What's new

India spanks USA over diplomat arrest issue !

I know about Indian laws.

You again deliberatily ignore my point .There is a injunction against her in Delhi court .She is under payroll of Indian government at that time .So she must obey Indian Court rule.
For you ,US law is god and only know that .But it is not like that.
Dont try to personal attack.I am an Engineer .I know some laws that a citizen must know in our country.
US treated Russian diplomat and Indian diplomats in different way.US senators also questioned state
dept action against Russian diplomats.Do you know why?.Russian foriegn minister already told
to US if they mistreat Russian ,US diplomats in Russia also face similar fate.
You idiot dont know the basic of the topic.Devyani Khobragade is a low caste person.
Some idiots in US think twisted way.

If you have no point to counter my argument then please STFU.



I agree Indian diplomat committed a crime .I also pointed it in my early post.But you dont even try to read that.Even if she committed a crime ,before arrest you must notify your own state dept about that.She is not a tourists or refugees or NRI.US already know about salaries given to the Indian employees in Indian embassy and they know it early that It is less than US standard .But they deliberatily take this case insult that diplomat ,that what i am talking about.
And you have no response

I will put your post through the idiot machine and see if it filters out all the gibberish. Till then , ignorance of international laws, hell- just basic law_ is your bliss.

and btw- stop using a google translator for F__ sake!

There is a video on Youtube of her being stripped naked and lying on the floor and her cavity is being searched. Most of it is blurred but you can make out that she is forced to comply. Why are the men police officers doing all the strip search?? It is demeaning to say the least. You will change your stance how she was treated.

there is a video of Elvis sighting on mount everest too... come on , how daft do you have to be to fall for hoax videos
 
.
You said you did not miss a single point and did exactly that. The whole list of comparison between an American getting arrested and what the Indian diplomat got is simply ludicrous. I did not say the diplomat should not be arrested. The arrest could should been cleared with Indian authorities. In fact, it is disturbing to see GoI trying to move the diplomat to UN. India should have allowed her to be prosecuted after US's apology.

No friendly country sneakily pulls a surprise to arrest a diplomat. And no friendly country 'evacuates' citizens from its friend. Nobody cares if you say that the US law is superior. But people care about the implicit statement made by US government's evacuation and that is what harmed the relationship.

The maid might as well be the victim here as I mentioned earlier. That is why I said the diplomat should have been prosecuted after GoI's green signal. The maid, being an Indian citizen, is free to file a complaint against the diplomat in an Indian court. After all Indian courts will treat the case as an Indian diplomat harming India's name(This goes against the declaration people sign to get their passports) and may punish her.

And who cares about the one among 10000 Saudi princesses? That is not even an official position.

As a matter of technicality, if Indian law is applied equally to US diplomats, even the anti-gay law is not needed. If US diplomats are treated like a common Indian would be in a case where they are in the wrong, then they wouldn't last a week here.

firstly, our judiciary is independent of other branches. There is no need for informing the state dept about jack. however, state dept knew of this taking place and her arrest, after all they would advise on the status and level of her diplomatic immunity.

Law of our country is the law of our country and when arrested she got treated way better. It makes no difference on who got arrested.

what does the term " evacuate" mean to you? They came in took them off in black hawks?

her family is free to travel anywhere... they choose to go to the US because they were being harassed. I believe they were...100%. you guys act like the family were criminals and some property of India. THEY LEFT ON THEIR OWN FREE WILL! - get over it!

honestly, I could care less if you apply whatever on our diplomats. do it. This woman is a crook apparently in India too. Hope you apply that scrutiny on her too.
 
Last edited:
.
I will put your post through the idiot machine and see if it filters out all the gibberish. Till then , ignorance of international laws, hell- just basic law_ is your bliss.

and btw- stop using a google translator for F__ sake!



Dont worry Indian governemnt already start tough reciprocal action. And US is now talking about bilateral co-operation.You dont give us enough explanation.Are you a diplomat ,or something like that?You boast you know too much about international laws.I showed you some points and I have enough proof for that.
You are perfect idiot so idiot machine not work in your case.
In international laws any person in foreign country must foreign rules .Indian citizens is under Indian rule,not US.If you want to arrest diplomat you can do that.But treat her as a human being not some criminals and for arrest that diplomat ,you dont need to 'evacuate' Indian citizens from India and ridiculed our judicial system.
Keep your US law in US,dont use it to evacuate Indian citizens from 'India'.
You can argue if you know enough background of this incident.Unfortunately you dont know nothing about it and try to justify US rant .We dont need that.
 
