Public statement of US Attorney Preet Bharara on the arrest of Indian diplomat.

[pnwmom]

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/devyani-khobragade-case-full-statement-issued-by-us-attorney-preet-bharara-460476

There has been much misinformation and factual inaccuracy in the reporting on the charges against Devyani Khobragade. It is important to correct these inaccuracies because they are misleading people and creating an inflammatory atmosphere on an unfounded basis. Although I am quite limited in my role as a prosecutor in what I can say, which in many ways constrains my ability here to explain the case to the extent I would like, I can nevertheless make sure the public record is clearer than it has been thus far.

First, Ms. Khobragade was charged based on conduct, as is alleged in the Complaint, that shows she clearly tried to evade U.S. law designed to protect from exploitation the domestic employees of diplomats and consular officers. Not only did she try to evade the law, but as further alleged, she caused the victim and her spouse to attest to false documents and be a part of her scheme to lie to U.S. government officials. So it is alleged not merely that she sought to evade the law, but that she affirmatively created false documents and went ahead with lying to the U.S. government about what she was doing. One wonders whether any government would not take action regarding false documents being submitted to it in order to bring immigrants into the country. One wonders even more pointedly whether any government would not take action regarding that alleged conduct where the purpose of the scheme was to unfairly treat a domestic worker in ways that violate the law. And one wonders 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?

Second, as the alleged conduct of Ms. Khobragade makes clear, there can be no plausible claim that this case was somehow unexpected or an injustice. Indeed, the law is clearly set forth on the State Department website. Further, there have been other public cases in the United States involving other countries, and some involving India, where the mistreatment of domestic workers by diplomats or consular officers was charged criminally, and there have been civil suits as well. In fact, the Indian government itself has been aware of this legal issue, and that its diplomats and consular officers were at risk of violating the law. The question then may be asked: Is it for U.S. prosecutors to look the other way, ignore the law and the civil rights of victims (again, here an Indian national), or is it the responsibility of the diplomats and consular officers and their government to make sure the law is observed?

Third, Ms. Khobragade, the Deputy General Consul for Political, Economic, Commercial and Women's Affairs, is alleged to have treated this victim illegally in numerous ways by paying her far below minimum wage, despite her child care responsibilities and many household duties, such that it was not a legal wage. The victim is also alleged to have worked far more than the 40 hours per week she was contracted to work, and which exceeded the maximum hour limit set forth in the visa application. Ms. Khobragade, as the Complaint charges, created a second contract that was not to be revealed to the U.S. government, that changed the amount to be paid to far below minimum wage, deleted the required language protecting the victim from other forms of exploitation and abuse, and also deleted language that stated that Ms. Khobragade agreed to "abide by all Federal, state, and local laws in the U.S." As the Complaint states, these are only "in part" the facts, and there are other facts regarding the treatment of the victim - that were not consistent with the law or the representations made by Ms. Khobragade -- that caused this Office and the State Department, to take legal action.

Fourth, as to Ms. Khobragade's arrest by State Department agents, this is a prosecutor's office in charge of prosecution, not the arrest or custody, of the defendant, and therefore those questions may be better referred to other agencies. I will address these issues based on the facts as I understand them. Ms. Khobragade was accorded courtesies well beyond what other defendants, most of whom are American citizens, are accorded. She was not, as has been incorrectly reported, arrested in front of her children. The agents arrested her in the most discreet way possible, and unlike most defendants, she was not then handcuffed or restrained. In fact, the arresting officers did not even seize her phone as they normally would have. Instead, they offered her the opportunity to make numerous calls to arrange personal matters and contact whomever she needed, including allowing her to arrange for child care. This lasted approximately two hours. Because it was cold outside, the agents let her make those calls from their car and even brought her coffee and offered to get her food. It is true that she was fully searched by a female Deputy Marshal -- in a private setting -- when she was brought into the U.S. Marshals' custody, but 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. This is in the interests of everyone's safety.

