Devyani Khobragade berates Preet Bharara
9 Jan 2014 12:50 AM GMT
Noting that the two sides had agreed not to make public the plea discussions, her lawyer Daniel Arshack gave a strong rejoinder to Mr Bharara who had written to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn stating that he had outlined reasonable parameters that could resolve the issue.
‘We can only think that the violation of that agreement is a distressingly calculated one,’ Mr Arshack said.
With the deadline for her indictment slated for 13 January, the diplomat had sought one-month extension, saying the ‘pressure of the impending’ date is interfering with the ability of the parties to have meaningful discussions. But her plea has been opposed by the prosecution.
India has been demanding the withdrawal of the case against Ms Khobragade and an apology from the US for the treatment meted out to the 39-year-old diplomat, including a strip search and detention with criminals after her arrest on 112 December.
India-born US prosecutor Preet Bharara’s office is required to file charges against the diplomat within 30 days of her arrest.
The US had issued a statement last month that it is proceeding with the prosecution of Ms Khobragade and has no intention of withdrawing the case.
At the time of her arrest, Ms Khobragade was Deputy Consul General in New York and was subsequently transferred to India’s Permanent Mission to the UN.
A 1999-batch IFS officer, Ms Khobragade was arrested on charges of making false declarations in a visa application for her domestic help Sangeeta Richard. She was released on a $250,000 bond.
India retaliated by downgrading privileges of a certain category of US diplomats among other steps last month.
Mr Bharara said his office has been receptive to continuing the plea discussions that have been taking place with the diplomat over the past several weeks.
He said his office has participated in ‘hours of discussion in the hope of negotiating a plea’ that could be entered in court before 13 January.
Mr Arshack voiced his displeasure with Mr Bharara giving details of the plea discussions in a letter he submitted to Netburn.
‘We are surprised and distressed that the prosecution has elected to publicly characterise the discussions that have taken place in the manner in which they have. Indeed, the agreed upon ground rules of the communications we have had to date were that no public characterisation of the discussions would be made.
‘We can only think that the violation of that agreement is a distressingly calculated one. It must be noted that we strongly disagree with their characterisation and we hope that the prosecution will not unilaterally take any further steps which will further polarise the situation,’ Mr Arshack said.
‘We can only think that the violation of that agreement is a distressingly calculated one,’ Mr Arshack said.
With the deadline for her indictment slated for 13 January, the diplomat had sought one-month extension, saying the ‘pressure of the impending’ date is interfering with the ability of the parties to have meaningful discussions. But her plea has been opposed by the prosecution.
India has been demanding the withdrawal of the case against Ms Khobragade and an apology from the US for the treatment meted out to the 39-year-old diplomat, including a strip search and detention with criminals after her arrest on 112 December.
India-born US prosecutor Preet Bharara’s office is required to file charges against the diplomat within 30 days of her arrest.
The US had issued a statement last month that it is proceeding with the prosecution of Ms Khobragade and has no intention of withdrawing the case.
At the time of her arrest, Ms Khobragade was Deputy Consul General in New York and was subsequently transferred to India’s Permanent Mission to the UN.
A 1999-batch IFS officer, Ms Khobragade was arrested on charges of making false declarations in a visa application for her domestic help Sangeeta Richard. She was released on a $250,000 bond.
India retaliated by downgrading privileges of a certain category of US diplomats among other steps last month.
Mr Bharara said his office has been receptive to continuing the plea discussions that have been taking place with the diplomat over the past several weeks.
He said his office has participated in ‘hours of discussion in the hope of negotiating a plea’ that could be entered in court before 13 January.
Mr Arshack voiced his displeasure with Mr Bharara giving details of the plea discussions in a letter he submitted to Netburn.
‘We are surprised and distressed that the prosecution has elected to publicly characterise the discussions that have taken place in the manner in which they have. Indeed, the agreed upon ground rules of the communications we have had to date were that no public characterisation of the discussions would be made.
‘We can only think that the violation of that agreement is a distressingly calculated one. It must be noted that we strongly disagree with their characterisation and we hope that the prosecution will not unilaterally take any further steps which will further polarise the situation,’ Mr Arshack said.
Next Story
