Lack of DNA evidence, among other things was an issue.  I have no idea if the officers are guilty or not, that being said, I find this statement... weird:

"Although the defense never conceded that the two had sex, a central point of argument in the case was whether the woman was too drunk to consent to sex. Under the prosecutors' theory of rape, they had to prove that the woman was physically unable to consent to sex, meaning that she was either unconscious or unable to speak when she was penetrated.

Defense lawyers pointed to surveillance footage of the woman walking on her own as she entered the building in front of the officers as evidence that she was conscious and able to communicate. They also contrasted what the woman told some friends shortly after the alleged rape -- that she thought she was raped -- with the certainty that she was expressing on the witness stand. Her spotty recollection of that night, the defense said, was enough to raise reasonable doubt over whether she was raped."

On the left in particular, there seems to be a prevailing code under which to refuse sexual advances, even when unwelcome, is somehow bourgeois. Many grandees reacted to Mr Strauss-Kahn's arrest with horror, not at the accusations, but at the humiliation of an untried powerful figure. Bernard-Henri Lévy, a philosopher who once defended Roman Polanski's right not to be jailed in America for unlawful sex with a minor, railed against the judge who "pretended to take [DSK] for a subject of justice like any other". "Nobody died," snorted Jack Lang, a Socialist ex-culture minister. Few had a good word for the hotel maid; some treated her claims with equal disdain. One left-wing editor, Jean-François Kahn, even dismissed the encounter as a "troussage de domestique", a reference to an aristocratic entitlement to extract sexual favours from domestic staff. All this leaves the troubling impression of an elite that believes itself exempt from ordinary rules (although both Mr Lang and Mr Kahn apologised for their comments).

And this article from the Guardian makes a very good point:

One very important fact has been largely absent from the coverage of the sexual assault case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and, until latterly, leading candidate to be the next president of France. The hotel housekeeper whom he allegedly assaulted was represented by a union.

The reason that this is an important part of the story is that it is likely that Strauss-Kahn's alleged victim might not have felt confident enough to pursue the issue with either her supervisors or law enforcement agencies, if she had not been protected by a union contract. The vast majority of hotel workers in the United States, like most workers in the private sector, do not enjoy this protection.

SNIP

There is a special irony to this situation given Dominique Strauss-Kahn's prior position. The IMF, along with other pillars of the economic establishment, has long pushed for reducing the rights of workers at their workplace. Specifically, they have pushed countries around the world to adopt measures that weaken the power of unions. The IMF has also urged western European countries to eliminate or weaken laws that prevent employers from firing workers at will. These laws, along with unions, are seen as "labour market rigidities" that prevent labour markets from operating efficiently.

The Supreme Court has backed an Arizona law that punishes businesses hiring illegal immigrants, a law that opponents, including the Obama administration, say steps on traditional federal oversight over immigration matters.

The 5-3 ruling Thursday is a victory for supporters of immigration reform on the state level.

It was the first high court challenge to a variety of recent state laws cracking down on illegal immigrants, an issue that has become a political lightning rod.

The outcome could serve as a judicial warmup for a separate high-profile challenge to a more controversial Arizona immigration reform law working its way through lower courts. That statute would, among other things, give local police a greater role in arresting suspected illegal immigrants.

The hiring case turned on whether state law tramples on federal authority.

WASHINGTON -- President Obama has quietly shifted to a goal of regime change in Libya, after first stating he wanted to protect civilians from massacres.