Fifth, as has been reported, the victim's family has been brought to the United States. As also has been reported, legal process was started in India against the victim, attempting to silence her, and attempts were made to compel her to return to India. Further, the Victim's family reportedly was confronted in numerous ways regarding this case. Speculation about why the family was brought here has been rampant and incorrect. Some focus should perhaps be put on why it was necessary to evacuate the family and what actions were taken in India vis-a-vis them. This Office and the Justice Department are compelled to make sure that victims, witnesses and their families are safe and secure while cases are pending.

Finally, this Office's sole motivation in this case, as in all cases, is to uphold the rule of law, protect victims, and hold accountable anyone who breaks the law - no matter what their societal status and no matter how powerful, rich or connected they are.

[Xipe Totec]

1. "This is standard practice for every defendant, rich or poor, American or not" - I feel much better

to know that we can all expect the same treatment from the authorities. Doesn't matter what the charge is; petty theft, white collar crime, murder, drug trafficking, or flipping the finger at a police officer. We can all rest safely knowing that there will be anal probings for everyone.

[pnwmom]

7. Other reports say there was no cavity search, so that isn't clear. n/t

[FarCenter]

9. Reportedly they do a visual inspection of cavities without probeing.

[Bonobo]

25. Searching for what? A smuggled housekeeper? nt

[Xipe Totec]

10. Quibble away. nt

[pnwmom]

12. The criminal charges against her are serious.

As it is, she had special treatment.

[Savannahmann]

16. No they are not serious.

Every day millions of undocumented workers earn less than minimum wage in this country from Americans who are using them as farm labor. Never are those people arrested for that heinous crime. Every time a cop lies there are other cops who lie on official documents and they are never prosecuted. The NSA lied to congress under oath, and they were congratulated for telling the least u truthful lie they could.

So these charges are far less serious than what our citizens are doing every single day.

No they are not serious. This is political bullshit. The same administration that is screaming give us the traitor Snowdon back are objecting to India telling their citizen to retun home. This is the same administration that won't retun Robert Lady to Italy where he was convicted of kidnapping and torture by the Italian court.

No this isn't serious crimes, but it is a serious problem regarding international relations. India telling us in Diplospeak to go jump in a lake is potentially very serious. When the truth comes out we'll find that we were trying to pressure the Indian Prime Minister into letting the CIA set up a drone base near Pakistan so we can blow up even more weddings.

[pnwmom]

19. Trafficking in human lives is a serious crime,

and anyone who is caught doing it should be prosecuted.

How can you say it's not serious when none of us know the details yet? If they were forcing her to work long hours, holding her passport, and keeping her from leaving the house -- in addition to filing a false contract in her VISA application -- would that be a serious enough crime for you?

[Savannahmann]

28. It might be if the Government wasn't abetting the same crime every day.

Today, from California to Texas migrant workers will be working for less than minimum wage. If they complain, they are turned over to the INS and threatened with deportation. So the US Government is a willing ally in the enforced slavery of people a million times a day every day.

But that is fine, because it isn't an Indian diplomat right?

Farmers use the migrant workers and then as the crops are picked call the INS to come and pick up the undocumented workers so they never pay anything for the work. Well, that's the law right?

People called Coyote's smuggle more u documented workers across the border so American Citizens can use them as domestic labor for pennies with threats of arrest if they complain. The lucky ones aren't forced int prostitution, and the Government never prosecutes the Americans.

So what is this all really about? It is an effort to exert pressure on India for some advantage or another. It is backfiring badly, and is getting another nation angry with us.

Because if the charges are absolutely true. It's no different than what we do every single day and yes I have personally seen it. So don't tell me that this case has anything to do with protecting the rights of this woman Ms. Richards. Especially when India asked for the return of Ms. Richards and presented extradition documents to the State Department before the claim of the abuses was made. Now the same Government that demands the immediate return of Edward Snowden is ignoring the Extradition request from India.

This is political bullshit that is being used to try and leverage some CIA deal on the Pakistani Border or perhaps directed towards China.

