"FREE VIKRAM BUDDHI"

BHARAT- BACHAO -ANDOLAN

"FREE VIKRAM BUDDHI"
PRESS CONFERENCE
THE PROCEEDINGS WILL BE ADDRESSED BY MR. B.K. SUBBARAO, THE FATHER OF VIKRAM BUDDHI.
VENUE: MARATHI PATRAKAR SANGH, AZAD MAIDAN, CST, MUMBAI.
DATE / TIME: 24th DECEMBER '09 (WEDNESDAY) / 3pm to 4pm
WE APPEAL TO INDIAN CITIZENS TO STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH VIKRAM & HIS FAMILY.

WE HAVE ALSO DECIDED TO WAGE A CONCERTED STRUGGLE TILL VIKRAM IS FREED FROM HIS AMERICAN CAPTORS.
FEROZE MITHIBORWALA, KISHORE JAGTAP, ASLAM GHAZI, VARSHA V V, VILAS GAIKWAD, SAYEED KHAN, ARIF KAPADIA, YAVAR ALI KAZI, MUNAWAR KHAN, SUDHIR DHAWLE, SHYAM SONAR, JAGDISH NAGARKAR, MULNIWASI MALA, JYOTI BADEKAR, GHAZALA AZAD, SHADAB SHAIKH, MUNAWAR AZAD & TITO EAPEN, IRFAN MULLA.
98208 97517 / 93245 14101

Introduction

Vikram Buddhi, an Indian Graduate Student of Purdue University at West Lafayette, Indiana State of United States has been placed in federal prosecution since April 2006. He continues to be in US Federal Prison at Chicago without a sentencing being pronounced so far.

Vikram was a National Science Talent Scholar during his school days in India.
Graduated in mathematics with M.Sc degree from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay, stood first in the class and received silver medal from IIT, Bombay.
Worked for a year at the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR), Bombay
Joined the mathematics department of Purdue University, in the year 1996.
At Purdue he received MS degree in mathematics and thereafter has been pursuing Ph.D degrees simultaneously in pure and applied mathematics.
His work in pure mathematics is in algebraic geometry and in applied mathematics the work is in the area of noninvasive techniques for cancer detection.
At Purdue University Vikram received two times Best Teaching Award from the Department of Mathematics.


Vikram’s father, Buddhi Kota Subbarao is former Indian Navy Captain with Ph.D from Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, in nuclear technology, and an advocate of Supreme Court of India. Vikram’s mother Smt.Buddhi Syamala is a science graduate and a former Secretary of Indian Women Scientists Association (IWSA).
Root Cause.
The root cause of the prosecution against Vikram Buddhi was a letter Vikram Buddhi wrote sometime prior to December 2005 to the then President of Purdue University Dr.Martin C. Jischke bringing to Dr. Jischke’s notice that an African American student Mr. Kendal Deas had been expelled from Purdue University for allegedly copying in an examination, but subsequently no action was taken against three non-African students who were similarly caught copying in examination. The administrators of Purdue University were annoyed at the ‘audacity’ of an Indian Graduate Student writing such a letter to the President of Purdue University.

The Indictment (Charge) is ill founded
The prosecution is supposed to be based on some Internet Messages on Yahoo Business Discussion Forum which appeared in December 2005 and January 2006 calling upon the people of Iraq to retaliate the perceived unjust Iraq war and to do tit-for-tat. But in the Indictment (Charge), there is not even a whisper about the Internet Messages. Thus the Indictment is arbitrary, ill founded and false.
Prosecution failed to establish that the Internet Messages were posted by Vikram Buddhi. Yahoo management merely informed the US Secret Service that the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses of Purdue University were used to post the Messages on the Internet. The person at Purdue University Mr. Scot Ksander who made crude guesses on the origin of those Internet Messages had admitted in the trial that he did not know the methods and means with which hacking of computer networks takes place. Please see pages 329 and 330 of Trial Transcript Volume II, June 26, 2007. The fact that Scot Ksander admitted to US Secret Service that the Address Resolution Protocol Table (ARP Table) was poisoned, strongly suggests that the computer network of Purdue University was hacked. Furthermore, it is well known there is a hacking history of Purdue Computer Networks.

One can see on Internet the details of one such hacking in the year 2004 at the internet sites http://lists.jammed.com/ISN/2004/10/0074.htmlhttp://seclists.org/isn/2004/Oct/0074.html

Admitted To Posting?
The initial publicity through media that Vikram Buddhi admitted to posting the Internet Messages proved to be false and without any foundation. During interrogation by US Secret Service in mid January 2006, along with others Vikram Buddhi was also interrogated and his written opinion on the Internet Messages was obtained. In that written opinion, Vikram only stated that it was a ‘political banter’ and a reflection of rivalry between Republicans and Democrats. There was no admission by Vikram in that written note. The US Secret Service admitted during cross examination in the jury trial that in the room where interrogation took place there was fully functioning audio and video equipment. The Secret Service could have easily resorted to audio/video recording of ‘admission’, if any, by Vikram. But no proof of ‘admission’ by Vikram was produced in the Court. Therefore, there was no ‘admission’ by Vikram Buddhi.

The case proceeded to jury trial only because the defendant Vikram Buddhi pleaded ‘not guilty’. There was no need for jury trial if Vikram ‘admitted.’

During jury trial, the Defense Attorney John E. Martin advised defendant Vikram Buddhi not to testify and to remain silent as the defendant has a constitutional right under Fifth Amendment to remain silent and there is an obligation on the Government to prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the defendant. Government failed completely to prove Vikram Buddhi committed any offence let alone posting any Internet Messages.

Author Immaterial

Whoever might be their author (not known till now), the Internet Messages reasoned that the Iraq war launched by President G W Bush and killing 312,769 IRAQI WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN IRAQ by that time, making millions of Iraqis refugees in other countries and destroying vast infrastructure in Iraq. Those Internet Messages appeared after the horrible sexual abuses committed by American Armed Forces Personnel and after the lurid details in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq became known to the world. The "Taguba Report" on Treatment of Abu Ghraib Prisoners in Iraq (Feb. 26, 2004), can be seen at,

http://www.npr.org/iraq/2004/prison_abuse_report.pdf;

It is more than clear that someone deeply affected by those events posted those Internet Messages in December 2005 and January 2006. Till to date, the origin of those Internet Messages could not be established conclusively. The history of hacking of Purdue Computer network is a relevant fact in Vikram’s case. The only legal question that can be raised in Vikram Buddhi’s case, even if the Prosecution is illegally permitted to raise (illegal because the Indictment as it exists cannot permit raising such a question), the legal question will be, whether the contents of the Internet Messages under reference would amount to an offense under the law of any land on earth, let alone the land of the United States of America, which prides itself in rule of law and freedom of speech. Right in the beginning, Indian Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh characterized Iraq War as ‘Wrong War’. There is no doubt that Iraq war is in violation of International Law and it is also in violation of Chapter V of United Nations Charter. The Bush Doctrine of ‘peremptory strike’ is nothing but an invitation to ‘Jungle Law’ amongst the sovereign nations of the world.

Greatest Irony The greatest irony in Vikram Buddhi’s case is that at the time of launching federal prosecution against him, the media was made to publicise that the prosecution was on account of the Internet Messages, but the eleven count Indictment (Charge) with which Vikram was made to face Jury Trial does not contain even a whisper about Internet Messages in any of those eleven counts of charge. US Government during Bush administration persuaded Grand Jury in April 2006 to pass Indictment and that too after US Secret Service having interrogated in mid January 2006 and let Vikram Buddhi to remain free and after the Secret Service having rendered a formal report on February 3, 2006 that Vikram Buddhi is not a threat to US President or to any of the US Secret Service Protectees. Indictment shows eleven count charge under Title 18 United States Code Sections 871(a) (threat to President G W Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney), 879(a) (threat to Laura Bush and Lynne Cheney) , 875(c) (threat to the then-Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld) and 844(e) (threat to installations in the United States). All the eleven counts of charge are, more or less, identically worded. It is enough to look at Count No.1 of the charge which reads:

Greatest Irony The greatest irony in Vikram Buddhi’s case is that at the time of launching federal prosecution against him, the media was made to publicise that the prosecution was on account of the Internet Messages, but the eleven count Indictment (Charge) with which Vikram was made to face Jury Trial does not contain even a whisper about Internet Messages in any of those eleven counts of charge. US Government during Bush administration persuaded Grand Jury in April 2006 to pass Indictment and that too after US Secret Service having interrogated in mid January 2006 and let Vikram Buddhi to remain free and after the Secret Service having rendered a formal report on February 3, 2006 that Vikram Buddhi is not a threat to US President or to any of the US Secret Service Protectees. Indictment shows eleven count charge under Title 18 United States Code Sections 871(a) (threat to President G W Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney), 879(a) (threat to Laura Bush and Lynne Cheney) , 875(c) (threat to the then-Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld) and 844(e) (threat to installations in the United States). All the eleven counts of charge are, more or less, identically worded. It is enough to look at Count No.1 of the charge which reads:

“On or about December 13, 2005, in the Northern District of Indiana and elsewhere, the defendant, Vikram S. Buddhi did knowingly and willfully threaten to kill the President of the United States, George Bush; All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 871(a).” All other Counts of the indictment (charge) are also similarly worded- “did threaten to kill or bomb”. They all, merely tracked the statutory language and left out the essential facts that constitute the offense charged. There is not even a whisper in any of the eleven count charge in the Indictment about the Internet Messages and the call given to the people of Iraq on moral grounds. There is nothing in the Internet Messages, whoever the author might be, to show that the author would himself or herself would do the things. Whoever it might be, the author on moral grounds merely gave a call to the Iraqis to act in retaliation of perceived unjust Iraq war. Yet the Indictment in all eleven counts has been worded to convey that the Defendant threatened to do the things himself which is patently false. In a meditated way, the Indictment is worded, the way it is worded, only to avoid it being quashed by the Courts for there is only an abstract advocacy of violence with no imminent danger from the advocacy. Profane, abusive and vituperative words (a few such words are there in the Internet Messages) do not constitute offense elements under any of the Sections mentioned in the Indictment. Moreover, the US Supreme Court repeatedly made it clear that such words should be ignored in speech threat cases to know if the threat is a ‘true threat’.

Indictment is defective if one goes by the mandatory provisions of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 7 ( c ) ( 1 ) which provides, “The indictment or information must be a plain, concise, and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged.”. In Vikram Buddhi’s case, the Indictment merely tracked the statutory language in the Sections 871(a), 879(a), 875(c) and 844(e) and failed to include the essential facts constituting the offense. Therefore, the Indictment is in violation of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 7 ( c ) ( 1 ). It amounts to denying due process to Vikram Buddhi. It also shows Vikram Buddhi was discriminated and deprived of Constitutional protections available under Fifth and Fourteenth amendments to US Constitution. US Supreme Court made it clear that the defect arising from the failure to include in the Indictment the essential facts constituting the offense cannot be cured by attaching subsequently additional documents to the Indictment. More specifically, the US Supreme Court ruled,“The Indictment must stand or fall on its own. Neither a bill of particulars nor any discovery provided by the government can cure a defective indictment.” Russell v. United States, 369 U.S. 749, 770 (1962).
The plain meaning flowing from all the eleven counts of charge in the indictment is what matters and the plain meaning flowing from all the eleven counts of charge is that the defendant Vikram Buddhi himself is going to kill or bomb which is patently false as the defendant never gave any such threat.

Since the essential facts constituting the offenses under Sections 871(a), 879(a), 875(c), and 844(e) have not been mentioned in the Indictment, it gave unfettered powers to the Government to choose facts of its choice and give colours to the case of its liking during the trial. To meet the ends of justice, the Indictment is required to be quashed. The jury trial conducted on the basis of such an illegal Indictment is in contravention of the statutory law of the United States and it also makes a mockery of the Amendments to the US Constitution. The US Department of Justice must examine this matter seriously, lest it should land the administration of justice in United States into disrepute.

