Visa fraud vs Diplomatic immunity

[Formaldehyde]

Similar cases when US diplomats broke law. If you remember Raymond Davis case , he shot dead 2 Pakistanis who allegedly tried to rob him .A embassy car coming to him killed a 3rd Pakistani . He was arrested , US cried hoarse, and managed to free him without any jail sentence by diplomatic pressure. The case was much more serious in nature.

Only he wasn't really a "diplomat" until after the US government tried to make the problem disappear. But you are right that it was quite "similar" to the whining and even threats that the Indian government has used in this case.

But that is hardly an acceptable rationalization. Raymond Davis clearly should have faced a criminal trial in Pakistan for his acts. And her own diplomatic immunity at the time didn't protect her from felonies, so why should she be treated any differently than anybody else who is arrested and booked?

In minor cases for sake of diplomatic relations wouldn't it be just better to just expel a diplomat rather than arrest strip search , cavity search or whatever it is. I mean if countries started saying US violated law by conduction espionage against the host country from embassy premises,(from Snowden revelations) and arrested all employees in embassy who didn't have full diplomatic immunity,it would be chaos.

Perhaps your government can remove even more protective barriers put in place to help assure the US embassy doesn't become a terrorist target.

Or perhaps they can go through with the threat to persecute the homosexual lovers of US diplomats assigned to India.

That should drastically improve so-called "diplomatic relations".

Yes one of the main reasons for the uproar is strip searching , cavity searching is a humiliating experience .For most Indians it is like our woman/girl went there and she got dishonored and disrespected by the US type of thing. I don't think there would have been protests, if it was just known she was arrested for visa fraud.

Indeed. It must be particularly "humiliating" given that she wouldn't have even been arrested in the first place in her own country for exploiting others in this manner.

Why shouldn't she expect to be able to do the same in other countries?

 

[Borachio]

Yes, Indian civil servants aren't paid that high. compared to western salaries. But it is high compared to Indian salary/. Though most earn more because of kickbacks and scams.

This is mental. Perhaps the reason they aren't paid that high is because the authorities expect them to "earn" more through kickbacks and scams.

I wouldn't call kickbacks and scams "earning" though. I'd call them theft and corruption.

 

[KMRblue1027]

When asked for an apology, the U.S. should have sent the Indian government the following video:


Link to video.

I'll have what she's having!

Sorry I had too.

 

[druidravi]

This is mental. Perhaps the reason they aren't paid that high is because the authorities expect them to "earn" more through kickbacks and scams.

I wouldn't call kickbacks and scams "earning" though. I'd call them theft and corruption.

Indian GDP per capita is $1100 per year. Coming to around 90$ per month. Diplomats salary is 50 times that. India is still a very poor country and total GDP is high only because of population . $4500 per month is a very high salary for Indians. You can't expect for the pay to be according to the richer western countries's standards.


It is the reason why the maid is largely not seen as victim in India. Being paid $600 per month with free lodging and boarding in a western country is no where close to what a maid working in India would get .

Maybe I should not have broadly accused all the Indian diplomats of being corrupt. Several of them are indeed including this lady. She could face a court case in India for corruption when she comes back.

 

[druidravi]

In India strip search , cavity search is seen as humilating. It is not done in Indian jails , airports unless there is suspicion someone is hiding something . An year back an ex Indian president Abdul Kalam was strip searched twice in US which prompted similar outrage . Indian envoy to UN a sikh was asked to remove his turban and was detained for refusing to do so .

Here is a 2010 BBC report on these issues

Spoiler :

India's foreign ministry has expressed concern after another of its diplomats was reportedly subjected to a security search at a US airport.

It has emerged that India's UN envoy, Hardeep Puri, was reportedly asked to remove his turban at an airport in Houston, Texas, two weeks ago.

When the Sikh refused to do so, he was detained in a "holding room", say Indian media.

[India's US ambassador Meera Shankar was frisked at a US airport this month.

Foreign Minister SM Krishna told the media in Delhi on Monday: 'We have taken it up with the US authorities and the matter [involving Mr Puri] is at that stage."

The BBC's Jyotsna Singh in Delhi says Sikh men are expected to keep all hair intact and their heads covered in public.

The turban symbolises self-respect, honour, and piety. Touching of the head dress in public is not allowed.

Normally the turban is only removed in the most intimate of circumstances, when washing the face or hair.

There was uproar in India after Ms Shankar was subjected to a hands-on search at an airport in Mississippi, even after her diplomatic status had been revealed.

