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.

Rishi wrote: 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 r

>>>> It seems Sonia Gandhi also lied on her aplication for Indian citizenship. She should also be prosecuted.

Brigadier HK (Retd) wrote:how would americans feel if their diplomats here were cavity searched for weapons of mass destruction? put them on trial here for war crimes and crimes against humanity! bloody hypocrites.

Hellsangel wrote:

Rishi wrote: 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 r

>>>> It seems Sonia Gandhi also lied on her aplication for Indian citizenship. She should also be prosecuted.

What did she lie about?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:indians and SUCHers of indian origin who whine here day in and day out about corruption of indian politicians should be ashamed of themselves. you whine, yet you do not stand by your own principles and let national pride take precedence over your distaste for corruption. yes it is hurtful that it is the government of another country that is bringing this suit, but if you truly care about weeding out corruption from your govt, why don't you stand with bharara?

Rishi wrote: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.

>>>That is not true. It seems the strip and cavity searching is only done for crimes like drug possession etc.

indophile wrote:
Someone is lying. Who?

Rishi wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:indians and SUCHers of indian origin who whine here day in and day out about corruption of indian politicians should be ashamed of themselves. you whine, yet you do not stand by your own principles and let national pride take precedence over your distaste for corruption. yes it is hurtful that it is the government of another country that is bringing this suit, but if you truly care about weeding out corruption from your govt, why don't you stand with bharara?

>>>>Max,

Don't jump up and down.

American politicians and bureaucrats are also hypocritical and corrupt in many different ways.

They use media for all  kinds of  propaganda to point fingers at others and minimize the misdeeds they commit.

They made a big stink about the Soviet Union killing innocent people in Afghanistan. But they have killed more people in that country than the Soviet Union in 1980s.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rishi wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:indians and SUCHers of indian origin who whine here day in and day out about corruption of indian politicians should be ashamed of themselves. you whine, yet you do not stand by your own principles and let national pride take precedence over your distaste for corruption. yes it is hurtful that it is the government of another country that is bringing this suit, but if you truly care about weeding out corruption from your govt, why don't you stand with bharara?

>>>>Max,

Don't jump up and down.

American politicians and bureaucrats are also hypocritical and corrupt in many different ways.

They use media for all  kinds of  propaganda to point fingers at others and minimize the misdeeds they commit.

They made a big stink about the Soviet Union killing innocent people in Afghanistan. But they have killed more people in that country than the Soviet Union in 1980s.

we can talk about american politicians and their hypocrisy in another thread. i am no shrinking violet when it comes to american politicians and their hypocrisy. we have plenty of discussions about them on these very pages.  but this incident is about an indian govt official. and do you not write post after post after post about the corrupt ways of this indian govt? so why this sudden change of heart?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:indians and SUCHers of indian origin who whine here day in and day out about corruption of indian politicians should be ashamed of themselves. you whine, yet you do not stand by your own principles and let national pride take precedence over your distaste for corruption. yes it is hurtful that it is the government of another country that is bringing this suit, but if you truly care about weeding out corruption from your govt, why don't you stand with bharara?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:indians and SUCHers of indian origin who whine here day in and day out about corruption of indian politicians should be ashamed of themselves. you whine, yet you do not stand by your own principles and let national pride take precedence over your distaste for corruption. yes it is hurtful that it is the government of another country that is bringing this suit, but if you truly care about weeding out corruption from your govt, why don't you stand with bharara?

indophile wrote:The Marshals Service could simply deny or own up the strip search on her. Case closed. Otherwise, the charge will be hanging out there and hurt feelings continue to simmer despite John Kerry's "expression of regret."

confuzzled dude wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:indians and SUCHers of indian origin who whine here day in and day out about corruption of indian politicians should be ashamed of themselves. you whine, yet you do not stand by your own principles and let national pride take precedence over your distaste for corruption. yes it is hurtful that it is the government of another country that is bringing this suit, but if you truly care about weeding out corruption from your govt, why don't you stand with bharara?

The so called victim also lied to the consulate when she said she was getting paid $9.75/hour or whatever that minimum wage was, she knew that she will be paid about Rs. 30k/month, nobody was holding a gun to her head to lie to the visa officer. There is legal aspect and there is moral aspect, the maid is as morally bankrupt as the woman hired her and legally as culpable yet DoS gave her preferential treatment. Not sure whether the maid would've been given the same treatment had Khobrogade been an ordinary person like you and me.

Propagandhi711 wrote:
saar, it's pretty common for DAs to cut deals with some perpetrating a so-called "lesser offense" in order to convict someone perpetrating a larger crime (in their eyes, not yours). it's based on the theory that you cant always have priests and nuns as state witnesses.

more interesting is your (and other desis) continued defense of corruption & excuses you give for various corrupt individuals and parties. says volumes infact.

confuzzled dude wrote:Also, is it a standard practice to give the victim & their family immigrant visas? Did they apply these rules to all those H1-B victims.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:
saar, it's pretty common for DAs to cut deals with some perpetrating a so-called "lesser offense" in order to convict someone perpetrating a larger crime (in their eyes, not yours). it's based on the theory that you cant always have priests and nuns as state witnesses.

more interesting is your (and other desis) continued defense of corruption & excuses you give for various corrupt individuals and parties. says volumes infact.