.
Dont worry Indian governemnt already start tough reciprocal action. And US is now talking about bilateral co-operation.You dont give us enough explanation.Are you a diplomat ,or something like that?You boast you know too much about international laws.I showed you some points and I have enough proof for that.
You are perfect idiot so idiot machine not work in your case.
In international laws any person in foreign country must foreign rules .Indian citizens is under Indian rule,not US.If you want to arrest diplomat you can do that.But treat her as a human being not some criminals and for arrest that diplomat ,you dont need to 'evacuate' Indian citizens from India and ridiculed our judicial system.
Keep your US law in US,dont use it to evacuate Indian citizens from 'India'.
You can argue if you know enough background of this incident.Unfortunately you dont know nothing about it and try to justify US rant .We dont need that.

try again and this time in English. you are nothing but an under-educated bloviator so far.
 
.
try again and this time in English


well I dont like to argue with ignorant idiots live in west countries.We existed the last 6 decade without the help of US and we can maintain that without present relation with US.Dont ignore that.
 
.
@JayAtl :
You are missing the point here. The Indian diplomat seems to have committed a crime according to US law. But the problem here is that the same diplomat who was not running anywhere for 6 months was arrested without even informing Indian embassy. Even if she does not have immunity, as an Indian diplomat, she deserves a court hearing without a humiliating arrest.

That is not how countries treat envoys. The Vienna Convention is a bare minimum set of privileges. In reality, countries especially friendly countries treat each others' diplomats with respect and even more privileges. Her arrest(or rather the manner of arrest) was therefore a humiliation for India.

If you want to gloat that Dominic Strauss Kahn was treated similarly, he did not represent any country. You will hear a boat load of instances where US claimed immunity and privileges for their consuls and even spies.

She was not a Diplomat.

Difference is subtle but significant. US law enforcement authorities are under no obligation to abide by the privileges reserved for Diplomats for a Deputy Counsel General.

As someone pointed out, the Indian anti-gay law will similarly apply to all American diplomats(minus the ambassadors) in India. So if you want to stand on that pedestal, calling your laws somehow superior to everyone else(case in point: how does US give visa to a person with charges pending against him?), you are welcome.

But US diplomats everywhere should expect the same treatment. First they will be arrested and then they will listen to the charges(this is how Indian law operates for commoners). They will have no privacy in India(no privacy laws in India) and their sexuality will be restricted by the law(unfortunately by law in India). So be prepared for the consequences.

India is free to implement its laws in its territory. US will not have any problem with that.
 
.
well I dont like to argue with ignorant idiots live in west countries.We existed the last 6 decade without the help of US and we can maintain that without present relation with US.Dont ignore that.

you did not exist , the country did. If you were the majority make up- the country would be called retarded. You don't matter one bit, never have never will.
 
. .
you did not exist , the country did. If you were the majority make up- the country would be called retarded. You don't matter one bit, never have never will.

I dont know how a country like US ,maintain an ignorant like you.
 
.
we did not send the marines in to evacuate them, they came on their own fruition.

The lady broke the law, the issue is the " strip search" . I can understand the outrage from that angle, but she broke the law and there is no two ways out of that

The word "evacuate" was used by Preet Bharara, hence the quotation marks.
The family of the maid travelled to the US on tickets under Tax exemption for US embassy (in other words, US embassy sponsored their travel to the US).

She was not just any lady, she was an Indian diplomat. She should not have been handcuffed and strip searched. The outrage is because the US is making a habit out of it.
 
.
Points that I think both Indian and US Govt. side must be considering is as follows :

Indian Govt. thinks :

1. That the Diplomat has got us a lot of trouble.
2. But to save our ego, we must bring her here and punish her.
3. Hire best lawyer there and try to win the case.
4. Wait for some opportunity for a US consular staff to commit a similar type of crime(say accident, molestation, brawl in some Bar or some thing) and go for the same procedure that US Govt. did to our staff, because when the time will change, no body knows!!
5. Bring back the Nanny and her family by pressure!!

US Govt. thinks :

1. This DA Preet Bharara has got us into this situation.
2. If he looses the case we will screw him!!
3. If he wins the case still we will screw him as suddenly the flood gates will open and many nannies of other countries embassies will also frame charges against their employee and apply for green card.
4. May be the best way is to sight the Arab Diplomat case and press no further charges against her!!

In my opinion Laws are made, fine but in the same breath "Law is an *** and Govt. is an *** hole"you twist the law in your favour and it will hurt you in the other way!!