Ex-president frisked

The ambassador had been picked out of a security line at Jackson-Evers International on 4 December simply because she was wearing a sari, it was claimed.

Meera Shankar
Indian ambassador Meera Shankar was taken to a separate room and searched
US Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said at the time the search had been "appropriate".

But US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed concern about the incident after India's external affairs ministry called it unacceptable.

Some Indian opposition politicians asked the government to subject the US envoy to security searches on flights.

Last year, Continental Airlines apologised to former Indian President APJ Abdul Kalam for searching him before he boarded a flight to the US.

Indians were outraged after it emerged that Mr Kalam had been frisked and made to remove his shoes at Delhi airport in April.

Protocol is meant to exempt former presidents and other dignitaries from such measures.

This was not an isloated incident which caused furore.

 

[bhsup]

In India...

That's the thing. She wasn't in India. She was in America where it's standard procedure in a lot of places. We're always being told to respect other cultures, well that cuts both ways. When in Rome...

 

[NovaKart]

I was surprised about the salaries too but I think it makes more sense if you look at the amount of hours the maid was supposed to work. Every American I know with a housekeeper just asks them to come once a week or once every other week, almost no one has a full time maid.

Giving free room and board and a small salary might be ok if she's supposed to have no life at all outside of that. I'm visiting New York now and I had to pay $50 for a taxi yesterday.

For once I agree with form here, the actions of the US government with the Pakistan case are terrible but I don't think 2 wrongs make a right. I'm also skeptical about the cavity search because it turns out the part about her being arrested and handcuffed in front of her kids was false.

 

[Borachio]

Indian GDP per capita is $1100 per year. Coming to around 90$ per month. Diplomats salary is 50 times that. India is still a very poor country and total GDP is high only because of population . $4500 per month is a very high salary for Indians. You can't expect for the pay to be according to the richer western countries's standards.


It is the reason why the maid is largely not seen as victim in India. Being paid $600 per month with free lodging and boarding in a western country is no where close to what a maid working in India would get .

Maybe I should not have broadly accused all the Indian diplomats of being corrupt. Several of them are indeed including this lady. She could face a court case in India for corruption when she comes back.

I understand all that. It's just curious.

I'm thinking the maid's salary was set at $4,500 because that's the minimum rate in the US for the hours she was going to work.

It's strange that the maid's salary should exceed that of the diplomat. But I can't see how that excuses the diplomat breaking American law on minimum wage.

It's somehow reassuring to me, though, that the UK and its citizens aren't alone in the world in setting and rules and then not keeping to them.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I'm thinking the maid's salary was set at $4,500 because that's the minimum rate in the US for the hours she was going to work.

Maids typically don't make $54K per year, even if they work 40 hours a week. That works out to about $27 per hour, when the usual rate is typically under $10 for full-time help of that sort.

If you could make far more than the average wage in the US being a maid, and what many managers and executives make in the UK, you would probably see it being offered as a major at many colleges.

For once I agree with form here, the actions of the US government with the Pakistan case are terrible but I don't think 2 wrongs make a right. I'm also skeptical about the cavity search because it turns out the part about her being arrested and handcuffed in front of her kids was false.

Being booked for felony charges usually does involve a strip search and bending over for the matron.

 

[Borachio]

I can only presume she was working upwards of 80 hours a week.

People do do, you know. Especially in the short-term, to kickstart some small business or other.

I see no other explanation for the figures. Other than simple error in the OP. Which would be a game changer.

 

[timtofly]

The wiki article does not mention how much the diplomat was being paid, but it states that the maid was to report her income at 9.75/hr. USD for working 40 hours a week.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I can only presume she was working upwards of 80 hours a week.

Yet the very same article that claims she was being paid $4500 per month clearly states that was for 40 hours per week.

The woman was obviously lying and just concocted a number out of thin air.

 

[Borachio]

Well, yes.

It doesn't pay to tell lies, in my experience. I've always been found out. And then I just look and feel stupid.

 

[druidravi]

By the way why are strip searches ,cavity searches conducted for jailed people in US? . Are they afraid of smuggling arms into jail?. Wouldn't metal detector or something be better?. Or is it 'war on drugs' , preventing people from smuggling in drugs or something?.
Wouldn't it be better not to have this as standard procedure ,unless there is a strong compelling reason for it?

 

[Dralix]

Strip searches are to prevent contraband, which is essentially anything that prisoners aren't supposed to have.

Apparently the issue with the strip search is that someone mistakenly thought that this woman was being booked into a jail, and not a hotel room.

