If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC-US)   Whoops, I guess she had diplomatic immunity after all   (bbc.com) divider line 109
    More: Followup, visa fraud, diplomats  
•       •       •

18598 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Mar 2014 at 1:56 PM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



109 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-13 01:15:38 PM
This link should explain it all in a bit more detail:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ubliNxy9tc
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-03-13 01:27:35 PM
Suits against somebody with diplomatic immunity can not be maintained until after immunity is lost. She got temporary immunity, for one day, as a "counselor" to the UN. That day was enough to have charges temporarily dropped. She can be re-indicted now that she does not have immunity.

I am tempted to expel the UN as too much trouble, but I imagine American intelligence agencies like having all those people under surveillance.
 
2014-03-13 01:28:19 PM
My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.
 
2014-03-13 01:38:59 PM

AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.


This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.
 
2014-03-13 01:50:19 PM
Just like Dr. Doom.
 
2014-03-13 01:59:24 PM
Pfft...  The whole diplomatic immunity thing is stupid.  If you do something that is illegal, you should be held accountable for it.

I have nothing more intelligent to add.
 
2014-03-13 02:00:23 PM
KHOBRA!!!!!111!!
 
2014-03-13 02:00:24 PM
She looks just like a manager where I worked.  What a lunatic biatch.
 
2014-03-13 02:00:51 PM

nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.


Police perform illegal searches all the time and get away with it despite swearing to uphold the Constitution - IV Amendment be damned.
 
2014-03-13 02:02:20 PM

nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.


Really? maybe in fantasy land but here in realityville, good farkin luck
 
2014-03-13 02:03:14 PM
i184.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-13 02:03:16 PM
You know who else had diplomatic immunity?
www.historyguy.com
 
2014-03-13 02:05:06 PM

ZAZ: Suits against somebody with diplomatic immunity can not be maintained until after immunity is lost. She got temporary immunity, for one day, as a "counselor" to the UN. That day was enough to have charges temporarily dropped. She can be re-indicted now that she does not have immunity.

I am tempted to expel the UN as too much trouble, but I imagine American intelligence agencies like having all those people under surveillance.


the U.N. didn't grant her the immunity... the U.S. state department colluded with the Indian foreign ministry and used the U.N. as a cover to do what they wanted. So outrage here should be based on whether you like State more than the NY prosecutor's office on this issue. But clearly, under Obama, State showed weakness by giving into India's stupidity on this issue and emboldened Putin to take over Crimea.
 
2014-03-13 02:05:43 PM

EdNortonsTwin: nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.

Police perform illegal searches all the time and get away with it despite swearing to uphold the Constitution - IV Amendment be damned.


Politicians don't do very well with the Constitution either. Don't like a law? Just farkin' ignore it.

/illegal aliens ftw.
 
2014-03-13 02:06:17 PM

EdNortonsTwin: Police perform illegal searches all the time and get away with it despite swearing to uphold the Constitution - IV Amendment be damned.


And people do home invasions and evade prosecution, too. The point is irrelevant. They are not allowed to do it, and stopping them is not illegal.
 
2014-03-13 02:06:24 PM

nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.


That's the letter of the law.  The practice, however, is WILDLY different.  I don't recommend a simple citizen use force against a governmental agent with qualified immunity, immediate access to superior weaponry, quick access to reinforcements (with similar qualified immunity), and a massive superiority complex.
 
2014-03-13 02:06:40 PM

nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.


This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."


i43.tinypic.com
 
2014-03-13 02:07:25 PM

nmrsnr: EdNortonsTwin: Police perform illegal searches all the time and get away with it despite swearing to uphold the Constitution - IV Amendment be damned.

And people do home invasions and evade prosecution, too. The point is irrelevant. They are not allowed to do it, and stopping them is not illegal.


How do you intend to stop them?
 
2014-03-13 02:08:30 PM

ZAZ: I am tempted to expel the UN as too much trouble, but I imagine American intelligence agencies like having all those people under surveillance.


Bingo.

All those tinpot asshats coming to Manhattan for booze and hookers? Surveillance gold.
 
2014-03-13 02:09:16 PM

nmrsnr: Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority


No you aren't.
 
2014-03-13 02:10:14 PM
she didn't have diplomatic immunity when she allegedly committed the crime or when she was arrested.

India changed her job position immediately (like an hour before) her indictment to one that had diplomatic immunity. She subsequently left the country.

Of course, now the US government is going to declare her persona non grata and make it really difficult (if not impossible) for her to enter the US where her american husband and children are citizens. so sucks to be her i suppose.
 
2014-03-13 02:10:41 PM

Molavian: [i184.photobucket.com image 280x180]


www.screeninsults.com
 
2014-03-13 02:10:48 PM
So how is the maid doing?
 
2014-03-13 02:14:18 PM

rkiller1


You know who else had diplomatic immunity?



img3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-03-13 02:16:28 PM

nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.


The law against B&E doesn't physically stop people from breaking into your house...
 
2014-03-13 02:16:59 PM

Yellow Beard: Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.

Really?  here in realityville, good farkin luck


that's why I live in a nice area of town
 
2014-03-13 02:18:03 PM

liam76: nmrsnr: Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority

No you aren't.


If they come to your door and say "Police, let us in" you are legally allowed to say "not without a warrant" and refuse to open the door for them. That is legally stopping them from doing something outside the scope of their authority. I never said you can physically restrain them if they do enter, or open fire on them if they refuse to leave.
 
2014-03-13 02:18:16 PM

nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.


And get your ass kicked in the process.

or worse.
 
2014-03-13 02:19:31 PM

stonicus: The law against B&E doesn't physically stop people from breaking into your house...


Correct, but if someone came up to you and said "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards" would you say "yep, that's how it works alright" or would you say "we kind of have laws here that say you can't do that."
 
2014-03-13 02:21:12 PM

Nana's Vibrator: Molavian: [i184.photobucket.com image 280x180]

[www.screeninsults.com image 557x262]


i184.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-13 02:22:17 PM

Tax Boy: she didn't have diplomatic immunity when she allegedly committed the crime or when she was arrested.

India changed her job position immediately (like an hour before) her indictment to one that had diplomatic immunity. She subsequently left the country.

Of course, now the US government is going to declare her persona non grata and make it really difficult (if not impossible) for her to enter the US where her american husband and children are citizens. so sucks to be her i suppose.


I'm sure she's okay.  Good help is so hard to find these days, even in India
 
2014-03-13 02:27:31 PM
Well, she didn't, but we really want this whole thing to just go away, so we're basically pretending she does.
 
2014-03-13 02:27:56 PM

durbnpoisn: Pfft...  The whole diplomatic immunity thing is stupid.  If you do something that is illegal, you should be held accountable for it.

I have nothing more intelligent to add.


It is meant to protect diplomats from trumped up charges and avoid international incidents.
 
2014-03-13 02:29:32 PM

nmrsnr: liam76: nmrsnr: Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority
No you aren't.

If they come to your door and say "Police, let us in" you are legally allowed to say "not without a warrant" and refuse to open the door for them. That is legally stopping them from doing something outside the scope of their authority. I never said you can physically restrain them if they do enter, or open fire on them if they refuse to leave.


So you were wrong before.

You are legally allowed to say, "no". Physically resisting them is a crime itself, no matter how BS what they are trying to do is.
 
2014-03-13 02:31:19 PM

SDRR: nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.

And get your ass kicked in the process.

or worse.


The good news is, if you do get your ass kicked, you can win a large settlement from the department.
 
2014-03-13 02:32:39 PM
FTFA: "This is the happiest moment of our lives. I have always maintained that this entire issue was a lie. The work done by our foreign affairs ministry is admirable," Mr Khobragade told BBC Hindi.

You DO understand that your daughter wasn't acquitted of the crime she was accused of right? The "happiest moment of your life" is the day you were able to game the system to get your evil spawn off on a technicality?

Please remember that some filthy Americans got to stare at your precious daughter's junk. Nothing your foreign affairs ministry can do about that.
 
2014-03-13 02:33:39 PM

Fusilier: EdNortonsTwin: nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.

Police perform illegal searches all the time and get away with it despite swearing to uphold the Constitution - IV Amendment be damned.

Politicians don't do very well with the Constitution either. Don't like a law? Just farkin' ignore it.

/illegal aliens ftw.


And most Americans Jaywalk, cross against the lights blow through stop signs on their bikes, and speed on the freeways, lie to their mothers and cheat at solitaire. Almost all of that is illegal.
 
2014-03-13 02:34:12 PM

NobleHam: Well, she didn't, but we really want this whole thing to just go away, so we're basically pretending she does.


India: I can see where Russia is coming from over Ukraine..

USA: We will over look the slavery you snuck in.

India: But we don't want to really get involved.
 
2014-03-13 02:34:18 PM

Molavian: Nana's Vibrator: Molavian: [i184.photobucket.com image 280x180]

[www.screeninsults.com image 557x262]

[i184.photobucket.com image 300x179]


2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-03-13 02:35:09 PM
nmrsnr:
Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.


Yea... Good Luck with that!
 
2014-03-13 02:37:17 PM
"This is the happiest moment of our lives. I have always maintained that this entire issue was a lie."
Her being able to get away with it doesn't mean it didn't occur, stupid.
 
2014-03-13 02:41:16 PM

nmrsnr: liam76: nmrsnr: Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority

No you aren't.

If they come to your door and say "Police, let us in" you are legally allowed to say "not without a warrant" and refuse to open the door for them. That is legally stopping them from doing something outside the scope of their authority. I never said you can physically restrain them if they do enter, or open fire on them if they refuse to leave.


I can't find the article at the moment but a Farkers (I forget who) cousin tried that when the police came to his door without a warrant. They executed him in his hallway.
 
2014-03-13 02:49:25 PM
Evil won.

They're laughing, cheering and celebrating.

But post Die Hard film screenshots from 20 years ago if it makes you feel like better.
 
2014-03-13 02:49:34 PM

AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.


What makes you think you can sue them?
 
2014-03-13 02:52:49 PM
journalbd.com
I'd examine her diplomatic pouch
 
2014-03-13 02:55:58 PM

nmrsnr: liam76: nmrsnr: Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority

No you aren't.

If they come to your door and say "Police, let us in" you are legally allowed to say "not without a warrant" and refuse to open the door for them. That is legally stopping them from doing something outside the scope of their authority. I never said you can physically restrain them if they do enter, or open fire on them if they refuse to leave.


Oooh shifting goal-posts. Haven't seen that in a while on fark.
 
2014-03-13 02:56:19 PM

nmrsnr: AverageAmericanGuy: My understanding is that the police in America can do anything they want and resisting them is illegal. The only recourse you have is to sue them after the fact.

This is just plain false. Why do people conflate capability with authority? It's like saying "my understanding is that in America people can break into your house, beat you up, and steal your stuff. The only recourse you have is to press charges against them afterwards."

Police can't do whatever they want, and you are legally allowed to stop them from doing anything outside the scope of their authority.


Indiana Supreme Court ruled otherwise a couple years ago. Citizens have no valid way to refuse illegal orders from LEOs there, the only remedy is a lawsuit after the fact.

This was because someone assaulted someone else, it was reported, the person who reported it then refused to cooperate with police and the homeowner refused to let cops in to find the assaulter. The police went in anyway and arrested the guy. The homeowner was also arrested, even though she was in the right to refuse entry under Indiana law since nobody would identify the assailant to the cops on the scene and what was told to dispatchers didn't provide reason to search without a warrant.

Supreme Court ruled in favor of the police saying that illegal or unconstitutional orders had to be followed at the time given and nobody has the legal right to refuse to cooperate. If they do they can be arrested for obstruction and at that point lose their right to Sue.
 
2014-03-13 02:56:42 PM

jaytkay: [journalbd.com image 520x315]
I'd examine her diplomatic pouch


My eyes would be watering from the curry. You can have that little slice of evil.
 
2014-03-13 03:00:48 PM

All2morrowsparTs: durbnpoisn: Pfft...  The whole diplomatic immunity thing is stupid.  If you do something that is illegal, you should be held accountable for it.

I have nothing more intelligent to add.

It is meant to protect diplomats from trumped up charges and avoid international incidents.


^THIS^ It is easy to hear about the abuses, but imagine being a US diplomat in some foreign hellhole (and don't say we don't need diplomats there as these are often where we need them the most) you sure want diplomatic immunity against the whims of the local dictator
 
2014-03-13 03:00:56 PM
I honestly dont know why this was even an issue.
The worker was not an US citizen. Why in the world would we expect an Indian citizen to pay another Indian citizen US wages just because they are in the US working as an agent of their government.
Stupid. The cost of labor is so cheap over there the person was probably happy to have a freaking job.
 
Displayed 50 of 109 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report