Do you have adblock enabled?
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  
•       •       •

18668 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Mar 2014 at 1:56 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



109 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
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.
 
2014-03-13 03:01:14 PM  
TFA:  Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled Devyani Khobragade had diplomatic immunity at the time of her indictment on visa fraud and underpaying her housekeeper.

How cute -- reading the order -- she was given a position by India on the 8th that gave her diplomatic immunity.  The indictment came on the 9th.  She didn't have diplomatic immunity when she was arrested, nor did she have it when committing the crimes.

Missed it by *that* much.
 
gja
2014-03-13 03:01:55 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.


Spoken as a person who has not managed to read and comprehend how the police truly behave and how the system is rigged for them and theirs.
 
2014-03-13 03:01:59 PM  
"This is the happiest moment of our lives. I have always maintained that this entire issue was a lie".

Yeah, but the judge just ruled that you had diplomatic immunity, not that you aren't guilty of all of these crimes.
 
2014-03-13 03:12:37 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.


Actually... In New York, it is illegal to resist arrest with violence, even if the arrest is illegal.  Someone cited that once and I'm having trouble finding it.

http://www.copblock.org/6952/a-person-cannot-resist-with-violence-an -u nlawful-arrest/

This one says the State Attorney's office said that.  Having trouble finding the law.

However,  http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm seems to suggest court rulings that deadly force is authorized to resist unlawful arrest.

So I dunno.
 
2014-03-13 03:13:01 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.



FTFY.

So you really want a system in which, say, Russia can arrest a US diplomat for "gay propaganda" or Saudi Arabia can arrest a diplomat for "insulting the name of the prophet" and so on?
 
2014-03-13 03:14:12 PM  

ReverendJynxed: Oooh shifting goal-posts. Haven't seen that in a while on fark.


I'd contend that it's shifting goalposts. I said you're allowed to stop a police officer from doing something outside their legal authority, to me, not opening a door when they demand it of you fits that bill. True, using physical force also fits that bill, and is unacceptable, but my original statement didn't say you could use any conceivable means of stopping them. But fine, I may have been too broad in my original statement. The point that there is a vast difference between what the police are capable of doing in this country and what they are allowed to do in this country still stands.

Just because they do do it doesn't mean that it's okay by the rules.

gja: Spoken as a person who has not managed to read and comprehend how the police truly behave and how the system is rigged for them and theirs.


Like I said just because they do do it doesn't mean that it's okay by the rules.
 
2014-03-13 03:15:03 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.


Let us know how that goes.
 
2014-03-13 03:16:23 PM  
"This is the happiest moment of our lives. I have always maintained that this entire issue was a lie. "

LOL right... because charges being dropped due to diplomatic immunity somehow means the crime didnt happen, and that it "was a lie".
 
2014-03-13 03:17:01 PM  

lemortede: 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.


Because it's the law of the land?
 
2014-03-13 03:22:07 PM  

lemortede: 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.


Ok, cool. We'll have one minimum wage for American citizens, and another, rock bottom one for foreigners working in this country, since you know, they come from shiatholes anyway. I'm sure there will be no problems or abuses stemming from this system, and the American lower classes won't complain about their labor being undercut at all.

How about this? If the Indian government official wasn't being paid enough as a diplomat to hire a maid in the US, maybe she could....I dunno, clean her own apartment?
 
2014-03-13 03:22:11 PM  

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


thank you for getting this thread back on track!

/insert naan joke
 
2014-03-13 03:24:18 PM  
US: You can't do that here. GTFO.
Khobragade: OK!

Still comes off as a small win for the US.
 
2014-03-13 03:27:44 PM  

Pincy: 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.

Let us know how that goes.


My guess is 'not well'
"And your honor, that's when I Roshamboed the officer for asking for a *2nd* form of ID"
 
2014-03-13 03:28:30 PM  

Barricaded Gunman: 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.


I guess you can find happiness in slavery
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-03-13 03:30:15 PM  
The law here says you can resist excessive force by police. An illegal arrest on its own does not excuse resistance. Excessive force making a legal arrest does. I believe this to be the standard rule in America.

There was a case out of Georgia where the court ruled reasonable but mistaken belief that the person breaking in was there illegally did not excuse shooting a police officer making a lawful entry. The defendant pleaded guilty to get a life sentence instead of death.
 
2014-03-13 03:34:15 PM  
Apparently she did not curry much favor while here.
 
2014-03-13 03:35:49 PM  

MythDragon: that's when I Roshamboed the officer


que?

fr.geneawiki.com
 
2014-03-13 03:36:51 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.


We just need your go ahead Internet Bosley, we can have them all liquidated at your signal.  Was that a nod?

Stop stretching your neck in a circular motion, it's farking everything up.
 
2014-03-13 03:37:58 PM  
Was reading that this case and that the former nanny is suing for the $10000 she would have received based on employment contract issued to State Department for her visa, which is very different from the 30000 rupees ($490) she was offered per month in a second contract.
If the Indian government has no problem with their US based employees paying Indian staff a nonstandard wage, then would the stick up for H1B employees being paid based on their domestic rate?
 
2014-03-13 03:42:34 PM  

All2morrowsparTs: 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.


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.



Whoa- calm down there Hitler.
 
2014-03-13 03:43:18 PM  
Lots of legal experts in this thread.
You are "legally" allowed to do only what the future judge and/or jury agrees you were legally allowed to do.
Want to resist the cops?  You take the chance that some judge isn't going to agree with you and you will suffer the consequences.
 
2014-03-13 03:45:41 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.


"It's better to have them inside the wigwam, pissing out, than outside the wigwam, pissing in."

paraphrased from LBJ, I think.
 
2014-03-13 04:00:58 PM  

Need_MindBleach: lemortede: 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.

Ok, cool. We'll have one minimum wage for American citizens, and another, rock bottom one for foreigners working in this country, since you know, they come from shiatholes anyway. I'm sure there will be no problems or abuses stemming from this system, and the American lower classes won't complain about their labor being undercut at all.

How about this? If the Indian government official wasn't being paid enough as a diplomat to hire a maid in the US, maybe she could....I dunno, clean her own apartment?


Have you even been out of the US.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the wealth gap in India is obscene, but is it really our place to impose anything?
The mentality that we have here in the US is astounding.
"Oh, we think it should be that way so the whole world should do it that way too."
 
2014-03-13 04:02:06 PM  
Isn't it funny how the scummy people of earth are also religious?
 
2014-03-13 04:07:28 PM  
Diplomatic Immunity?

i1082.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-13 04:13:15 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.


In the State of Indiana, if the the police breach your property without warrant or just cause, you can legally shoot their sorry ass. It was the first State to introduce such a law.

+1 for Indiana
 
2014-03-13 04:15:35 PM  
Sorry lady:

Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled Devyani Khobragade had diplomatic immunity at the time of her indictment on visa fraud and underpaying her housekeeper.

and

"This is the happiest moment of our lives. I have always maintained that this entire issue was a lie."

Are NOT the same thing. At all. The judge didn't rule that your case was without merit, didn't throw out the evidence, etc. It was just decided that you had immunity. This doesn't mean that ANYTHING was a "lie".
 
2014-03-13 04:19:16 PM  
"no dear, we do not have diplomatic immunity"

encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
 
2014-03-13 04:20:40 PM  

lemortede: Need_MindBleach: lemortede: 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.

Ok, cool. We'll have one minimum wage for American citizens, and another, rock bottom one for foreigners working in this country, since you know, they come from shiatholes anyway. I'm sure there will be no problems or abuses stemming from this system, and the American lower classes won't complain about their labor being undercut at all.

How about this? If the Indian government official wasn't being paid enough as a diplomat to hire a maid in the US, maybe she could....I dunno, clean her own apartment?

Have you even been out of the US.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the wealth gap in India is obscene, but is it really our place to impose anything?
The mentality that we have here in the US is astounding.
"Oh, we think it should be that way so the whole world should do it that way too."


You understand that you are defending SLAVERY,right?
 
2014-03-13 04:27:46 PM  
cdn-media.hollywood.com
 
2014-03-13 04:42:23 PM  
i2.cdn.turner.com

I'd probably find some sort of reason to strip search her also.

India has a right to be pissed off about this.
 
2014-03-13 04:54:39 PM  
Still guilty of being subhuman scum from a backward, barbaric country. Thanks for once again demonstrating to the world exactly what you stand for, India.
 
2014-03-13 04:56:06 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I'd probably find some sort of reason to strip search her also.

India has a right to be pissed off about this.


Why?

She was arrested and sent to jail.

Everybody arrested and sent to jail is strip searched to make sure they aren't bringing in drugs or weapons.

She did in fact commit a crime that was not related to her official duties and did not have diplomatic immunity at the time of her arrest (but her government gave it to her before she could be indicted).
 
gja
2014-03-13 05:04:16 PM  

phoxxy: 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.

In the State of Indiana, if the the police breach your property without warrant or just cause, you can legally shoot their sorry ass. It was the first State to introduce such a law.

+1 for Indiana


But, then you have to LIVE in Indiana.
Good luck with THAT.
'You're gonna need a bigger boat gun.'
 
2014-03-13 05:20:06 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


When did this happen?  Or are you not in America?
 
2014-03-13 05:20:43 PM  

Mell of a Hess: 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.

"It's better to have them inside the wigwam, pissing out, than outside the wigwam, pissing in."

paraphrased from LBJ, I think.

L

eBron James said that?
 
2014-03-13 05:22:11 PM  

All2morrowsparTs: 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.


Oo
 
2014-03-13 05:23:21 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I'd probably find some sort of reason to strip search her also.

India has a right to be pissed off about this.


Americans should be pissed at this.  She was put through nothing more then the average american citizen who was arrested that same day.
 
2014-03-13 05:35:58 PM  

shtychkn: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I'd probably find some sort of reason to strip search her also.

India has a right to be pissed off about this.

Americans should be pissed at this.  She was put through nothing more then the average american citizen who was arrested that same day.


No, we shouldn't. Hey, I'm all for preserving dignity as much as possible, but when you're processed into a detention center, they absolutely should strip-search you to find and remove weapons and contraband, but also so that everyone knows exactly what condition you were in when you got there.

Full disclosure: when I worked at a psych hospital, we did "strip searches" of new patients. Myself and another (male) staffer went with the kid (the unit was for 12-18 year old boys) to the bathroom, where the kid stripped off to his boxers. We went through their pockets, made note of any visible bruises or marks, handed back the clothing and left while they got dressed, no physical contact with the patient allowed (excepting exigent circumstances, obviously).

It's probably a different process for detention centers, but done for the same reasons.

Unless you can figure a different way to make that happen, while also explaining why a place ostensibly built to house the accused (and/or convicted) should not make absolutely sure that no one is bringing in weapons or contraband, it's the best of a bad situation.

// I suppose we could use the TSA's machines, but they're expensive (OMG coddling criminals!) and may expose detainees to radiation (OMG 8th Amendment!), so I'm fine with doing it "manually"
// "strip search" is different from cavity search (as I understand it)
 
2014-03-13 05:38:04 PM  

shtychkn: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I'd probably find some sort of reason to strip search her also.

India has a right to be pissed off about this.

Americans should be pissed at this.  She was put through nothing more then the average american citizen who was arrested that same day.


She was a flight risk. I am actually ok with her being held in prison. If you are going to prison a serach makes sense.
 
2014-03-13 05:57:03 PM  

Dr Dreidel: No, we shouldn't. Hey, I'm all for preserving dignity as much as possible, but when you're processed into a detention center, they absolutely should strip-search you to find and remove weapons and contraband, but also so that everyone knows exactly what condition you were in when you got there.


I think that, if we would just pass some laws banning weapons from jail facilities, the problem will pretty much solve itself and any sort of searches will be redundant and therefore unnecessary.
 
2014-03-13 06:01:19 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.


Wow, I didn't think it was possible to sound richer or whiter in print.
 
2014-03-13 06:40:46 PM  

BigNumber12: Dr Dreidel: No, we shouldn't. Hey, I'm all for preserving dignity as much as possible, but when you're processed into a detention center, they absolutely should strip-search you to find and remove weapons and contraband, but also so that everyone knows exactly what condition you were in when you got there.

I think that, if we would just pass some laws banning weapons from jail facilities, the problem will pretty much solve itself and any sort of searches will be redundant and therefore unnecessary.


I think you're overthinking the problem.  We just just pass a law banning people from breaking laws, and then we won't need jails at all.
 
2014-03-13 06:44:42 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.

Let us know how that works out for you.
 
2014-03-13 06:54:16 PM  

toraque: I think you're overthinking


Sounds like you know me.
 
2014-03-13 07:09:30 PM  

Fano: lemortede: Need_MindBleach: lemortede: 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.

Ok, cool. We'll have one minimum wage for American citizens, and another, rock bottom one for foreigners working in this country, since you know, they come from shiatholes anyway. I'm sure there will be no problems or abuses stemming from this system, and the American lower classes won't complain about their labor being undercut at all.

How about this? If the Indian government official wasn't being paid enough as a diplomat to hire a maid in the US, maybe she could....I dunno, clean her own apartment?

Have you even been out of the US.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the wealth gap in India is obscene, but is it really our place to impose anything?
The mentality that we have here in the US is astounding.
"Oh, we think it should be that way so the whole world should do it that way too."

You understand that you are defending SLAVERY,right?


I don't know that I would go so far as to call it slavery. There is a definate cost of living difference between the US and Inida.
Most of us could live like kings on our salaries there. Does that make us bad? We leverage that purchasing power quite a bit.....
The person got a wage, we would consider it too low for the US.
In India the wage is average or above....
Why should our social economic market and cost of living be imposed on everyone in the world? It doesn't cost the same to live there.
You are imposing first world standards and your cost of living expectations on what is literally third world life styles in much of the country.
Again, you are complaining about things from a first world perspective. Odds are this person lost their job because of this.
Way to go.
 
2014-03-13 07:19:22 PM  

lemortede: I don't know that I would go so far as to call it slavery. There is a definate cost of living difference between the US and Inida.
Most of us could live like kings on our salaries there. Does that make us bad? We leverage that purchasing power quite a bit.....
The person got a wage, we would consider it too low for the US.
In India the wage is average or above....
Why should our social economic market and cost of living be imposed on everyone in the world? It doesn't cost the same to live there.
You are imposing first world standards and your cost of living expectations on what is literally third world life styles in much of the country.
Again, you are complaining about things from a first world perspective. Odds are this person lost their job because of this.
Way to go.


The maid was living and working in the US.
 
2014-03-13 07:24:27 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.


Hahahaha...FALE.
 
2014-03-13 07:26:37 PM  

gja: phoxxy: 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.

In the State of Indiana, if the the police breach your property without warrant or just cause, you can legally shoot their sorry ass. It was the first State to introduce such a law.

+1 for Indiana

But, then you have to LIVE in Indiana.
Good luck with THAT.
'You're gonna need a bigger boat gun.'


It's not that bad. It could be worse.... much, much worse.

Don't judge me. I'm trying to look on the bright side of things...
 
2014-03-13 07:27:33 PM  

lemortede: Fano: lemortede: Need_MindBleach: lemortede: 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.

Ok, cool. We'll have one minimum wage for American citizens, and another, rock bottom one for foreigners working in this country, since you know, they come from shiatholes anyway. I'm sure there will be no problems or abuses stemming from this system, and the American lower classes won't complain about their labor being undercut at all.

How about this? If the Indian government official wasn't being paid enough as a diplomat to hire a maid in the US, maybe she could....I dunno, clean her own apartment?

Have you even been out of the US.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the wealth gap in India is obscene, but is it really our place to impose anything?
The mentality that we have here in the US is astounding.
"Oh, we think it should be that way so the whole world should do it that way too."

You understand that you are defending SLAVERY,right?

I don't know that I would go so far as to call it slavery. There is a definate cost of living difference between the US and Inida.
Most of us could live like kings on our salaries there. Does that make us bad? We leverage that purchasing power quite a bit.....
The person got a wage, we would consider it too low for the US.
In India the wage is average or above....
Why should our social economic market and cost of living be imposed on everyone in the world? It doesn't cost the same to live there.
You are imposing first world standards and your cost of living expectations on what is literally third world life styles in much of the country.
Again, you are complaining about things from a first world perspective. Odds are this person lost their j ...


Yes, the maid DID lose her job.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/US-agreed-to-deport-Devyani -K hobragades-maid-before-changing-tack/articleshow/28449975.cms

http://www.voanews.com/content/court-paper-show-abuse-of-maid-by-Ind ia n-diplomat/1827442.html

And I have the perspective of my wife, from Pondicherry.
 
2014-03-13 07:52:38 PM  

liam76: shtychkn: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I'd probably find some sort of reason to strip search her also.

India has a right to be pissed off about this.

Americans should be pissed at this.  She was put through nothing more then the average american citizen who was arrested that same day.

She was a flight risk. I am actually ok with her being held in prison. If you are going to prison a serach makes sense.


I disagree. Keep temp people in a sep. location from those that are there for years. Then no need to rape those there for the weekend.
 
2014-03-13 08:00:57 PM  

Dr Dreidel: shtychkn: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I'd probably find some sort of reason to strip search her also.

India has a right to be pissed off about this.

Americans should be pissed at this.  She was put through nothing more then the average american citizen who was arrested that same day.

No, we shouldn't. Hey, I'm all for preserving dignity as much as possible, but when you're processed into a detention center, they absolutely should strip-search you to find and remove weapons and contraband, but also so that everyone knows exactly what condition you were in when you got there.

Full disclosure: when I worked at a psych hospital, we did "strip searches" of new patients. Myself and another (male) staffer went with the kid (the unit was for 12-18 year old boys) to the bathroom, where the kid stripped off to his boxers. We went through their pockets, made note of any visible bruises or marks, handed back the clothing and left while they got dressed, no physical contact with the patient allowed (excepting exigent circumstances, obviously).

It's probably a different process for detention centers, but done for the same reasons.

Unless you can figure a different way to make that happen, while also explaining why a place ostensibly built to house the accused (and/or convicted) should not make absolutely sure that no one is bringing in weapons or contraband, it's the best of a bad situation.

// I suppose we could use the TSA's machines, but they're expensive (OMG coddling criminals!) and may expose detainees to radiation (OMG 8th Amendment!), so I'm fine with doing it "manually"
// "strip search" is different from cavity search (as I understand it)


I'm against strip searching people accused of a crime. Keep them separated from people convicted of crimes.
 
2014-03-13 08:06:52 PM  

shtychkn: Dr Dreidel: shtychkn: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I'd probably find some sort of reason to strip search her also.

India has a right to be pissed off about this.

Americans should be pissed at this.  She was put through nothing more then the average american citizen who was arrested that same day.

No, we shouldn't. Hey, I'm all for preserving dignity as much as possible, but when you're processed into a detention center, they absolutely should strip-search you to find and remove weapons and contraband, but also so that everyone knows exactly what condition you were in when you got there.

Full disclosure: when I worked at a psych hospital, we did "strip searches" of new patients. Myself and another (male) staffer went with the kid (the unit was for 12-18 year old boys) to the bathroom, where the kid stripped off to his boxers. We went through their pockets, made note of any visible bruises or marks, handed back the clothing and left while they got dressed, no physical contact with the patient allowed (excepting exigent circumstances, obviously).

It's probably a different process for detention centers, but done for the same reasons.

Unless you can figure a different way to make that happen, while also explaining why a place ostensibly built to house the accused (and/or convicted) should not make absolutely sure that no one is bringing in weapons or contraband, it's the best of a bad situation.

// I suppose we could use the TSA's machines, but they're expensive (OMG coddling criminals!) and may expose detainees to radiation (OMG 8th Amendment!), so I'm fine with doing it "manually"
// "strip search" is different from cavity search (as I understand it)

I'm against strip searching people accused of a crime. Keep them separated from people convicted of crimes.


Oo
 
2014-03-13 09:04:56 PM  
I hope they PNG her ass. She can stay in her polluted shiathole of a country.
 
gja
2014-03-13 10:06:58 PM  

phoxxy: gja: phoxxy: 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.

In the State of Indiana, if the the police breach your property without warrant or just cause, you can legally shoot their sorry ass. It was the first State to introduce such a law.

+1 for Indiana

But, then you have to LIVE in Indiana.
Good luck with THAT.
'You're gonna need a bigger boat gun.'

It's not that bad. It could be worse.... much, much worse.

Don't judge me. I'm trying to look on the bright side of things...



I judge no fellow human. One of my rules. Another rule is I never attack another persons place of living/residence (poor form).
Only ever in jest do I take slight jabs at that.

Fair warning, long-damned post follows:
CSB/
I was in Indiana a last year. Had some work in Terre Haute. I always 'go native when traveling so no chain eateries for me.
Drove to have dinner at a local place (Major Restaurant<thats the name, East African/Ethiopian food, yum>).
Got off the main route, foolishly followed the GPS.
Saw literal blocks of houses where more were boarded up than occupied. This was now near 9PM.
Saw a 2.5-3 year old kid in diapers running around not 15 feet from road. Nobody anywhere near to stop this child from 'going mobile'.
The look of that area is one of 'those' images I will take to my grave, and if god turns up I will be certain to start some shiat with god over that.
I knew I was not in a happy area. I still have a sad from that. Maybe always will. My heart breaks for others that hit times that tough.
Second part was in Gary. Holy up-jumped-jesus-on-a-plutoinum-powered-pogostick! Never have I seen such blight.
/CSB
 
2014-03-13 10:45:50 PM  

gja: Terre Haute ... Gary


Gary's the armpit of Indiana with Terre Haute a close second, in my opinion.  You couldn't have gone to a worse place either time.

Gary's one of those you see from the highway and keep going to your next destination (usually Chicago). There's no real direct route to Terre Haute from the rest of the state... and for good reason, in my opinion.
 
2014-03-13 11:47:35 PM  

djwebb1127: .

Hahahaha...FALE.


Hahahaha ... FAIL.
 
2014-03-14 09:35:13 AM  

myrrh: djwebb1127: .

Hahahaha...FALE.

Hahahaha ... FAIL.


notsureifserious.jpg
 
2014-03-14 10:12:02 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.


This is an example of being right might also mean being dead.  If a burglar breaks into your home, you probably will be able to maintain your rights and shoot the intruder without repercussion -legal or otherwise.  But if you shoot a cop executing an unlawful entry into your home the odds do not favor your rights over his protections.  Furthermore, outside of flat out killing the intruding cop, the homeowner has zero recourse.  You certainly arent going to talk the cop out of it, or get 911 to help you.  You would have to tolerate the loss of rights and take it to court.

BUT what you said isnt technically wrong.
 
Displayed 109 of 109 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report