Monthly Archives: May 2012

SIT report uncovers the murky world of anti-Modi cottage industry, where cops, journalists, NGOs, politicians are in nexus

(our Thanks to DeshGujarat.com and Japan Pathak)

http://deshgujarat.com/2012/05/09/sit-report-uncovers-the-murky-world-of-anti-modi-cottage-industry-where-cops-journalists-ngos-politicians-are-in-attempt-to-misuse-the-court-read-it-to-believe-it/

                                                                                                                             Sanjiv Bhatt

Ahmedabad, 9 May 2012

In its closure report, the Special Investigation Team (SIT) has clearly expressed an opinion that “certain vested interests including Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, different NGOs, and some political leaders were trying to use honorable Supreme Court/SIT as a forum for settling their scores”. The SIT has in its report noted that “Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been colluding with the persons with vested interests to see that some kind of charge-sheet is filed against Shri Narendra Modi and others.” The report has quoted some email communications of Sanjiv Bhatt that clearly make a point that Bhatt had attempted to influence Amicas Curiae through NGOs, media campaign and pressure groups.

The SIT in it report says: Government of Gujarat vide its letter dated 22-6-2011 forwarded a set of emails exchanged between Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, DIG, Gujarat Police and certain individuals during April and May 2011. It was mentioned in the above letter that during the course of an inquiry instituted against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, IPS by DG (Civil Defense), Gujarat regarding misuse of official resources, some revelations have been made having direct bearing on the cases being monitored by SIT. The material forwarded by Govt. of Gujarat has been scrutinized and the salient features of the same are summarized as below:

(1) That top Congress leaders of Gujarat namely Shri Shaktisinh Gohil, Leader of Opposition in Gujarat Legislative Assembly and Shri Arjun Modhwadia, President of Gujarat Pradesh Congress Committee are in constant touch with Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, DIG. They are providing him ‘packages’, certain materials and also legal assistance. Further, on 28-04-2011 Shri Sanjiv Bhatt exchanged mails with Shri Shaktisinh Gohil and the former gave point for arguments in honorable Supreme Court matter, allegations to be made against the members of SIT and to establish that the burning of a coach of a Sabarmati Express at Godhra railway station was not a conspiracy. From the emails, it appears that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was holding personal meetings with senior mentions that he was ‘under exploited’ by the lawyer representing Congress before Nanavati Commission of inquiry.

2. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been persuading various NGOs and other interested groups to influence the Ld. Amicus Curiae and the honorable Supreme Court of India by using ‘media card’ and ‘pressure groups’.

3. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been exchanging emails with one Nasir Chippa and in the email dated 11-5-2011 Shri Bhatt has stated that he (Nasir Chipa) should try to mobilize support/pressure-groups in Delhi to influence Ld. Amicus Curiae Shri Raju Ramchandran in a very subtle manner. In another email dated 18-5-2011, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had requested Shri Nasir Chippa to influence Home Minister Shri P.Chidambaram through pressure groups in U.S. It is believed that Shri Nasir Chippa has strong U.S. connections and his family stays there.

4. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt arranged an appeal from Shri M.Hassan Jowher, who runs a so called NGO titled SPRAT(Society for Promoting Rationality) to Amicus Curiae on 13-5-2011, to call Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, IPS, Shri Rajnish Rai, IPS, Shri Satish Verma, IPS, Shri Kuldeep Sharma, IPS and Shri Rahul Sharma, IPS (all police officers of Gujarat) to tender their version of the Gujarat story. It may be mentioned here that the draft for the said appeal was sent by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt himself to Shri Jowher, Further, a copy of this mail was circulated by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt to Ms. Shabnam Hashmi, Ms. Teesta Setalwad, Shri Himanshu Thakker, journalist, Shri Leo Saldana, journalist and Shri Nasir Chippa to encourage the prominent persons/organizations to write to Amicus Curiae on the similar lines so as to pressurize him.

5. In emails exchanged on June 1, 2011 between Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and Shri M.H.Jowher, it was proposed that a PIL may be field through a lawyer named Shri K.Vakharia( a senior advocate and chairman of legal cell of Congress party in Gujarat) in the Gujarat High Court for providing security to Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. It was also proposed that another complaint may be filed with the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad city against Shri Narendra Modi and others for his alleged involvement in 2002 riots which would be taken to appropriate judicial forums in due course.