And BTW after this is over (after US or DA uses the maid) there will be horrible time ahead for the maid "Na Ghar Ka Na Ghat Ka"!! No body will take her to be nanny as she might as well blackmail them!!
 
Last edited:
.
Decoding the Khobragade controversy: How a row over a maid's visa sparked a full-scale diplomatic incident
By Saurabh Shukla

PUBLISHED: 23:34 GMT, 18 December 2013 | UPDATED: 23:42 GMT, 18 December 2013
The Devyani Khobragade controversy is not just about the provocative arrest of a senior Indian diplomat. Highly-placed sources have told Mail Today that Sangeeta Richard, the maid at the centre of the controversy, was previously employed by a senior US diplomat.

Another intriguing part of the unfolding story is that a visa was issued to the Richard family - Sangeeta's husband Philip and their two children - and they left the country by an Air India flight on December 10, even as New Delhi was engaging with Washington on the issue.

A Mail Today investigation has revealed how the saga unfolded, with the Indian Deputy Consul General finding it difficult even to lodge a missing person's report for Sangeeta Richard with the New York Police Department (NYPD), and how the US ignored India's plea for action against Richard and instead piled pressure on India.


Mail Today has accessed official documents to weave the story together. This is how it all went down:

NOVEMBER 2012: Sangeeta Richard enters the United States with Deputy Consul General Devyani Khobragade.

JUNE 23, 2013: Richard goes missing. In Delhi, her husband says he has no idea where she is. Richard had some days earlier sought Khobragade's permission to take up another part-time job in New York; it was denied.

JUNE 24, 2013: Office of Foreign Missions (OFM) in New York informed, and its help requested in tracing Richard. An intriguing part of the story is how difficult it became for Khobragade to file a Missing Persons Report with the NYPD. It was on the advice of the OFM, Khobragade went to file a missing person report at the police precinct concerned, but was told that she could not since Richard was an adult, and that such a report could only be lodged by a member of her family.

When Mr Richard, Sangeeta's husband, was contacted, he refused to file a Missing Person Report, indicating his awareness of something being amiss.

article-2526067-1A2F737700000578-294_472x665.jpg

Indian Deputy Consul General Devyani Khobragade found it difficult even to lodge a missing person's report for her maid Sangeeta Richard

JUNE 25, 2013: Unable to file a report, Devyani sends a letter to the police precinct concerned, requesting them to file a missing person report and trace Richard. Sustained efforts resulted in the NYPD seeking inspection of Khobragade's residence.

As diplomatic premises are out of bounds for local law enforcement agencies, Khobragade was interviewed in front of the Permanent Mission of India, her residence, and a missing person report filed by the NYPD.

JULY 1, 2013: A woman claiming to be the Richard's lawyer calls Khobragade to tell her that Sangeeta would not go to court only if, one, the Indian diplomat signs a 566 form authorising the maid to terminate her employment, and, two, change her visa status from government visa to normal visa, and, three, be compensated for 19 hours of work per day.

Khobragade refuses to negotiate on the phone, insisting that the caller first identify herself. She claims the caller hung up.

JULY 2, 2013: Khobragade informs the OFM about these developments in writing, seeking NYPD support in ascertaining the identity of the caller and her links with Richard, and claiming the conversations clearly indicate that the runaway maid has no intention of returning to India and seems keen to extort money by making false accusations. No action is taken.

Khobragade files a written complaint with the Delhi Police against Sangeeta Richard and her husband Philip Richard, accusing them of cheating under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, and asking the police to begin proceedings against them and recover the maid's official passport.

JULY 5, 2013: Khobragade files complaint of "aggravated harassment" with respect to the phone call received on July 1 for extortion and blackmail. No action taken by NYPD. Michael Phillips, Director (Human Resources) at the US embassy in New Delhi, is called by senior MEA official and briefed about missing maid, reports filed with the US State Department and NYPD, and the FIR filed in India against Sangeeta Richard.

The assistance of the State Department and US Embassy is sought in locating the maid and sending her back to India to pre-empt this being used as an immigration channel. The US Embassy conveys its understanding and promises to follow-up with the State Department and local authorities. No feedback is received India's requests, however.

Similar requests were made by the Indian Embassy in Washington D.C. to the State Department in Washington D.C.

Lack of cooperation by Philip Richard prompts Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to advise Khobragade on filing a First Information Report in Delhi against the Richard family for wilful deceit and attempt to cheat to illegally immigrate to the US by wrongful means.

Based on the MEA's advice, Khobragade also files for an anticipatory anti-suit injunction in the Delhi High Court so as to prevent filing of any case in the US by Richard to avoid ensuing litigation in the US.

JULY 8, 2013: Khobragade is called to 'Access Immigration', an immigration lawyer's office, to discuss terms of settlement with Richard. Accompanied by the consulate officers, Khobragade meets Richard who seeks payment of $10,000 and the granting of an ordinary Indian passport, along with whatever immigration relief is required to stay on in the US on that ordinary passport.


Consulate officials tell Richard that she cannot remain in the US under any circumstances without legal authorisation, and that she should return to India as per her contract with Khobragade. Richard is told that any argument over salary or working hours could be settled in the consulate before her return to India. Richard refuses, saying that she wants to remain in the US.

Khobragade complains to the NYPD about the demands, but there is no response. Richard's passport is revoked and notice for termination of her personal identity also given to OFM with effect from June 22, 2013. Richard is now staying illegally in the US. A felony / theft complaint is filed with the NYPD against Richard by Khobragade's husband, reporting theft of cash, Blackberry phone, two SIM cards, a metro card (valued at $113) and documents such as contracts, signed receipt book-cum-working hour log. No action is taken.


article-2526067-1A2F738F00000578-523_964x623.jpg

Watchful: The US Embassy in New Delhi has been under scrutiny since the evolving row took hold

JULY 15 & 19, 2013: Philip Richard filed a writ petition against Khobragade and the Union of India, alleging that his wife Sangeeta Richard was in police custody in New York since July 8, 2013, charging the Indian diplomat with "slave labour" and illegally making Sangeeta sign a 'second contract' with far less pay and perks. The Union of India is accused of not paying according to the requirements of the local law. Richard withdraws his writ petition four days later.

JULY 30, 2013: A copy of Philip Richard's writ petition is forwarded to OFM, which states that Sangeeta is in police custody in New York, for producing the maid at the Consulate so she can be repatriated to India as requested by her husband in his writ petition. Consul General is also informed that Richard was last seen at the office of Access Immigration on July 8, 2013. No action taken by the US.

article-2526067-1A2F73CF00000578-791_472x631.jpg

The Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations, in New York

SEPTEMBER 4, 2013: The US State Department issues a one-sided letter to the Indian Ambassador, projecting the allegations of the maid which are of "considerable concern", and asking for the allegations to be probed. It also seeks a voluntary meeting between Khobragade and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security in the State Department as well as proof of payment of minimum wages from the embassy.

SEPTEMBER 10, 2013: In Delhi, MEA calls US officials and strongly protests against the tone and content of the letter.

SEPTEMBER 20, 2013: Delhi High Court issues an ex-parte ad interim injunction against Philip and Sangeeta Richard, restraining them from initiating any legal action or proceedings against Khobragade in any Court / Tribunal / Forum outside India with regard to her employment. The final hearing in the matter is scheduled December 13, 2013.

SEPTEMBER 21, 2013: A reply is sent to the State Department by the Indian Embassy in Washington, rebutting the allegations and bringing out the facts of the case while highlighting the fact that Sangeeta Richard is seeking monetary settlement and a US visa, thereby seeking to subvert both Indian and US laws. The letter also emphasises that the matter is an issue between the Government of India and one of its employees and is not subject to US regulation or adjudication. Assistance of the State Department is sought in locating and repatriating Sangeeta Richard to India.

NOVEMBER 19, 2013: Metropolitan Magistrate of South District, New Delhi, issues a non-bailable arrest warrant against Sangeeta Richard.

DECEMBER 6, 2013: The arrest warrant issued by the Delhi Metropolitan court is forwarded to the US State Department and the US Embassy in New Delhi, requesting them to instruct the relevant authorities in the US to arrest and repatriate Sangeeta Richard to India through the Consulate in New York, so that due process of law may be prosecuted in India. No action is taken by the US.

DECEMBER 12, 2013: Khobragade arrested on the basis of a Second District court warrant for visa fraud as she drops her daughter to school in New York. Immunity is denied under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) for this "felony charge" Bail posted at $250,000, Khobragade's passport is seized, and she is asked not to leave the country or seek another travel document though she can travel within the US after notifying authorities. She is been not to be in touch with Sangeeta Richard.

JANUARY 13, 2014: Next date of hearing is announced, but Khobragade's attorney claims he is not free that day and is negotiating another date, which will be known in due course. Pre-trial process commenced on December 16, 2013 where a urine sample was taken by US authorities for drugs testing.