Unfair Jury Trial
In June 2007, Vikram Buddhi was subjected to jury trial before a twelve member Jury in which there were eight lady members. All the members of Jury were ordinary citizens of Indiana State. The jury trial took place before US District Court, Hammond Division, Northern District of Indiana, presided over by US District Judge James T. Moody. The case is registered as, United States v. Vikram Buddhi, Case No: 06 CR 63.
The jury trial in Vikram Buddhi case is unfair for the following reasons, apart from other reasons:
It was the duty of the presiding US District Judge James T. Moody to instruct the Jury on relevant law. But the Trial Transcripts clearly show that the Judge openly declared his resolve not to instruct the Jury on relevant law and he did not instruct the Jury on relevant law. See, Trial Transcript Volume IV, June 28, 2007, pages 2 & 3.
The Judge warned and directed the Defense Attorney John E. Martin not to link the evidence on record with relevant law while addressing the Jury during the closing address of the Defense to the Jury. See, Trial Transcript Volume IV, June 28, 2007, pages 4-6.
The Jury while in deliberations in closed door discussion, the Jury sent a Written Note to the Judge pointing out a contradiction in Judge’s Instructions to the Jury noticed by the members of Jury. But the Judge with his Written Reply to the Jury commanded the Jury stating that there was no contradiction and the Jury should continue its deliberations. See, Trial Transcript Volume IV, June 28, 2007, pages 91, 111, 115, 116.

In such facts and circumstances, the ill informed and insufficiently informed Jury delivered GUILTY verdict on June 28, 2007. It clearly shows that Vikram Buddhi was subjected to an unfair trial and was discriminated. These facts and such other facts in the Trial Transcripts do show the Judicial Misconduct of US District Judge James T. Moody. There is enough evidence on record to show that Judge Moody knowingly, willfully and deliberately ignored and neglected the established law in speech threat cases and subjected Vikram Buddhi to a special law devised by the Judge himself. This is an alarming situation that affects all the resident aliens in the United States.

Professional Misconduct of Prosecutor
Prosecutor Philip C. Benson named Vikram Buddhi’s father Buddhi Koasubbarao (former Indian Navy Captain with PhD from Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, and an attorney of Supreme Court of India) as Government Witness. See, Trial Transcript Volume I, June 25, 2007, pages 8-9. To name father as a Government is a meditated plan to prevent the father from witnessing the jury trial. It is also a meditated plan to deny to the defendant the benefit of father’s technical knowledge on computer networks and legal knowledge in criminal trials. The fact is, though father was named as Government Witness, he was not served any Summons and he was not called to the Court to testify as Government Witness. To name him as a Government Witness was with the sole aim to keep him out of the Court till all the Witnesses of both sides were examined in the Court. Thus, though father waited for one year in the United States to witness his son’s trial as the sole family member of Vikram Buddhi in the United States, father could not witness his son’s trial, all on account of the professional misconduct of Prosecutor Philip C. Benson.

Father Prevented From Helping Son
Retired Indian Navy Captain Buddhi Kota Subbarao, father of Vikram Buddhi, obtained at the end of May 2006 one year Emergency Visa from US Consulate, Mumbai to help his son and reached United States on June 7, 2006. At that time the jury trial of Vikram was fixed for June 26, 2006. But the trial was periodically continued (adjourned) up to June 2007.
On July 18, 2006, Federal Magistrate Andrew P. Rodovich granted bond (bail) to Vikram with several conditions, including the crucial condition that during the bond period till the commencement of the jury trial, the father should take custody of the son, reside in the United States and also ensure the attendance of the son at all pretrial proceedings of the Court. Failure to abide by the bond conditions would not only result in cancellation of the bond (bail) but also would make the father liable to pay $100,000 as fine and with attendant consequences.
When the jury trial commenced in June 2007, father was prevented to witness his son’s trial. Father was named as Government Witness and kept out of the Court during the trial. Father was not served any Summons to appear as Government Witness and father was not called to the Court as Government Witness during the trial. Naming father as Government Witness was a meditated and deliberate attempt to keep the father out of the Court during the trial. Thus, though father waited for one year in the United States to witness his son’s trial, father could not witness his son’s trial, all on account of the professional misconduct of Prosecutor Philip C. Benson