6.That Ms. Teesta Setalwad, her lawyer Shri Mihir Desai and Journalist Shri Manoj Mitta of Times of India were in constant touch with Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, IPS and were instrumental in arranging / drafting of the affidavit for filing the same in honorable Supreme court. Vide email dated 10-4-2011, Shri Bhatt solicited “Co-ordinates” from Ms. Teesta Setalwad, who had also arranged for a meeting with her lawyer Shri Mihir Desai at Ellis bridge Gymkhana, Ahmedabad. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt sent the first draft of his proposed affidavit to Shri Manoj Mitta on 13-4-2011, after meeting Shri Mihir Desai, Advocate and invited his suggestions. Shri Manoj Mitta advised Shri Sanjiv Bhatt to incorporate a few more paragraphs drafted by him which were incorporated by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt in his final affidavit sent to honorable Supreme Court of India as suggested by Shri Mitta.

7. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was instrumental in arranging an affidavit of one Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary, a journalist, to corroborate his claim that he had gone to attend a meeting called by the Chief Minister at his residence in the night of 27-2-2002. Significantly, Shri Bhatt had sent his mobile phone details of 27-2-2002 to Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary and had also suggested that probable timings of his meeting to Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary on 15-5-2011. Simultaneously, these details were sent to Ms. Teesta Setalwad on 16-5-2011, for drafting the document, presumably the affidavit to be filed by Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt sent an email to Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary that the said affidavit could be leaked out to the print media which would force the Amicus Curiae and honorable Supreme Court to take notice of the same. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt also sent another email to Shri Shubhranshu Chaudhary, in which he has stated that they should play the ‘media trick’ so that affidavit is taken seriously by Amicus Curiae and the honorable Supreme Court.

8. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been exchanging emails with one Leo Saldana, a Narmada Bachao Andolan activist, with a view to mobilize public opinion in their favor. On 1-5-2011, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had sent an email to the latter to the effect that what they needed to do at this stage was to create a situation, where it would be difficult for three judges Supreme Court bench to disregard the ‘shortcomings of SIT under stewardship of Mr. Raghavan’ and that the pressure groups and opinion makers in Delhi could be of great help in forwarding the cause. He has further stated in the mail that he was hopeful that things would start turning around from the next hearing, if proper pressure was maintained at national level.

9.That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was trying to contact Shri K.S.Subramanyam, a retired IPS officer, through Shri Nasir Chippato make an affidavit supporting his stand with a view to convince the Amicus Curiae and through him the honorable Supreme Court of India that Shri K.Chakravarthi, former DGP of Gujarat, was a liar.

10. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been taking advice of Ms. Teesta Setalwad in connection with his evidence before Nanavati Commission of inquiry. He had also been in touch with various journalists, NGOs and had been forwarding his representations, applications and other documents through email, whereas on the other side he had been claiming privilege that being an intelligence officer he was duty bound not to disclose anything unless, he was legally compelled to do so.

11. That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been maintaining a close contact with Shri Rahul Sharma, DIG of Gujarat Police and had been getting his mobile phone calls analyzed with a view to ascertain his own movements of 27-2-2002. This shows that Bhatt does not recollect his movements on that day. He has also been trying to ascertain the movements of Late Haren Pandya, the then minister of state for Revenue on 27-2-2002, with a view to introduce him as a participant of the meeting of 27-2-2002 held at CM’s residence, but could not do so, as Shri Rahul Sharma had informed him after the analysis that there was absolutely no question of Late Haren Pandya being at Gandhinagar on 27-2-2002 night.

From the study of emails, it appears that certain vested interests including Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, different NGOs, and some political leaders were trying to use honorable Supreme Court/SIT as a forum for settling their scores.This would also go to show that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been colluding with the persons with vested interests to see that some kind of charge-sheet is filed against Shri Narendra Modi and others.