 

[JollyRoger]

By the way why are strip searches ,cavity searches conducted for jailed people in US? . Are they afraid of smuggling arms into jail?. Wouldn't metal detector or something be better?. Or is it 'war on drugs' , preventing people from smuggling in drugs or something?.
Wouldn't it be better not to have this as standard procedure ,unless there is a strong compelling reason for it?

Here is how it is viewed by the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, joined by the court’s conservative wing, wrote that courts are in no position to second-guess the judgments of correctional officials who must consider not only the possibility of smuggled weapons and drugs, but also public health and information about gang affiliations.

According to opinions in the lower courts, people may be strip-searched after arrests for violating a leash law, driving without a license and failing to pay child support. Citing examples from briefs submitted to the Supreme Court, Justice Breyer wrote that people have been subjected to “the humiliation of a visual strip search” after being arrested for driving with a noisy muffler, failing to use a turn signal and riding a bicycle without an audible bell.

A nun was strip-searched, he wrote, after an arrest for trespassing during an antiwar demonstration.

Justice Kennedy responded that “people detained for minor offenses can turn out to be the most devious and dangerous criminals.” He noted that Timothy McVeigh, later put to death for his role in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, was first arrested for driving without a license plate. “One of the terrorists involved in the Sept. 11 attacks was stopped and ticketed for speeding just two days before hijacking Flight 93,” Justice Kennedy added.

The case decided Monday, Florence v. County of Burlington, No. 10-945, arose from the arrest of Albert W. Florence in New Jersey in 2005. Mr. Florence was in the passenger seat of his BMW when a state trooper pulled his wife, April, over for speeding. A records search revealed an outstanding warrant for Mr. Florence’s arrest based on an unpaid fine. (The information was wrong; the fine had been paid.)

Mr. Florence was held for a week in jails in Burlington and Essex Counties, and he was strip-searched in each.

As in the Bell case, Justice Kennedy wrote, the “undoubted security imperatives involved in jail supervision override the assertion that some detainees must be exempt from the more invasive search procedures at issue absent reasonable suspicion of a concealed weapon or other contraband.”

Justice Kennedy said one person arrested for disorderly conduct in Washington State “managed to hide a lighter, tobacco, tattoo needles and other prohibited items in his rectal cavity.” Officials in San Francisco, he added, “have discovered contraband hidden in body cavities of people arrested for trespassing, public nuisance and shoplifting.”

In a concurrence, Chief Justice Roberts, quoting from an earlier decision, said that exceptions to Monday’s ruling were still possible “to ensure that we ‘not embarrass the future.’ ”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/us/justices-approve-strip-searches-for-any-offense.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Text of opinion:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-945.pdf

 

[Borachio]

Ugh. Just exactly what won't people hide up there?

 

[JollyRoger]

5 on the Supreme Court hide their head up there.

 

[druidravi]

I'm speechless. I guess since it is a verdict by a 9 member bench in supreme court ,no chance of it being overturned ? . Can Legislature create a law to overturn it?.
Extending the same logic they should strip search the politicos and judges everytime they come to office. Who knows what they could hide there. Maybe we might even find if some is a 'closet' communist,liberal,homosexual or even 'gasp' a Muslim .

" In a concurrence, Chief Justice Roberts, quoting from an earlier decision, said that exceptions to Monday’s ruling were still possible “to ensure that we ‘not embarrass the future.’ ”

Are exemptions used in practice?

 

[Farm Boy]

I'm speechless. I guess since it is a verdict by a 9 member bench in supreme court ,no chance of it being overturned ? . Can Legislature create a law to overturn it?.
Extending the same logic they should strip search the politicos and judges everytime they come to office. Who knows what they could hide there. Maybe we might even find if some is a 'closet' communist,liberal,homosexual or even 'gasp' a Muslim .



Are exemptions used in practice?

The Supreme Court "tends" not to overturn its rulings directly, though it might occasionally cheat here and there. A municipality or state may constrain the discretion of its own law enforcement officers on its own accord, since that takes latitude away from officers rather than rights from people, but the Federal Supreme Court isn't going to be coming in anytime soon and limiting the power of any state or local officers that want to strip you naked and probe your privates for spitting into the wind, or looking at them funny, or whatever. If we want a Federal limitation on those police powers, since apparently our 4th Amendment means jack and (feces) now, you would have to amend the Constitution itself with some more robust language and then probably reamend it again when the Justices reinterpret it yet again. Likelihood approaches zero.