Though, father duly applied well in time seeking extension of his Visa and stay in the United States to help his son, father was denied extension of Visa and stay. While father was trying to approach appropriate forum as per the provisions of US laws to seek extension of Visa and stay, father was prevented, his Passport was illegally taken away on August 21, 2007 and he was put in jail and moved in one week to three jails- Mariano County jail (Indianapolis), Grayson County Detention Center (Kentucky) and McHenry County jail (Chicago).
In due course, and well in time permitted by the US laws, the father approached US Appeals Court, Seventh Circuit, Chicago seeking review of the whole matter regarding extension of Visa and stay in the United States. When the Review Petition of the father is expected to come up for hearing, the US Authorities under Obama administration deported the father to India and landed him at Sahar International Airport, Mumbai on August 8, 2009. It was on August 8, 2009, the Indian Immigration Officers at Sahar Airport, Mumbai, handed over to the father his Indian Passport that was illegally taken away from him on August 21, 2007 at West Lafayette, Indiana, by the US Authorities and declining to return the passport all along. Now, the US Authorities say, since father has been deported, he cannot enter the United States for ten years.


If not to the affected citizens of India, at least to the people of the United States, the US Department of Justice has a lot to answer over such arbitrary and inhuman treatment to the resident aliens in the United States. What good are the laws of a country if the affected people cannot even agitate for justice under those laws?
Who all have been approached in USA and India ?
While in the United States, father of Vikram Buddhi formally represented the matter of Vikram Buddhi to successive US Attorney Generals, Alfred R. Gonzales, Michael B. Mukasey and Eric Holder and also to US President Barack Obama, and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, but all in vain as no one even bothered to acknowledge the representations let alone acting on them. Father even made representations to the Indian External Affairs Minister Sri.S.M.Krishna and others, mentioning clearly that the whole pursuit is for justice and not for mercy. All such pursuit remained in vain. Letters to Indian External Affairs Minister contained only two specific requests at the end, firstly for an official communication from Indian Government to the Government of the United States to ensure that rule of law is followed in Vikram Buddhi’s case and secondly the Indian Passport of Captain Buddhi Kota Subbarao, Indian Navy (Retd.) should be returned to him. But everything remains in vain so far.

Mother’s Attempts
Vikram’s mother Mrs.Syamala Buddhi all alone in India for over three years made several formal representations to Indian authorities including Indian President, Indian Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh, Indian External Affairs Minister S.M.Krishna and others requesting that the Indian Government should insist on the US Government to deal with her son according to the laws of the United States and not subject him to arbitrary measures to put false charge and to deny fair trial. Vikram’s mother even submitted a formal representation to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when Hillary Clinton paid official visit to India in July 2009 bringing to Hillary Clinton’s notice a comparison of the cases of Roxana Saberi and Vikram Buddhi.
Vikram’s mother also pointed out to all concerned quarters that on more or less identical accusation, Ken Haywood, an American citizen ran away to USA from India hoodwinking the Indian Investigating Agency, whereas her son Vikram Buddhi remained in the United States, answered all questions from US Secret Service and is now boldly facing the federal prosecution to prove his innocence, but Vikram is denied a fair trial and is discriminated.

External Affairs Minister Approached
In August 2009, public spirited persons including Shri Somnath Bharti, advocate of Supreme Court of India, Shri. Lella Anjaneyulu, a relative of Vikram Buddhi and others met External Affairs Minister Shri S. M. Krishna on August 17, 2009 and personally submitted Memorandums seeking appropriate action in Vikram’s matter. No clear picture is emerging as to what the External Affairs Ministry did in the matter, except some vague promises.