I smell bullshit, and I see a diplomatic disaster developing. The claims I'm hearing are bullshit, especially when I've seen the rounding up of migrant workers right before they get paid back when I lived in California. I've seen the workers in the fields and seen them straining to complete the work fast enough to get paid. I've watched them load the damned truck I was driving so people in Wahington DC could have fresh salads.

I know and that's why I know this is all a lie. Because the Government doesn't give a shit about the abused workers, they help heap the abuse on the migrants.

[pnwmom]

31. I think the Indians brought this on themselves by trying to get the

US to help them get back their "servant" after she "absconded."

[Recursion]

29. Sadly, agricultural laborers are exempt from the national minimum wage

Blame that on the over-representation of rural states in the Senate.

As far as the "illegal" part goes, the estimates I've seen are that about 300,000 undocumented immigrants work on US farms, alongside about 40,000 H2-A guest workers. Publicly, farmers complain that the paperwork for H2-A applicants is cumbersome and slow (and they have a point), privately they complain that the Adverse Effect Wage Rate set by the Department of Labor costs more than undocumented labor does (though that has changed in recent years as immigration from the south has tapered off -- some workers now complain that the AEWR is actually lower than what laborers can get in some in-demand sectors). We shouldn't lower the AEWR calculation, but we probably should make the visas easier to obtain.

Now, as to the larger question of agricultural worker pay in general? I'm with you 100%: it's shameful that the agricultural minimum wage is only $5.85 (though in most states the AEWR is at least a little higher). Maybe once Baucus goes to China we'll have more sane voices on ag policy, at least in the Senate...

[Jim Lane]

34. In New York, police can't do a strip search for minor charges

A woman was arrested in Newburgh, New York on a charge of not having a license for her dog. The City of Newburgh had a policy of strip-searching all arrestees, regardless of the charge, so they strip-searched her. (The court decision doesn't say there was a cavity search, nor does it say whether the strip search uncovered any concealed guns, cocaine, or doggie biscuits.)

She sued the City and won. The court held:

Strip searches of arrestees charged with misdemeanors or other minor offenses violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution unless there is a reasonable suspicion that the arrestee is concealing weapons or contraband based on the crime charged, and the circumstances of the arrest.

If the person is instead arrested for an alleged felony, but one (like exploiting a worker and lying on official documents) that doesn't normally involve guns or the like, you could argue that it's reasonable to strip-search all felony arrestees, even without any particular reason to suspect concealed weapons or contraband. Based on the U.S. Attorney's statement, I'm guessing that's the law.

But if you get arrested for "flipping the finger at a police officer" and they strip-search you, call a lawyer.

[woolldog]

2. Good. Hopefully this diplomat gets hard time

in prison. These diplomats should not be above the law.

[JI7]

5. she wont, they promoted her

hopefully she will at least be forced to go back though.

[woolldog]

8. I figured if diplomatic immunity couldnt get her out of this

there was a chance she'd do time. Darn. Hate to hear about people being exploited like this in the US.

[pnwmom]

14. Apparently the Indians believe the new job will give her

retroactive full immunity.

[Recursion]

17. Well, the larger issue is it does give her current inviolability

It's an interesting legal situation: she would not be "immune" strictly for the acts, but she would be personally inviolate, so the police couldn't compel her to go to trial (though she'd lose the quarter-million she posted as bail).

[pnwmom]

18. Probably someone paid the bail for her.

Likely, the same government that gave her an allowance to pay for the maid and was threatening her relatives in India.

[Recursion]

21. It took me several reads of the Delhi ruling to get it: they're calling it "blackmail"

Richards said, "pay me my back wages according to the contract on the visa or I will sue you".

The court in Delhi, mind-bogglingly (to Americans, at least), has viewed that as "blackmail".

[pnwmom]

22. Right. And they think that the proper response to a maid complaining

that her Indian employer is violating her rights in the US is to file charges against her in India.

Here's a copy of the US complaint, FYI.

http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/archive/01692/Text_of_complaint__1692362a.pdf

As they said in the official statement, this isn't their whole case -- just what they needed for probable cause. But it's interesting.

