous criminal charge is no longer; he is free to return to France, albeit a job and a surefire presidential run later. The memory of the Manhattan D.A.'s early hubris and unilateral conviction of Mr. Strauss-Kahn's guilt, its subsequent collapse—both of the procedural and emotional stripe—and Ms. Diallo are likely to remain in New York City far longer than he.

For how long and with what strength is anyone's guess.

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

Via Getty.

[Insert French expression of astonishment here.] The New York Times reported Thursday evening that the Manhattan DA's sexual assault case against former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn—or "Le Perv," as dubbed by a few New York City newspapers—has come into serious, serious question by (among other things) 400 pounds of Marijuana, and moreover, the credibility of the former IMF chief's accuser.

Their story is essentially:

There have been inconsistencies in the accuser's story and past, which is reportedly littered with questions about motives (immigration status) and ties to unsavory characters.

Someone, somewhere is working on a really good line about "freedom fries" right now.

To recap: the now-notorious Mr. Strauss-Kahn was accused of sexually assaulting a maid at the Sofitel Hotel in Midtown on May 14th; he was pulled off of a hastily-booked flight back to France, given a camera-ready "perp walk," an eye-widening bail, and the front cover of tabloids everywhere (but especially here) for the better part of two weeks. Many a French person was upset at Mr. Strauss-Kahn's treatment by American authorities; the case subsequently opened up discussions about the divide between French and American attitudes about sex, justice, and fame.

Now, as the New York Times reports, that may all have been for naught. The Times says the prosecution team met with Mr. Strauss-Kahn's defense attorneys Thursday evening and discussed dropping the felony charges. They're going to speak with the case's judge about their discussion Friday morning. In the attorneys' discussion—despite the prosecutors emphasis on what they see as unquestionable forensic evidence that there was a sexual encounter, they revealed that:

• Since her initial allegation, the accuser has repeatedly lied to prosecutors.
• The accuser, a Guinean national, has a pending asylum application. The woman had told prosecutors that in the application was another account of rape, and prosecutors found no such account in the application.
• She also had a phone conversation with a man in jail about the benefits of pressing charges against Mr. Strauss-Kahn the day she charged him. The conversation is on tape.
• The man she had the conversation with was jailed for possession of 400 pounds of marijuana.
• He is also one of many people who made cash deposits in her bank account going upwards of $100,000, from four different states.
• Bills belonging to the woman from four separate phone companies were found.

Interestingly enough, the revelations were reportedly not dug up by the star defense team of Benjamin Brafman and William W. Taylor—who have also famously defended P. Diddy, Jay-Z, and Plaxico Burress—but by the prosecution for the case. Not that this is likely to make a difference in Mr. Struass-Kahn's legal bills.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn was a frontrunner for the French presidency before the accusation against him; he has since fallen behind in polling. Many of Mr. Strauss-Kahn's supporters—especially French—called the charges into question from the get-go; if the Times is correct, and this does extend to the charges being dropped, Americans everywhere initially pained with annoyance of belligerent French claims of fraudulent charges and conspiracy to take down Mr. Strauss-Kahn will have to suffer their validation; on the other hand, the plainly accusatory New York City tabloids will look as plainly accusatory as they were, which is nothing new.

The Times reports that Mr. Strauss-Kahn could be at the least freed on his own recognizance with only his passport retained—quite the change from that pesky $1M bail and $5M bond—and at most, have all charges against him dismissed. Also: The DA might try to get him to plead guilty to a misdameanor charge, though the Times doesn't specify what (evading arrest: certainly one possibility), which they also contend that his defense is likely to basically laugh at.

Mr. Strauss-Kahn was formerly the chief of the International Monetary Fund; since he's charges, he resigned from his position, and was replaced by Christine Lagarde only one week ago. The former IMF chief has maintained his innocence throughout all charges against him.

Strauss-Kahn Case Seen as in Jeopardy [NYT]

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

Photo via Getty Images.