USA: Disappointing Verdict- Dr. Divyendu Sinha Murder Case

Trial Days 13, Monday, May 07, 2012

Middlesex County Superior Court

May 07, 2012

 

Dear Supporters of Sinha Family and Community Members:

Namaste. The Jury in the case of The State of New Jersey Vs. Steven K. Contreras for the murder of Dr. Divyendu Sinha on June 25, 2010 has   returned the verdict on the 10 count indictment today at 2:10 PM.  It is a very disappointing verdict. Mr. Contreras was acquitted of murder and aggravated charges which would have carried long term sentences and on the alternate count of Reckless Manslaughter, the Jury was hung. He was convicted on each count of Aggravated Assault to cause significant bodily injury on Anthony Martino, Ashish Sinha and Ravi Sinha which are all third degree charges but was acquitted of Aggravated Assault to cause serious bodily injury on Anthony Martino, Ashish Sinha and Ravi Sinha which are all second degree charges. He was also convicted of Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution of others but was acquitted of Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution of himself.

All third degree convictions carry sentence of 3 to 5 years but they (and fourth degree convictions) are considered “presumption of non-incarceration” meaning unless prosecution proves a need for putting the convict in jail, he goes home free. Also, if he is jailed these are what is termed Flat sentences, meaning a three year term actually translates to nine months, a four year term translates to nine months and 26 days and a five year term translates to 13 months in jail.

However, if convicted, Reckless Manslaughter carries from 5 to 10 years compulsory jail term where 85% sentence has to be served before getting a parole.

Since the Jury was hung on the charge of Reckless Manslaughter, the State can retry Steven Contreras on that single count. In coming days the Deputy 1st Assistant Prosecutor Mr. Chris Kuberiet will Consult with Alkabahen Sinha and his boss, Public Prosecutor, Bruce Kaplan to decide next step of action.  Then, there will be a status conference between Mr. Kuberiet, Defense attorney Hassen Abdellah and the Judge Bradley Ferencz on May 25 to decide the sentencing date and parameters of retrial on that single count. We will keep you posted of further developments.

Alkabahen is quite understandably distraught and disappointed as are many of us. However, we have to respect the Jury’s verdict. We do think that the Jury did not want to sentence the young man to a 30 years to life imprisonment that is why in every case it chose to acquit on Serious bodily  injury (which would lead to the natural conclusion of Murder/Aggravated manslaughter) and settled for Significant bodily injury. There cannot be doubt in any mind that Mr. Contreras, who drove the assailants from place to place that night, who let them out of the car to beat up Sinha family, who waited for them to return after the attack and who drove them back to their homes after the attack was equally responsible for the murder of Dr. Divyendu Sinha. One wonders if such criminals have any remorse or pangs of conscience, i.e, if they have any conscience.

We do thank Mr. Kuberiet who presented a very persuasive case and interacted more as a well-wisher of the family then just a prosecutor. We are thankful to Ms. Terry Musso, the Victim Assistance Officer who has remained with Alkabahen and her sons as a shadow all this time to take care of all her emotional needs. We thank the Judge Bradley Ferencz for overseeing the case in a professional manner and giving fair hearing to both the sides. We thank the Jury- though the verdict was not to our liking; we realize that they exemplified sense of public service and duty by giving 17 days of their precious time. We thank The Star Ledger, Home News Tribune, NJ Channel 12 and Verizon FIOS1 for timely and frequent coverage of the trial. While majority of ethnic media was disappointing and did not care to cover such an important trial that has the Indian community shaken, TV ASiA did a good job of frequent trips to the court house and giving updates in its nightly community roundup program. We sincerely thank them and hope that the community will put enough pressure on other ethnic newspapers, radio stations and TV channels who find time for cinema, entertainment as well as many frivolous programs but not for things that matter, to redirect their focus. This is what the community owes to itself, if it wants its voice to be heard.

Finally, we thank dozens of community members, those of Indian origin and of American, who took time off from their work or business and other engagements and attended the trial to be with Alkabahen and lend her and the family moral support. No words can describe the sense of obligation that we feel towards all of them. Several others sent emails from across USA and from India showing their support, concern and encouragement. Many members called to express their sense of solidarity. Alkabahen feels that she is blessed to have such an extended wonderful family.

We are not done yet; we may have this retrial and then the trial of four accused later on. We now know that we can count on you. Please see below the details of the verdict.

Please watch TV Asia, Channel 12 and Verizon FIOS1 in NJ for details. Also The Star Ledger at <www.nj.com> as well as Home News Tribune <http://www.mycentraljersey.com/>

have details of the judgment.

Please forward this to your contacts.

Thank you.

