Crookbond Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 IF Richards family was granted a T1 visa as Seedhi says, Khobragade will be charged for human trafficking - I can say out that on a limb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Also, if I may add - the maid is trying to seek a US stay and passport. That is pretty clear. I can't understand how Khobragade manages to revoke Richards passport while sitting in the US within a month. This is the Indian legal system we're talking of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Feel sorry for the maid and her family. For west, This is a case of human trafficking and modern day slavery, only glitch here is the personal involved is not their citizen or a immigrant but Indian Consulate General herself. I am certain that law enforcement Agencies must have enough evidence to successfully prosecute her before they arrested her People supporting Indian stand and Khobaraghade should answer one simple question. If a Civil Servant (IAS) commits a crime in India shouldn't he be arrested and tried for that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Merlyn Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 So is it true that they have got asylum or did they leave on a tourist visa? Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Merlyn Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 IF Richards family was granted a T1 visa as Seedhi says' date=' Khobragade will be charged for human trafficking - I can say out that on a limb.[/quote'] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 IF Richards family was granted a T1 visa as Seedhi says' date=' [b']Khobragade will be charged for human trafficking - I can say out that on a limb. She must be charged for that. Here in UK, Parliament is re-evaluating existing slavery laws so that victims (generally illegal/legal immigrants) can feel safer to go to authorities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 T-Visa is a short term temporary visa for victims of human trafficking. T1 is for the victim, T2- Spouse and T3 - child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomGuy Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Comment on following please - According to the criminal complaint filed against her, Khobragade told the U.S. Embassy in India that her housekeeper would receive $4,500 a month and would work normal hours, at a rate of $9.75 an hour (which does not add up). But, after the woman was given a visa to come to the U.S., prosecutors say Khobragade told the woman to sign a second contract — which the U.S. was not told about — paying her $3.31 an hour. The housekeeper told U.S. authorities Khobragade subjected her to verbal abuse, paid her less than $3.31 an hour, took her passport away, and told her she had no choice but to continue working under those conditions, prosecutors say. http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/December13/KhobragadeStatement.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Also' date=' if I may add - the maid is trying to seek a US stay and passport. That is pretty clear. I can't understand how Khobragade manages to revoke Richards passport while sitting in the US within a month. This is the Indian legal system we're talking of.[/quote']It is not Dr Khobragade who has revoked the passport, she has no authority to do so. It was the Indian Govt who revoked it. The maid was absconding and she was on an official passport, not a regular one. The Indian govt is well within its rights in revoking the official passport of an absconder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Btw Bharara (the uncle tom) is evidently feeling the heat otherwise he would not have released a second statement painfully explaining that Khobragade was served coffee before being cavity searched ... The dog has bitten off more than he can bite .. I look forward to his impending humiliating retreat .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 It is not Dr Khobragade who has revoked the passport' date=' she has no authority to do so. It was the Indian Govt who revoked it. The maid was absconding and she was on an official passport, not a regular one. The Indian govt is well within its rights in revoking the official passport of an absconder.[/quote'] Not questioning the right but the swiftness of response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomGuy Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 it has been 1. Legal arguments definitions of "grave crime". 2. moral lectures - modern day 'slavery' . Versus 1. Consular immunity and respect(arrest,handcuff, strip and cavity search). 2. Glaring conspiracy argument. Absconding maid, US not replying to Indian govt. emails since June. Delhi High court's judgement on this matter. 3. GDP-per-capita-and-salary ratio and free food, accommodation at the place of work. 4. Broader Long term Country-country relations and the emotional reactions to this in India. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnterTheVoid Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Preet Bharara, take a fu>cking bow son, you are an absolute bloody champ. Refreshing to see someone sticking by their principles. As for the diplomat, what an utter disgrace she is. Lie, cheat and exploit and than cry crocodile tears when she is held to account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnterTheVoid Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 New York: The federal prosecutor whose decision to charge an Indian diplomat in New York City last week touched off a furore in India made an unusual and robust public defence of that decision on Wednesday night, saying that "there can be no plausible claim that this case was somehow unexpected or an injustice." The prosecutor, Preet Bharara, the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, said the diplomat's conduct showed that "she clearly tried to evade US law designed to protect from exploitation the domestic employees of diplomats and consular officers." (Read full statement) The diplomat, Devyani Khobragade, 39, the deputy consul general in New York, had been accused of submitting false documents to obtain a work visa for a housekeeper. Indian officials have been quoted as saying that she was arrested and handcuffed as she was leaving her daughter at school, and there were accounts that she was strip-searched and then held with drug addicts before being released on $250,000 bail. The Indian government has complained about Khobragade's treatment. In New Delhi, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called the arrest deplorable, newspaper editorials expressed outrage and the police removed barriers meant to protect the US Embassy. But Bharara, in his statement, said there had been "much misinformation and factual inaccuracy in the reporting" about the case, and the inaccuracies were "misleading people and creating an inflammatory atmosphere on an unfounded basis." "Is it for US prosecutors to look the other way, ignore the law and the civil rights of victims," Bharara asked, "or is it the responsibility of the diplomats and consular officers and their government to make sure the law is observed?" "And one wonders," Bharara added, "why there is so much outrage about the alleged treatment of the Indian national accused of perpetrating these acts, but precious little outrage about the alleged treatment of the Indian victim and her spouse?" Bharara noted that the diplomat had underpaid the housekeeper and made her work more hours than her contract called for. Although his office did not take Khobragade into custody, Bharara said she had been "accorded courtesies well beyond what other defendants, most of whom are American citizens, are accorded." He said that State Department agents had arrested her "in the most discreet way possible," and that unlike most defendants, she "was not then handcuffed or restrained." The arresting authorities had not seized her telephone as they normally would have, Bharara said, and allowed her to make calls for about two hours, including to arrange for child care. Because it was cold outside, Bharara added, the agents "let her make those calls from their car and even brought her coffee and offered to get her food." It was true, Bharara added, that Khobragade was "fully searched" in a private setting by a female deputy marshal when she was taken into the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service, which handled her detention. But, he said, "this is standard practice for every defendant, rich or poor, American or not, in order to make sure that no prisoner keeps anything on his person that could harm anyone, including himself." The tone of Bharara's statement, issued in the evening in New York, seemed in marked contrast to an expression of "regret" made earlier in the day by Secretary of State John Kerry in a call to a senior Indian official, as Kerry sought to ease tensions with India over the episode. Kerry's call to the official, Shivshankar Menon, India's national security adviser, was disclosed by the State Department in a statement. "As the father of two daughters about the same age as Devyani Khobragade, the secretary empathizes with the sensitivities we are hearing from India about the events that unfolded after Ms. Khobragade's arrest," the State Department said in its statement. "He expressed his regret, as well as his concern, that we not allow this unfortunate public issue to hurt our close and vital relationship with India," it added. Khobragade's lawyer, Daniel N. Arshack, said Wednesday that his client would be pleading not guilty, that the allegations against her were "false and baseless" and that her diplomatic status protected her from prosecution. Brilliant rebuttal! :hatsoff: http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/us-prosecutor-defends-arrest-of-indian-diplomat-460524?pfrom=home-lateststories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Not a champ, but a F u cking idiot he is. He knows the maid was absconding, knew that the family in India had a criminal case against them, got them to US using CIA or some other clandestine means, 2 days later...he arrests the diplomat who has immunity of whatever kind. He talks about courtesy extended. How about not arresting and not pursuing the mid-level diplomat with so much gusto. Saala...opportunist of a worst kind. NEW DELHI: India on Thursday hit back at US Attorney Preet Bharara, who had justified Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade's arrest, accusing him of interfering with the Indian legal system and asserting that the arrest was not in keeping with the Vienna Convention on diplomatic immunity. Criticizing