Indian deputy consul general arrested in US on visa fraud charges

[Jzaib]

Next time Clinton come here do a cavity search on her fro drugs , then show US the finger

are you sure the indian men could handle it .. ur men are into raping alot ... 3
but the idea is gud ... i support that idea

 

[bornmoron]

lol ... interesting cavity searches ..... they might want to see, is it same as americans or different lol

POST REPORTED,,,,,
Reason,,,all r matured here to know it ...

 

[IBRIS]

Enslavement is considered a "grave crime" in the U.S. Our bad history with slavery, you know.

Not at all:

Article 55: Without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving State.​

Article 72.

The much talked about Visa fraud - India had already asked US to revoke the visa as well as not extend it back in June. That was not acted upon - rather US gave visa to the maid's husband and children and they arrived in US on Dec 2nd.

This is why Indian foreign minister openly called it a conspiracy. India is not only a global trade partner with US but a crucial ally to keep the sea lanes open for global trade.

This wouldn't have happened if the Visa Office had listened to India's request and revoked visa back in June.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Regardless of how many insulting comments pakistanis make---the u s will pay heavily for this indescretion---india will come out a winner---.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Hi,

Regardless of how many insulting comments pakistanis make---the u s will pay heavily for this indescretion---india will come out a winner---.

@MastanKhan; I do not see this in the light of winners and losers; even if India can win----whatever that may be.
The point is very simple; American Official Arrogance has been directed towards the rest of the World for far too long.
Now that has to be cut to size.

As an Indian MP said in Parliament yesterday; "The world is undoubtedly becoming a Global Village, but we are not looking for a Village Headman. And the US cannot arrogate the role of Village Headman upon itself."

Apart from that; the US is intertwined with some issues behind this whole fracas. As is unravelling now.
We are now waiting to see that whole thing getting exposed.
We will wait for that, no pulling it below any carpet.

 

[Dash]

Hi,

Regardless of how many insulting comments pakistanis make---the u s will pay heavily for this indescretion---india will come out a winner---.

Khan Sahab, we may not come out as a winner after all, but we will have to make sure that equality prevails for both, regardless of who is what. If that is achieved then mission accomplished.

 

[Iggy]

Actually the real winner is Sangeeta Richards, she got her visa, she was able to take her family to US and now she can stay there also.. it must be a dream come true for her.!!

 

[Solomon2]

One Indian government minister, Shashi Tharoor, has argued that it is not reasonable to expect diplomats from developing countries to pay the U.S. minimum wage to domestic staff because the envoys themselves earn less than that.

Seems to be the most sensible Indian voice out there. So India can either pay its staff more, or encourage them to give up their domestics and do the spice-grinding and housework themselves. (In one diplomat's household I visited I never saw the domestic do anything other than grinding spices; the diplomat's wife & kids did all the cleaning and most of the cooking themselves. The aroma was wonderful...)

Actually the real winner is Sangeeta Richards, she got her visa, she was able to take her family to US and now she can stay there also.. it must be a dream come true for her.!!

"The victim in this case is not a criminal defendant but the person who was denied her wages and underpaid for her work," said Dana Sussman, an attorney with the Safe Horizon Anti-Trafficking Program who is representing Richard.

 

[Iggy]

"The victim in this case is not a criminal defendant but the person who was denied her wages and underpaid for her work," said Dana Sussman, an attorney with the Safe Horizon Anti-Trafficking Program who is representing Richard.

Actually many here were showing sympathy to her in this whole incident.. But the way US treated our diplomat changed the tide.. They could have been more careful while dealing with a diplomat.. I am sure that those educated guys in US knows a diplomat represents a country..I am sorry but have to say this was sheer US arrogance which was displayed here..And whats your country's right to evacuate a family who is facing cases here? She could have come here and defend herself..

 

[Solomon2]

Claims you. India is pretty sure and convinced it is a clear case of Entrapment and conspiracy...In fact, how do we know that she was not a double agent who passed on information to the US ?

I doubt "entrapment" is anything but the wild invention of Indian media fanned by a few Indian officials, but it can be employed as an argument at the trial. However, if I recall correctly it's only going to help the defendant if her attorney can demonstrate that the abusive behavior was something the defendant was coerced into her by the entrappers, rather than something she would have done regardless.

If the consul performed an illegal act, US had the choice to revoke her status and deport her back to India.

The U.S. was under no obligation to do so. I think this is where worker-protection law may collide with diplomatic practice. It's a conflict worth study.

The fact that they did not choose to do that again shows clear intent to humiliate and harass Indian diplomats.

It should be clear by now that there was no intent to humiliate Indian diplomats.

Let us first discuss 'Mutual Respect' before claiming any sort of 'Friendship'.

I may argue with a friend. I respect that he may walk away from an argument to cool down so he can come back to discuss things calmly later. I ignore or forgive what he said in the heat of his passion. When calm we talk it over. Perhaps we will decide to part ways.

But one thing is sure, that if he's in my household again he's going to have to adhere to a minimum standard of conduct ultimately determined by myself. And I'd expect him to treat me exactly the same way.

But the way US treated our diplomat changed the tide.. They could have been more careful while dealing with a diplomat..

The procedures are under review but the prosecuting attorney (himself of Indian descent, btw) claims she was given special treatment and was not subject to invasive searching, nor handcuffing (at least upon arrest).

She could have come here and defend herself..

In which case I'm not sure her domestic's rights could have been sufficiently defended. That may have been why State decided requesting expulsion was not an option.

 

[Star Wars]

I doubt "entrapment" is anything but the wild invention of Indian media fanned by a few Indian officials, but it can be employed as an argument at the trial. However, if I recall correctly it's only going to help the defendant if her attorney can demonstrate that the abusive behavior was something the defendant was coerced into her by the entrappers, rather than something she would have done regardless.

This is a clear case of entrapment , two days before her family flies away to NY , and after that she is arrested in worst possible way and humiliated in the worst possible way .. this is agreed even by your govt. Besides this is an accusation which has not been proven and India is saying there is absolutely no Visa fraud and U.S has openly lied about this ...

The U.S. was under no obligation to do so. I think this is where worker-protection law may collide with diplomatic practice. It's a conflict worth study.

U.S has every obligation to do so , US failed to follow the Vienna convention when it comes to treating diplomats . there is even a proper respectful way to arrest a diplomat . that was clearly violated

It should be clear by now that there was no intent to humiliate Indian diplomats.

Did you read my earlier reply to you on three kinds of arrests ? this is a clear case of deliberate humiliation... The whole following procedure excuse is absolute bull

 

[adwityagrata]

I doubt "entrapment" is anything but the wild invention of Indian media fanned by a few Indian officials, but it can be employed as an argument at the trial. However, if I recall correctly it's only going to help the defendant if her attorney can demonstrate that the abusive behavior was something the defendant was coerced into her by the entrappers, rather than something she would have done regardless.

Entrapment is something India and Indian govt. believes has taken place.

What do I care if 'entrapment' will be used by the attorney on either side. The simple fact of the matter is that the Indian diplomat cannot be and should not be tried in the US. How you take care of the legal mess you have created is your problem.

However if the US is to peruse judicial action against Indian diplomat, India will reciprocate in kind and you will soon see US diplomats in Indian jails and fighting their prosecution in India.

The U.S. was under no obligation to do so. I think this is where worker-protection law may collide with diplomatic practice. It's a conflict worth study.

Study it all you want. It is not going to get you anywhere.

It should be clear by now that there was no intent to humiliate Indian diplomats.

On the contrary as the case unfolds, it appears as if there was an intent to humiliate India and Indian diplomats. I am not sure what your media has been feeding you, but this is what pretty much the whole of India thinks. It is a PR nightmare and a total mess.

I may argue with a friend. I respect that he may walk away from an argument to cool down so he can come back to discuss things calmly later. I ignore or forgive what he said in the heat of his passion. When calm we talk it over. Perhaps we will decide to part ways.
But one thing is sure, that if he's in my household again he's going to have to adhere to a minimum standard of conduct ultimately determined by myself. And I'd expect him to treat me exactly the same way.

As I said before, before US talks about Friendship, the US first needs to establish Mutual Respect. So far, even that basic framework of mutual respect has not been established.

You can be sure that if your friend is an Indian who has been insulted in your house, He will never again enter your house. And you will most certainly be unwelcome in his house. You may continue to do 'business' but you can be sure that the relationship will never evlove beyond that for a long long time.

I guess you still have a lot to learn about India and Indians.

 

[Iggy]

The procedures are under review but the prosecuting attorney (himself of Indian descent, btw) claims she was given special treatment and was not subject to invasive searching, nor handcuffing (at least upon arrest).

In which case I'm not sure her domestic's rights could have been sufficiently defended. That may have been why State decided requesting expulsion was not an option.

But dont you think the damage has already been done? And why you think her domestic right could have sufficiently defended? Indian court is an independent system.. If her claims are correct she will get justice!!

 

[Solomon2]

this is an accusation which has not been proven and India is saying there is absolutely no Visa fraud and U.S has openly lied about this ...

This kind of arrest can't happen merely by accusation; there has to be some sort of supporting evidence. Evidence that isn't merely testimony, but something physical.

US failed to follow the Vienna convention when it comes to treating diplomats.

The DC certainly was in error to claim that she, personally, had immunity in this manner. There is no doubt about this. As required by the Convention, she was processed through the legal system without delay. (I think normal processing of an accused felon from arrest to bailment would have been 2-5 days whereas the DC was processed in far less time.) As for whether she was treated with due dignity, the prosecutor says yes while the DC says no. The matter is being investigated.

The simple fact of the matter is that the Indian diplomat cannot be and should not be tried in the US.

As a consul her immunity is only partial and only covers her job functions, not actions she takes outside of her job.

 

[Fattyacids]

Then what would you 'classify' it?!

another way of saying, I'm not going to issue an apology