US says Indian government knew about the case
By Indira Kannan in Toronto


The United States had informed the Indian Government about the allegations against Devyani Khobragade, the Deputy Consul General in New York, over three months prior to her arrest last week.

A State Department official told Mail Today: "To confirm, the State Department notified the Indian Embassy in writing on September 4. The Department of State advised the Embassy of the Republic of India of allegations of abuse made by an Indian national against the Deputy Consul General of India in New York."

This refers to the allegations by Khobragade's former housekeeper and babysitter, who the US Attorney's office in New York claims was brought in to the US on the basis of fraudulent information given by the Indian diplomat and then paid less than the amount specified in her contract, and less than minimum wages in America.

The State Department said the notification sent to the embassy was part of official procedure and the department's policy of advising foreign missions of allegations made involving a member of a mission or a family member. Officials at the Indian Embassy in Washington, DC could not be reached to comment on what, if any, action was taken by the Indian government upon receipt of the notification from the State Department.

The State Department has clarified that Khobragade has consular immunity, which applies only to functions performed in line with her official duties and not to alleged crimes such as visa fraud. She does not have diplomatic immunity which applies across the board.

With the Indian government now reportedly moving to obtain diplomatic immunity for Khobragade, the disclosure of the State Department's prior notification could raise the question as why Indian officials did not anticipate possible action against their diplomat and take action to provide her with diplomatic immunity earlier if they were convinced there was no wrongdoing on her part.

On December 5, 25 current and former Russian diplomats in New York and their spouses were charged with defrauding Medicaid, a state-run healthcare program, but none was arrested or prosecuted as the US said they enjoyed diplomatic immunity.

Decoding the Devyani Khobragade controversy: How a row over a maid's visa sparked a full-scale diplomatic incident | Mail Online

Now combine that story with this one below, and the story becomes interesting.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2528046/Fear-loathing-New-York-Former-diplomat-Prabhu-Dayal-reveals-Indian-envoys-US-fall-victim-maids-pursuing-American-dreams.html
 
.
She was not a Diplomat.

Difference is subtle but significant. US law enforcement authorities are under no obligation to abide by the privileges reserved for Diplomats for a Deputy Counsel General.



India is free to implement its laws in its territory. US will not have any problem with that.
I used the word diplomat to mean envoy/representative. What I said earlier did not assume that the Indian envoy had diplomatic immunity. Great then!
 
.
firstly, our judiciary is independent of other branches. There is no need for informing the state dept about jack. however, state dept knew of this taking place and her arrest, after all they would advise on the status and level of her diplomatic immunity.
Nobody is arguing over the jurisdictions of US government organs here. The net result is a snub to India.
Law of our country is the law of our country and when arrested she got treated way better. It makes no difference on who got arrested.
Does the law of the country also requires to 'evacuate' citizens of a friendly country from the purview of the local law?
what does the term " evacuate" mean to you? They came in took them off in black hawks?
Ask Preet Bharara what it means.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/20/nyregion/fury-in-india-over-diplomats-arrest-in-new-york.html?_r=0
her family is free to travel anywhere... they choose to go to the US because they were being harassed. I believe they were...100%. you guys act like the family were criminals and some property of India. THEY LEFT ON THEIR OWN FREE WILL! - get over it!
Pfft... who complained that US forced them to immigrate? And who called them criminals? If they are(not) it will be proved in an Indian court. But the US government did its dirty job, hastening their visa process and according to some claims also bought tickets for them.
honestly, I could care less if you apply whatever on our diplomats. do it. This woman is a crook apparently in India too. Hope you apply that scrutiny on her too.
No worries then. The process is under way. The woman gets her due in India. In fact she is already getting it.
 
.
@Guynextdoor2

Looks like there is someone who knows better.

"She is not a CIA mole because the US has nothing to gain out of Sangeeta Richard. She was an employee at the home of a deputy consul general. I know for a fact that a deputy consul general has no secrets. Moreover, Sangeeta has no access to her employer's office."

- An excerpt from the interview of ex RAW counter-espionage section, Amar Bhushan.

'Talk of Sangeeta Richard being a CIA agent rubbish' - Rediff.com India News


Or still you think you know better than him? :lol:

I never claimed her to be CIA agent or anything. And no- no one makes any assumptions. In any case it's irrelevant. She's ours so we want her back. If you want to lick them up and be against your people that's fine.

aren't you special...

Koi shak?!
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom