The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
The prosecutor really should have swallowed their pride under any normal circumstannces. However, whatever the original foggy bottom deal was, same remains in play. DA has no choice but to play along now. This is all at a political/ H&D level.
Tiring your opponent out (of patience, money, time) are all valid strategies for a losing team. The courts encourage them. After two years and weekly filings, you still see continuances granted on flimsy pretences.
The court gave a good way out, the state department chose not to take it. Not enough letters were sent to the representatives.
This new complaint is unlikely to be dismissed or proceed.
UlanBatori wrote:But it hasn't come to trial. PB is betting that it never does. The arrest warrant is also voided, so now since he has an indictment he can claim there is an arrest warrant. This ensures that DK does not set foot in US, HOWEVER, she still can if she comes under Dip. Imm. BUT then she can't defend case, can she, because she can still be sentenced to jail.
India can still send her to UN - US cannot do a whit about stating whom India sends to UN!
Going to UN at a diplomatic capacity grants her diplomatic immunity. What will PB do? Bray like a pig to get his re-indictment to trial? However the original indictment has already been thrown away! Even if the "re-indictment" goes to trial and the jury agrees with PB, what will they do? Prove to the world that they have a kangaroo court?
DK anyway will say as UN diplomat, I have diplomatic immunity and here :p to your trials!
Suraj wrote: There's no new evidence in the case, at least none with damages Devyani, just Sangeetha and her now divorced husband. Isn't there any legal provision against those trying the same thing again and again hoping for a different result ?
You cannot prosecute again for the same crime precisely because of what you raise as a question.. This "re-indictment" is all garam-hawa.
As Amerikhans do: "Declare victory and then surrender."., In this case "Declare victory, surrender and then blame the opponent for their defeat".
Yes, so what's the purpose of reindicting ? Just to have it in the books before the defendant herself launches a civil suit ?
Does the US system really allow someone who had their case thrown out to come back and re-file without any change in circumstances, simply to avoid a wrongful arrest lawsuit ?
PB is asinine. He should have let it go. But H&D, I guess. Now I think the statute of limitations will stop until DK comes into the jurisdiction of the court.
Whether divorced on or not communications between the wife and husband are privileged. Anyway I dont think this will ever go to trial. DK wont come to US and SR wont go to India.
Suraj, a person acquitted or convicted can not be tried for the same offence. In this case it did not to trial. So I do not think this applies to indictments.
Yes, I already mentioned in my very first post on this page that double jeopardy does not apply here. I'm asking whether the law actually permits frivolous re-indictments of this kind when a case was thrown out before trial.
Shreeman wrote:
Just for the record as well, why do we note these things. Would the press release not been much better without this sentence?
FYI, the bolded portion shows that GoI accepts the judgment with a caveat. And this gives the GoI freedom to pursue various future courses of action if it so chooses. The judgment was out, the GoI had to give an official statement. They did that. If the bolded portion was not in the statement it would have implied the GoI was 100 per cent happy with the outcome. But that would have curtailed any potential for future manoeuvre if the situation so warrants. I think this should be obvious.
[/quote]
amit,
It is actually the reverse. Media statements are not manoeuvres, the re-indictment is. If you want the merit examined, you should have been preparing to exercise civil remedies at the instant of a decision. Instead, you have re-indictment and a poor statement.
This is a dharmic dilemma. You think they are playing, and want to stop. They think they are exterminating.
Without that statement the press release is a mature forward looking gesture. With it, its neither here nor there. If GoIs stated aim of moving forward was true, then all needed to be forgotten. If not, why stick you gripes in a media statement no one except small number of indians will read and fewer will care.
Suraj wrote:Yes, I already mentioned in my very first post on this page that double jeopardy does not apply here. I'm asking whether the law actually permits frivolous re-indictments of this kind when a case was thrown out before trial.
Yes, there is *no* law about "frivoulous re-indictments"., the DA can and in this case filed re-indictments. It is in the discovery phase that the Judge will throw the new re-indictment out (or allow it to trial). However given an indictment (re- or not)., it does give the prosecutor ability to detain the suspect.
Now the question is why PB did it. Subjectively PB is just braying like a pig. Objectively, does he have something up his legal sleeve which we may not know of? The answer is - we never know., since given this re-indictment, DK may not risk coming into US.
Is it possible that DK was working under cover? That PB is assisting US SD/CIA? And because of all this, DK as an asset in US is damaged?
Whatever we may think the charges are not frivolous. The indictment was dismissed on technical grounds without going into the merits. So this cannot be a bar for re-indictment. In fact Achrack conceded as much.
The offences (that of visa fraud and lying on visa app) according to the prosecutors were committed in November ‘12 i.e. even before DK became a diplomat in the USA. True she was appointed as a diplomat but did not reach USA. So they are claiming in essence extra territorial jurisdiction. According to this line of argument even the limited consular immunity does not come into play.
Even in the best case scenario DK obtained full immunity in August 13. But the offences according to the prosecution were committed prior to that. Even the non payment of minimum wages happened before June 13. According to the prosecution DK had limited immunity at that time. Even if DKs arrest is illegal and gives her a cause for civil action, this indictment itself is not vitiated.
The essense of full diplomatic immunity is that you are immune from prosecution even for crimes alleged to have been committed before your immunity exists. Immunity is just that - immunity. There are two options for a prosecuting entity: a) request that the diplomat waive immunity and accept prosecution proceedings or b) diplomat declines to waive immunity and is declared PNG.
The US case hinges on sidestepping the question of recognizing immunity at the time of arrest. It only acknowledges the existence of immunity at the time of prior indictment, and therefore drops charges. The new indictment hopes that Devyani can be prosecuted again simply for being in a non-diplomatic status.
Some interesting questions:
a) What is the statute of limitations on the current indictment ?
b) Wrongful arrest civil suit, to force the legal establishment to answer the question of whether she had diplomatic immunity at the time of arrest ?
disha wrote:Objectively, does he have something up his legal sleeve which we may not know of?
This is what I guessed and posted here long ago. OTH, USSD behavior has to be accounted for as well. PB is a puppet whose strings are being pulled from the top.
This is all engineered by the the Obama administration & state department to put India in its place. Obama is Bharara's boss, and he would not go to these lengths without tacit approval. The way a great power retaliates would be to provide far more explicit approval for Russia's actions in Crimea.
Madhusudhan wrote:This is all engineered by the the Obama administration & state department to put India in its place. Obama is Bharara's boss, and he would not go to these lengths without tacit approval. The way a great power retaliates would be to provide far more explicit approval for Russia's actions in Crimea.
Just saw the news item about DK being indicted again. Just couldn't believe this!!
I used to think Hussein is not involved, not any more.
Suraj wrote:Yes, I already mentioned in my very first post on this page that double jeopardy does not apply here. I'm asking whether the law actually permits frivolous re-indictments of this kind when a case was thrown out before trial.
Yes, there is *no* law about "frivoulous re-indictments"., the DA can and in this case filed re-indictments. It is in the discovery phase that the Judge will throw the new re-indictment out (or allow it to trial). However given an indictment (re- or not)., it does give the prosecutor ability to detain the suspect.
Now the question is why PB did it. Subjectively PB is just braying like a pig. Objectively, does he have something up his legal sleeve which we may not know of? The answer is - we never know., since given this re-indictment, DK may not risk coming into US.
Is it possible that DK was working under cover? That PB is assisting US SD/CIA? And because of all this, DK as an asset in US is damaged?
This analysis still doesn't make sense...about the Pig having some thing up his sleeve...
The only thing that makes sense is the Pig is petty minded and vengeful and is obsessed.
I feel calling it a Pig is insult to the pigs.
AoA, Todin's the time to press charges of statutory rape against PB and the entire SD press gang starting from the May neanderthals. In addition charges against PB for removing from justice Indian citizens, the DUI husband and his children.
While at it we should arrest some US diplomutt on charges of kiddie *****, irrespective of his immunity status and let the Indian courts decide if immunity is tenable for such grave charges.
Madhusudhan wrote:This is all engineered by the the Obama administration & state department to put India in its place.....
Saar, why such a defeatist tone..please do not make yourself and 1 Billion people mediocre. The only way others can put you "in place", if you let them put you "in place".
Shreeman wrote:The prosecutor really should have swallowed their pride under any normal circumstannces. However, whatever the original foggy bottom deal was, same remains in play.