Who is defending who? I was only questioning the motives & double standards of US Attorney. Don't try so hard clinging to that self-appointed pedestal of yours, you may risk falling of and injuring, make an argument if you can without resorting to personal attacks.

goodcitizn wrote:
5. Is calling a spade a spade so politically incorrect for Indians?

truthbetold wrote:Bharara and max are full.of it.  every one including toddlers of devyani know she broke law and is lying through her teeth.
the question has nothing to do with the crime or the impact on sangeetha's family.
international diplomacy is way above these normal daily actions.this is a minimal negative impact incident and a sensible prosecutor would find outside public vuewmethods to resolve these cases.
despite India being a dump, it is a major country in the world. some overzealius self advancing prosecutor cannot set us relations with India. there were no big human issues involved in this case.

peace_lover wrote:My dear NRI brothers and sisters, pliss to read this article. It shows the double standards of U.S and how they deal with BIG countries.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1131218/jsp/opinion/story_17690205.jsp#.UrMdHPQW2Gc

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

peace_lover wrote:My dear NRI brothers and sisters, pliss to read this article. It shows the double standards of U.S and how they deal with BIG countries.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1131218/jsp/opinion/story_17690205.jsp#.UrMdHPQW2Gc

I already stated that with the Spineless Indian Government and people India is not feared even by Boputhatswana.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

peace_lover wrote:My dear NRI brothers and sisters, pliss to read this article. It shows the double standards of U.S and how they deal with BIG countries.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1131218/jsp/opinion/story_17690205.jsp#.UrMdHPQW2Gc

I already stated that with the Spineless Indian Government and people India is not feared even by Boputhatswana.

Hellsangel wrote:

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.

Preet Bharara wrote: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.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:we can have the conversations about american double standards etc. but why are you (the people who support the indian govt on this issue) opposed to bharara's actions, when you have yourself in the past whined about the indian govt's corruption? why are you not able to separate in your minds the corruption of the indian official from the hypocrisy of the american govt? clearly national pride is more important to you than your own professed principles.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:we can have the conversations about american double standards etc. but why are you (the people who support the indian govt on this issue) opposed to bharara's actions, when you have yourself in the past whined about the indian govt's corruption? why are you not able to separate in your minds the corruption of the indian official from the hypocrisy of the american govt? clearly national pride is more important to you than your own professed principles.

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:we can have the conversations about american double standards etc. but why are you (the people who support the indian govt on this issue) opposed to bharara's actions, when you have yourself in the past whined about the indian govt's corruption? why are you not able to separate in your minds the corruption of the indian official from the hypocrisy of the american govt? clearly national pride is more important to you than your own professed principles.

this kind of 'corruption' is indulged in by thousands of diplomats in the US as Tharoor pointed out so why single out Devyani? Would anyone dare to take similar action against a Chinese diplomat?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:we can have the conversations about american double standards etc. but why are you (the people who support the indian govt on this issue) opposed to bharara's actions, when you have yourself in the past whined about the indian govt's corruption? why are you not able to separate in your minds the corruption of the indian official from the hypocrisy of the american govt? clearly national pride is more important to you than your own professed principles.

this kind of 'corruption' is indulged in by thousands of diplomats in the US as Tharoor pointed out so why single out Devyani? Would anyone dare to take similar action against a Chinese diplomat?

has a maid employed by the chinese consulate or by a chinese diplomat complained? i understand that this entire incident could have been worked by the maid in question to take advantage of the system. however, it is still khobragade who signed the contract. if she is not able to afford a maid at that salary, then don't employ one. millions of us in the US do without one.

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:we can have the conversations about american double standards etc. but why are you (the people who support the indian govt on this issue) opposed to bharara's actions, when you have yourself in the past whined about the indian govt's corruption? why are you not able to separate in your minds the corruption of the indian official from the hypocrisy of the american govt? clearly national pride is more important to you than your own professed principles.

this kind of 'corruption' is indulged in by thousands of diplomats in the US as Tharoor pointed out so why single out Devyani? Would anyone dare to take similar action against a Chinese diplomat?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:you are missing the point. the maid brought in a complaint to bharara's office. he is duty bound to investigate it. there is no choice in the matter.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
has a maid employed by the chinese consulate or by a chinese diplomat complained?

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:you are missing the point. the maid brought in a complaint to bharara's office. he is duty bound to investigate it. there is no choice in the matter.

would he have taken similar action if it would have been a chinese maid complaining against a female chinese diplomat?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Brigadier HK (Retd) wrote:how would americans feel if their diplomats here were cavity searched for weapons of mass destruction? put them on trial here for war crimes and crimes against humanity! bloody hypocrites.

(a) in her original post, she did NOT have diplomatic immunity.
(b) following from (a), she was arrested and treated like anyone else who is arrested by the US marshall's office.

they strip search arrestees because they want to make sure they are not carrying concealed drugs or weapons. i think bharara's letter is quite persuasive.  speculations about chinese diplomats and what they pay their maids is irrelevant (not you but uppili in an earlier post). maids employed by chinese diplomats have not complained. if they do, they will be investigated.

i am interested in learning (bharara hints at this in his letter) what deviltry the indian government has been up to in harassing and threatening the maid and her family.

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:you are missing the point. the maid brought in a complaint to bharara's office. he is duty bound to investigate it. there is no choice in the matter.

would he have taken similar action if it would have been a chinese maid complaining against a female chinese diplomat?

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:you are missing the point. the maid brought in a complaint to bharara's office. he is duty bound to investigate it. there is no choice in the matter.

would he have taken similar action if it would have been a chinese maid complaining against a female chinese diplomat?

Furthermore, has he not subverted the indian legal and judicial system by extraditing the maid's husband to the US who was facing legal proceedings in an Indian court? Now every other nation will start showing the middle finger to Indian courts. People facing legal proceedings in indian courts can simply be extradited to another country.