the US prosecutor for making statement for "post facto rationalization" for an action that should never have taken place in the first instance, external affairs ministry Spokesperson said there were no courtesies extended to Khobragade, who is the only "victim" in this case. He said despite acknowledging that legal process were in place in India, the statement talks why it was necessary to evacuate the family of absconding maid Sangeeta Richard, thereby, making "implicit comment" about the Indian legal system, its enforcement authorities, and the responsibility that legal officials of a foreign government seem to "arrogate upon" themselves with regard to nationals of another country. "We need to keep in mind the simple fact that there is only one victim in this case. That victim is Devyani Khobragade - a serving Indian diplomat on mission in the United States. "The action taken against her was not in keeping with the Vienna Convention. There were no courtesies in the treatment that was meted out to the diplomat, under the normal definition of that word in English language," he said. Observing that the statement includes remarks about equality before the law of both the rich and the poor, the spokesperson said, "Not only is this a rhetorical remark that is not conducive to resolving 'inaccuracies', it is also not a feature of the law that is exclusive to the office of the Manhattan US Attorney." In a statement in the US, the India-born Bharara not only defended the action against Khobragade but also said that maid Sangeeta Richard's family has been brought to the US. He said a legal process was started in India to "silence her and attempts were made to compel her to return to India". Reacting to this, MEA said, "The statement in question acknowledges that legal processes were in place in India. Yet, incredibly, it invites speculation about why it was necessary to evacuate the family of Ms Richards and about the action purportedly being taken against them. "The implication of this remarkable admission needs to be considered very carefully with regard to the implicit comment it makes about the Indian legal system, Indian law enforcement authorities, and the responsibility that legal officials of a foreign government seem to arrogate upon themselves with regard to the nationals of another country." A 1999-batch IFS officer, Khobragade was arrested on December 12 on visa fraud charges as she was dropping her daughter to school and released on a USD 250,000 bond only after pleading not guilty in court. The ill-treatment of the its diplomat evoked a sharp reaction from India which initiated a slew of steps to downgrade the privileges enjoyed by the US diplomats and their families including withdrawing airport passes and stopping import clearances. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Devyani-Khobragades-arrest-India-hits-back-at-US-attorney-Preet-Bharara/articleshow/27658479.cms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnterTheVoid Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 I don't know what diplomatic courtesy they keep harping about? If she committed a criminal act, she should be treated like a criminal. She can't afford to pay her maid but is able to post a quarter of a million dollars in bond money in no time. Go figure. How the hell can anyone support her when she exploited and took advantage of someone that was much more vulnerable than her is beyond me. Such people think that they can get away by throwing some cash around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 One makes another sign a second contract to take lower than local minimum wage, holds her passport, the other runs away from this situation. Who are we saying is the criminal and who is the victim here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South_Paw Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Not a champ' date=' but a F u cking idiot he is. He knows the maid was absconding, knew that the family in India had a criminal case against them, got them to US using CIA or some other clandestine means, 2 days later...he arrests the diplomat who [b']has immunity of whatever kind. He talks about courtesy extended. How about not arresting and not pursuing the mid-level diplomat with so much gusto. Saala...opportunist of a worst kind. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Devyani-Khobragades-arrest-India-hits-back-at-US-attorney-Preet-Bharara/articleshow/27658479.cms Of no fu*king kind. The immunity she had would never prevent an arrest on this sort of case. Our guys have to be cautious on talking to US. Once US think we are touching their ego, then even a nucler war would not save our sweety's a*s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnterTheVoid Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Money talks, BS walks. She basically wants special treatment because of her supposed status in society. Hats off to Preet for fighting for the maid. There has been a totally unjustified attack on her character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 I am sure this uncle tom has a PIO card. India should revoke it and make sure that he gets special treatment at the airport if he ever tries to visit India. Btw his ass has been banned by the Russians from ever entering their country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts