Desicritics Comments on Sabhnanis Convicted in Slavery Case

Comment by A.K.Rathor

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 02:37:30 EST

The Higher courts will definately turn doen the mansion confiscation order which is nothing but absurd. Allegation for the torture of maid is accepted in lower court. Lets see what the appeal brings to the couple. But certainly, its a lesson learnt for all those who have maids.

Comment by kerty

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:19:59 EST

Amrita. All the things that you mention are allegations and there is no independent proof except testimony of maids. The defendants have maintained that none of such things ever happened and they are appealing the ruling. In dealing with allegations like these, courts do often act as Kangaroo courts - activist court so as not to be seen condoning such acts and prefer to err on the side of alleged victims, giving victims the benefit of doubt. The reparation for slavery is not about plantations being turned over to progeny of slaves - the logic behind reparation is that system as a whole benefited from slave labor and society owes heirs of slaves some redress administered by state. In this case, there is no evidence that defendant's wealth was created by slavery of maids. Just because alleged crime took place in a mansion is not justification to confiscate the mansion. If the defendant had built their wealth due to practice of slavery or trafficking of illegals, it would be justifiable that wealth earned because of it be confiscated by state - and state in turn can use such funds to redress the parties that are wronged, or, in this case, to help homeland security fight illegal immigration. In case of drug busts, the assets of drug dealers are confiscated and reason is clear - that drug dealers have built their assets from drug trade - so state have right to take it away and use such assets to fund fight against drug trade - it is called reparation to society - for drugs costs a lot to society. There is no such compelling rationale to confiscate home of defendant here - unless court is trying to make a statement here that illegals do cost a lot to society and those who hire them have to bear the burden thru confiscation of their assets.

Comment by Lakshmikanth

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:29:33 EST

Erron: I am not saying there is VALID reason for Indians calling ALL indians as being what the Sabhnanis are :) I am saying i UNDERSTAND why he said that, because being an Indian i can see why its being said. I also mentioned WHY i consider it to be partly incorrect. Also I would stop at that point and dont go on and say "Look what the Indians did". Any other culture who has little understanding of the Indiann culture and is a bit xenophobic, can add a lot of Masala to it :) Like "Look what the indians did, they enslave people", "Look what the Indians did, they steal our job", "The indians are coming for the Jaguar and they are coming for our backs" This is the kind of shit that i am scared of.. because its the same slippery slope that leads to racist, xenophobic behaviour which if directed against say jews would be known better as anti semitisism. And I DID NOT MENTION ANYWHERE that ALL the current US/Brits people are racists etc. I mentioned it in a HISTORICAL context :) Which i still subscribe to. And unfortunately the people who are not colonialists are not on the top :) Thats why you have Iraq et al. I hope you understand where the "bagage come from" and how it dissapears :)

Comment by Erron

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:10:17 EST

You mean the Indians have 'valid' internal dynamics for their f*cked up behavior, but all Westerners are default slavers, racists, et al? You're sure carrying some baggage, dude.

Comment by Lakshmikanth

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:50:43 EST

Not too far, thats why i said I partly agree. Now let me tell you why your analogy is not accurate. I KNOW the indians and grew up having both good maids and bad maids. And I can see why he uses the term "BECAUSE" The ones who SHOUT (i.e. the Amru dudes), dont quite know the internal dynamics of why the Indians do what they do.

Comment by Erron

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:45:11 EST

Lakshmikanth, if 'they probably mistreated the servants BECAUSE they were Indian.', how far a streatch is it to say ""Oh look here comes the Indian. Do u know what they do"?

Comment by Lakshmikanth

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:31:42 EST

yes, the US did some stupid shit in its past (and present) but throwing stones when India still has child labor and treats dalits like lumps of dog shit is hardly useful. all countries have their social issues. SS: :) I have no prejudice.. i throw stones at everyone equally. What i am worried about is, people maximizing this news and spreading xenophobia about Indians... i.e. kids near an Indian home might start calling the women Cruella and shit like that. Or statements like "Oh look here comes the Indian. Do u know what they do" This is the same thing that causes the Romas to be treated like shit. Or how the Jews used to be treated for example. Saying that Brits were colonialists/racists at that point in history is not a generalization... because thats how a vast majority of them were and being race neutral is a very recent state of being. So is the case with, say, lynching the blacks... a lot of people in the US may have been against it but the majority were not. Evidenced by the fact that there was a market for postcards that had the pictures of lynching. Thats why I partly agree to Leds statement that they probably mistreated the servants BECAUSE they were Indian. But nowadays its largely not true. Coming to your understanding of India's social issues. While i partly agree to the treatment of dalits. I completely disagree that child labor is a social evil. Every country that is developed now used child labor. Every developing society uses child labor of some sorts. Amit Verma has a good article about it. Go read it. It might give you a refreshing perspective of the economics of child labor. Also here is one more excersize (suggested by Amit Verma and recommended by me) for the chest beaters about child labor: the rescue squads of the anti child labor NGOs will have some ID of the kids. After two years go check on these kids: you would see that most have returned to work and the ones who did not are leading a more miserable life. The NGOs who rescue the kids dont have the support infrastructure to get them to a different level. The simple reason being that we are overpopulated :) And the west being concerned about child labor: how about this proposal: Everytime we discover a child laborer, we ship that kid to the west. That can be the new form of charity, just like outsourcing is. I am sure if we ship of every kid that is working in India to the US. The US economy would be doomed, IF they do not use these kids for some revenue generation that is.

Comment by Amrita

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:29:40 EST

Kerty - uh, no, there is nothing subjective or highly personal about locking people up in cupboards, cutting them with knives, making them eat their own vomit and starving them. Find me a computer engineer whose firm does that to him and tell me if you think that compares to "treating him badly". Also, please don't use terms and concepts that you've heard about but don't understand. Reparations for slavery is no way comparable to the govt confiscating the Sabhnani mansion. People calling for reparation don't want former plantations to be turned over to them and the govt isn't planning on handing over the mansion to the maids either. This law was applied because a crime was carried out in this house. If they had been running a meth lab, it would have been the same.

Comment by kerty

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:22:12 EST

Erron The mansion of the family that held maids as slaves was confiscated. The mansion did not commit any crime, nor the wealth of the mansion was created by exploiting the maids as slaves - confiscation of mansion can only be construed as reparation for practicing slavery.

Comment by Erron

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:06:03 EST

How did we get to slavery reparations from criminal mistreatment?

Comment by kerty

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:03:51 EST

Indians were trafficked by British to many countries as indentured laborers and held there without any rights for generations. These nations have profited from such indentured slaves. Should India confiscate such nations?

Comment by kerty

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 12:55:22 EST

Its how one defines 'abuse' and 'torture' and these definitions can be highly personal and subjective, and therefor they can be used or applied so loosely and they can conjure up the worst scenario when such terms are used even when such may not be the case. Than there is an issue of evidence. Mere allegations can not be treated as evidence. You have allegations from 3 maids in this case and they are treated as clinching evidence. The millionaire family might have restricted the maids to use certain of their facilities like kitchen or restricted the access to their food - a privilege granted or withheld depending on how pleased or displeased they are with the maids. They might have been required to do certain physical or hazardous household tasks of their mansion. They might not have provided medical attention when maids might have needed them. Their employers are not their care-takers, and anything they do for the maid is a privilege, denial of which can not be called abuse. Lots of illegals work for peanuts - they might get paid flat monthly pay and if you divide it by 24/7, it would come out to be peanuts - one can say it is financial slavery, but I don't think Sabhnanis invented the economics of illegal house workers. Than there is an issue of punishment that fit the crime. Nothing justifies confiscation of homes that punish the innocents living in that home. That amounts to indicting whole family. One can withhold the freedoms of guilty persons, force them to do community service and pay back to society, force them to do their own house work by preventing them from hiring any house help at their residence, make them pay the cost of deporting the illegal maids. To define hiring of illegals as human trafficking minimizes the horrors of real human trafficking where humans are trafficked and held against their will. The illegals willingly come for economic opportunities and they submit to the available opportunities willingly. They would rather work like slaves than be deported. The homeland security treats them as criminals and impounds them like stray dogs - and that is real face of slavery and torture - what if UN or some country were to declare USA guilty and confiscate the land and assets of USA for that crime?

Comment by Amrita

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:58:07 EST

Kerty - SLIGHT difference dont you think between "treating badly" and "torturing"? And as a matter of fact, there was a ton of medical evidence and Litras, who is neither a maid nor an illegal but is incidentally a cancer patient whose medical insurance depends on the Sabhnanis staying in business, also said that she'd noticed signs of abuse. Also, H1 visa holders are not illegals.

Comment by kerty

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:39:06 EST

Lots of illegals are treated in America no better. I have heard lots of H1 visa people subjected to blackmail, their legal immigration documents held by their employers - the abuse may not be physical but more emotional and financial. What I find unconvincing is lack of clinching and collaborative evidence other than allegations from maids. It is not unusual for live-in maids to develop sense of resentment, sense of being used, being told to do certain unpleasant things, being made to do certain things against their will or moods - nobody likes being told - and house mistresses can be tough to please and be very demanding task masters. I also find the punishment here that does not fit the crime. Confiscation of their home is draconian. If some illegals accuse their bosses of abusive servitude, will they confiscate their corporation, and its assets? I think some form of punitive fines would be reasonable in such cases. But by confiscating the home of this family, the entire family including children are being punished - The idea that government can take away homes of families and deprive the children on any pretext is no less heinous than slavery. Lots of illegals work as maids and baby-sitters in America. I think this case is hyped to send chilling message to people who hire them as maids and servants. That all one has to do is to accuse them, and the mighty bosses can be brought to ground zero.

Comment by Amrita

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:08:13 EST

this just in: the Sabhnani home is now forfeit as it was the scene of the crime. I can't post the link for some reason but the report's at Newsday.

Comment by Amrita

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:07:34 EST

this just in: the Sabhnani home is now forfeit as it was the scene of the crime. http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzslav1219,0,6992578.story?coll=ny-arts-headlines

Comment by Amrita

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:05:26 EST

This just in: the Sabhnanis will now lose their home as it was the scene where the crime was commissioned.

Comment by Deepti Lamba

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:36:50 EST

Ledzius, next time you see a child servant call the cops.

Comment by Deepti Lamba

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:32:17 EST

With the booming economy and more alternate opportunities available for the poor things are changing. We cannot treat our 'help' like house elves anymore;)

Comment by Aaman

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:10:57 EST

And I didn't mean issues in the desi sense:)

Comment by Aaman

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:10:23 EST

As Woody Allen might say, we've all got issues, some of my issues have issues.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:59:03 EST

laks... listen... some indians are assholes and some americans are assholes... but what good are all these generalizations? yes, the US did some stupid shit in its past (and present) but throwing stones when India still has child labor and treats dalits like lumps of dog shit is hardly useful. all countries have their social issues. the problem here is not a societal one for either US or India. It is a story of one entirely disgusting family. maybe they picked up their ability to treat others like slaves in India. Could be. But not all Indians behave like that, so no use making sweeping generalizations. In the end this falls squarely on the heads of the effed up people who were sick enough to store humans under the stairs like old books.

Comment by Lakshmikanth

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:53:01 EST

Lezidius: Maybe the US Govt. learned their lesson after slavery :) OR maybe the mofo Brits learned theirs after being after ruthlessly causing 2 million indians to murder each other.. (They were also responsible for displacing an ENTIRE indigenous island population to make way for a US base in the indian ocean, the lasting legacy of a dying empire left by sticking its tongue into the next empire's butthole, which to this day continues to be lodged deep within the butthole :)) we had our heros (Ambedkar, the mao-ists) etc. Things are changing.. will take a while to change :) but i am sure we will get there :) That being said.. i partly agree with the rest of your comments that they did that BECAUSE they were Indian. The part of the rest of the comment that i find hard to agree to is due to the fact that i was brought up by a maid who was and still is treated as a member of my family. So NOT ALL Indians treat their maids as a piece of shit.

Comment by Ledzius

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:11:55 EST

"Money combined with arrogance does things to people" I think it also has to do with the fact that they happen to be Indians. Bonded servants are relatively common in India. I have come across many instances where young children are kept as maid slaves in wealthy households and are also physically abused and beaten up. While in India we tend to look the other way around, in the US people actually care for the rights of such people. That's the difference.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:09:31 EST

I am not sure that we need to see a xenophobic monster lurking in *every* corner... often news that involves people being smuggled or whathave you ends up in the world section. it is because of the victims and not the perps that it ends up in the world section. that being said, I am sure that now some people will generalize the behavior and say that indians are this or that, and well... there are stupid people everywhere...