Isn't there a small matter of a US flagged small ship filled to the brim with mercenaries of all stripes and nationalities (US, UK, Estonian, Ukranian and Indian too) that has been detained at Tuticorin for the past 90 days or so , on charges of not disclosing weapons on board when the came into port for fuel and seeking shelter from a cyclone ? Ostensibly the ship was on anti piracy operations , which sounds like a sham.
It looks like the Baboos have locked up a bunch of US outsourced covert ops cut throats and there is a petition being put up to the UK govt to intervene by the family of one of the brits on it (a former soldier) by his girlfriend and brother to intervene. There are wheels within wheels here. I think the US soldiers/covert op diplomutts are trying to get some leverage on this with a proposed dropping of charges on both sides.
Trouble is that they opened out a can of worms for the civilian diplomutt types in the embassies and consulates and left them nekkid to getting their Mushrrafs whipped in retaliation.
The ultimate goal of Chacha is a nuke-nekkid India with a plantation type economy and as a market for US/MNC products all molesting Indian customers economically while being unmolested by bhooka nanga Indian police and inspectors via MNC import called Jokepal. Sort of like Indonesia but many sizes bigger. Somebody has been trying to do a Fukushima to India for a long long time. Once this happens the AAPturds will scream and shout and we will willingly give away our nukes. The first stop was low cost bomb manufacturing locally in which Udaykumar was injured. Next were the mercenaries who have now been arrested. The DK affair was to get Indian babooze to acquiesce and let off these guys. However they didn't anticipate for India's reaction. Essentially laffaire DK is a sideshow. In the main line of conspiracy is now hijacking of MH370.
Yup. The story of the MV Seaman Guard Ohio sure sounds fishy.
According to India Today, preliminary investigations revealed that the ship was between Tuticorin port and Kudankulam nuclear power plant for 30 days and the Director General for shipping is to submit a report to the admiralty court.
TUTICORIN: The voluminous 2,158-page chargesheet filed by the state Q branch in the case of maritime violations by the US-based vessel MV Seaman Guard Ohio has named the shipping company's president William Watson, besides crew members, for violations of the Indian Arms Act by sending the arms-laden ship into Indian territorial waters. The chargesheet includes information gathered from the ship crew on their alleged intrusion into Indian territorial waters. The ballistic lab report on the arms seized from the ship as well as the cyber lab report that details its GPS position in Indian waters when it was detained has also been included in the chargesheet, sources said.
The vessel, on an anti-piracy assignment, was detained on October 12 for straying into Indian waters, carrying a huge cache of arms and ammunition, apparently meant to be used to resist piracy attacks. Such floating armouries strike mid-sea deals with vessels to provide them protection in piracy-infested areas.
The Judicial Magistrate court in Tuticorin is likely to hold a hearing on the chargesheet on January 3. Sources said the chargesheet has to be handed over to the accused in the case on that day. There are possibilities that the crew members, who were arrested and lodged in prisons in Puzhal in Chennai and Palayamkottai in Tirunelveli will either be produced in court or briefed through video-conferencing. Besides, their remand period expires the same day. The court will decide the further course of action in the case, officials said.
The Seaman Guard Ohio was detained by the Indian Coast Guard with 35 crew members, including 25 anti-piracy guards aboard. The Q branch took over the case and the ship crew was arrested and lodged in the prison. The bail pleas of the crew members were rejected by the Tuticorin court and Madurai Bench of the Madras high court. But the magistrate court granted them conditional bail on a fresh petition filed by them on December 26 on the grounds that the chargesheet was not filed within 60 days. However, the Q branch filed a review petition before the Principal Sessions Court on December 28 seeking a stay on the bail. The court stayed the bail and the Q branch filed the chargesheet before the judicial magistrate court on Monday evening.
" Somebody has been trying to do a Fukushima to India for a long long time."
This also needs a lot of people within India to carry the plan at required levels. Plus focus is on certain reactors only apparently.
By the way, Fukushima disaster is played out well even in Japanese media as also is outside. With everyday propaganda, it will be tough for Japanese to go nucler even when it was post Tsunami - a natural disaster and nuke reactors aren't Japanese.
ramana wrote:Looks like PB filed another indictment. The judge gave partial dismissal leading to this situation.
Ramana,
Jurisprudence is about not deciding what does not need a decision too. And american judges are shepherds. They control what flock (jury) get to see, but not more than that. The only way of preventing another indictment was to remain at UN. Obviously, PNG status gets in the way of that resolution. That judge had no other option -- they were not favoring anyone!
Unless this (and similar) is treated transparently, and with principles, it will continue to irritate. You can't sit on matters unrelated, and you cant choose not to explore avenues favirable because of "harmonious" relationship. You cant expect quid-pro-quo, or a dharmic approach. This is a zero sum game.
Yes, the formation of a jury and indictment explicitly gives prosecution the ability to obtain an arrest warrant. They have done so.
Last edited by Shreeman on 15 Mar 2014 09:15, edited 1 time in total.
VijayKM wrote:Is Khan going to bring a resolution in UN demanding plebiscite in Kashmir?
I know that is rhetorical question. For the record, if khan moves that in UN, Pakistanis first have to vacate POK and wait till situation in POK stabilizes for a smooth conduct of the plebiscite. I would say let Pakistan start e process if the plebiscite. Paul slip and all that ...
VijayKM wrote:Is Khan going to bring a resolution in UN demanding plebiscite in Kashmir?
I know that is rhetorical question. For the record, if khan moves that in UN, Pakistanis first have to vacate POK and wait till situation in POK stabilizes for a smooth conduct of the plebiscite. I would say let Pakistan start e process if the plebiscite. Paul slip and all that ...
Khan has no appetite for Kashmir (or India) right now. Ookraine, then syria, then af-pak withdrawal, then mid-terms and so on. US will use their limited time in the UN to harp on crimea for the foreseeable future.
VijayKM wrote:Is Khan going to bring a resolution in UN demanding plebiscite in Kashmir?
India will say f*k you and will have a whole lot of allies who also know that UN can be used against them by individual P5 members like US using UN to get their things done. It will mean nothing. Nothing will happen.
If Angelina Joile does not respond to direct wooing, it will not be possible to get her by invoking UN.
Pratyush wrote:Sue Bahara for wrongful arrest and custodial rape. Destroy him, by destroying his reputation.
Then what? Some other HAvaDy will step into his shoes and the circus continues on the circus.
The civil process is there for a good reason. Its value is mainly as a deterrent. If you forgo your rights to pick the lesser of the many evils, there is no deterrent effect. What prevents the next administration from installing its own worse entities anyway? This is not about individuals on either side.
The position of vice counsel deserves respect, even if it were from some pakistan. Dont like it, PNG them. The position of DA deserves the praise for all the good work, and severe punishment for its failures.
WASHINGTON: Rara Avis is a Latin term for a "rare bird." The diplomatic fraternity could well coin the term "Bharara Avis" to describe this US attorney, a rare prosecutor who simply does not lose sight of his quarry no matter what the political costs are.
In a move that Indian officialdom is certain to see as cussed and vindictive, Preet Bharara, the nemesis of errant Indian diplomats in New York, oversaw filing of a fresh indictment against Devyani Khobragade a day after a district judge had dismissed the case against her. The court had ruled that she had diplomatic immunity when she was charged earlier.
But the ruling had given Bharara leeway to re-indict her by indicating the immunity was good only as long as she was assigned to the UN in New York, and the prosecutors were free to charge her anew since she had moved on from that window.
On Friday, Bharara's office did exactly that, essentially reiterating the charges against the diplomat of visa fraud and misrepresentation in a case involving her housekeeper Sangeeta Richard. Cautionary advise by Khobragade's attorney Daniel Arshack that any new indictment would be viewed as "unnecessarily aggressive" and "one that (prosecutors) would be ill-advised to pursue," didn't deter the USAttorney, who is widely seen as a man with a mission, who remains unswayed by the fact that his target is from the same country as the one of his origin.
A warrant of arrest has also been issued against Khobragade, Bharara's office said. "The Government will alert the Court immediately upon the defendant's arrest so that an appearance before Your Honor may be scheduled. At present, the defendant is believed to be in India," he said in a letter to United States District Judge William Pauley.
ToiLet Twist
At the end of the day, it appeared the State Department's political mandarins were not going to pick up cudgels against the department's own bureau of diplomatic security, its human rights and civil liberties campaigners, and its legal eagles, all of who combined to initiate and back the case against Devyani Khobragade. It was not clear how much New Delhi would push its point of view either, now that the controversial diplomat, who is having her own run-ins with South Block, had been "rescued" from New York and safely ensconced in India.
and the Director General for shipping is to submit a report to the admiralty court.