Apparently the law is clear that the employees must be paid at least minimum wage -- and there can't be any deductions for things like housing, medical, etc.

Also, the money has to be paid directly into a US bank account that the employee has control over. It can't be sent into another country. So the claim that they were paying part of her money -- at her request -- to her relatives falls flat. (I didn't believe it anyway because they could have easily put that in the contract.)

Also, the employer cannot hold her passport. She must be allowed to hold her own passport and her copy of the contract.

The fact that these points were made in the charging document makes me think it's likely that there will be evidence that the employer withheld her passport and didn't deposit the money into a US bank.

[JI7]

23. and i think it's because so many of them do have "domestic servants" and treat them badly

as you said one doesn't need to be wealthy in india to have maids. her own dad used her being middle class as a defense, as if that makes it ok to treat someone who has less ok.

so these people view these "servants" as lower than them and think they are doing them a favor just by giving them something to eat . i have seen comments like "they let her use their phone" "they paid for her to come here" and other crap as if any of that justified not paying her as they should. and as if it meant she owed them something.

on issues like gay rights, even the rape and other issues the comments i see on various sites often tend to be kind of fair and people accepting the criticism of india. even on things like caste , corrupt politicians etc they criticize these things.

but on this issue they just can't get it. but it does explain a lot of problems in india.

[okaawhatever]

33. The caste system in India is what the neo-conservatives are trying to force us into here. People who

are willing to beg for jobs and give up all their rights.

[bluestate10]

3. There was a news item that indicated that she was paying her housekeeper $3 per hour.

She need to face the full force of the law if that news article is true.

[pnwmom]

6. It was supposed to be about $3.30 an hour, but it was actually

less than that because there was so much overtime.

Also, the diplomat is accused of giving false documents to the US when applying for the VISA for the maid. The contract she gave the government said she was paying her more than $9 an hour, and also included other provisions that were struck from the real contract.

[Recursion]

11. Specifically, the claim is she took the money the Indian government had allotted for Richards...

... gave her a fraction of it, and kept the rest herself (at current exchange rates, Khobragade doesn't make much more than the maid officially made). Khobragade claims the "missing" money was sent, per Richards' request, to Richards' family in India. If that seems like a fairly straightforward question of fact to you, then you have never had the joy of banking in India...

I would like to make one point, though: those of us who grew up in the US, where labor is relatively expensive and manufactured goods are relatively cheap, hear about somebody having a full time maid or driver and think "wow, they must be loaded!" But to someone who grew up in India, where labor is relatively cheap and goods are relatively expensive, hears that and thinks "OK, they're middle-class"; rich people "signal" their wealth with luxury goods in India; they do it with services in the US.

[pnwmom]

13. Too bad she didn't add that payment clause to at least one of the

conflicting contracts she had the maid sign. Like the one saying she would only be paid $3.31 an hour. Why didn't it say, "and the rest of your $9.45 an hour salary will be paid, at your request, directly to your family in India."

I think her story reeks.

[JI7]

4. it's scary how they went after her in India, while rapists and other thugs

are able to do as they want.

most of those protesting this were old fat guys who have some place of power and are afraid of losing it and not being able to get away with these things.

and of course those using this for their own political agenda with the elections coming up .

[JI7]

15. it's fucked up that he is being called a self hating indian for protecting an indian woman

just because she is a maid and may not have education doesn't mean she is worth less than any other human being .

it's like the duck dynasty people claiming one is anti christian if they criticize their(duck dynasty guy) bigotry.

[pnwmom]

20. He's protecting the wrong kind of Indian woman, apparently. nt

[malaise]

32. Ding ding we have a winner

You see this is business as usual for one class or caste of people.
I don't care who is a diplomat - a lie is a lie.

[Bonobo]

24. Why the cavity search?

Simple question.

[pnwmom]

26. There wasn't one, according to the DA and police. n/t

[Recursion]

27. The Marshals categorically deny a cavity search was performed

They do maintain a strip search by a female officer in a private room was performed.

[Bonobo]

30. Thanks for the clarification. nt