Brotherly yours,

Gaurang G. Vaishnav

Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHPA)

Indian American Defense League (IADL)

732-754-1727

Blog at <https://vicharak1.wordpress.com/>, Twitter at<http://twitter.com/#!/vicharak1>

Disclaimer: This is a synopsis of court hearing based on notes taken by me. Not all communications are captured and while I attempt to be as accurate as possible, there may be legal points that could have been missed or misinterpreted. – Gaurang 


old-bridge-teens-tried-adults-sinhajpg-fdb9eff374f9bf9a_large.jpg

Dr. Divyendu Sinha (1961-2010)      

 Old Bridge.JPG

                 Mrs. Alka Sinha 

Contreras trial

                   Defendant Steven Contreras, Driver of the car

                                                          (Photo: Courtesy of tThe Star-Leger)

Deputy  First Assistant Prosecutor,

Christopher Kuberiet

05/01/12-Closing arguments take place in the Steven Contreras murder trial in Middlesex County Superior Court in New Brunswick, in the courtroom of Judge Bradley J. Ferencz. B691894914Z.1 KATHY JOHNSON/STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER

                       Judge Bradley Ferencz

 Defense Attorney,

Hassen Abdellah  

(Courtesy: Patti Sapone/Star Ledger)        

                                      

Contreras trial

 Deputy  First Assistant Prosecutor, Christopher Kuberiet, 

Judge Bradley Ferencz, Defense Attorney, Hassen Abdellah

                                                                 (Courtesy: Courier News)                    


    

                                                                               Judge:  Bradley Ferencz (BF)

                                                                                                   Deputy 1st Asst. Public Prosecutor:

                                                                                                            Christopher Kuberiet (CK)

                                                                                                Defense Attorney: Hassen Abdellah (HA)

                                                                                                     Defendant: Steven Contreras (SC)

========================== ===========================

CHARGES and VERDICT SHEET

THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Vs.

Steven K. Contreras

Prosecutor No.: 10002581

Indictment No.: 10-11=01628

Count 1:

Conspiracy

a.     Steven K. Contreras did conspire with Julian C. Daley and/or Christian M. Tinli and/or Christopher Conway and/or Cash Q. Johnson to commit the crime of aggravated assault, serious bodily injury.

 

________ NOT GUILTY [X

________ GUILTY [  ]

If you find the defendant not guilty of count 1a, please answer count b. If you find defendant guilty as to count 1a, please move to count 2.

 

b.    Steven K. Contreras did conspire with Julian C. Daley and/or Christian M. Tinli and/or Christopher Conway and/or Cash Q. Johnson to commit the crime of aggravated assault, significant bodily injury, and did an overt act.

 

________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________ GUILTY [X]


Count 2:

Conspiracy

Steven K. Contreras did conspire with Julian C. Daley and/or Christian M. Tinli and/or Christopher Conway and/or Cash Q. Johnson 

to commit the crime of Riot, fourth degree, with the purpose of promoting or facilitating its commission and in pursuance of this conspiracy an overt act was done.

 

 ________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________ GUILTY [X]


 

Count 3:

Aggravated Assault

a.     Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt to cause serious bodily injury to Anthony Martino.

  

________ NOT GUILTY [X

________ GUILTY [  ]

 

If you find defendant not guilty of 3a, please move to 3b.

 

b.    Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt to cause significant bodily injury to Anthony Martino.

 

 ________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

 ________ GUILTY [X]

 

If you find defendant not guilty of 3b, please move to 3c.

 

c.     Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt a simple assault on Anthony Martino.

  

________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________ GUILTY [  ]

 

Count 4:

Criminal Mischief

a.     Steven K. Contreras did purposely or knowingly damage a 2003 Mazda Miata, the tangible property of Manolo Martinez 

and/or Michael Martinez while in the custody of Anthony Martino causing pecuniary loses.

  

________ NOT GUILTY [X

________ GUILTY [  ]

  

The amount of the loss proven beyond a reasonable doubt is:

(Please check)

 ______ $2000.00 or more [  ]

 ______ More than $500.00 but less than $2000.00 [  ]

 ______ $500.00 or less  [  ]

 

Count 5:

a.     Murder

 

Steven K. Contreras did purposely or knowingly inflict serious bodily injury upon Dr. Divyendu Sinha resulting in his death.

 

________ NOT GUILTY [X

________ GUILTY [  ]

 

If you find defendant not guilty of 5a, please move to 5b.

 

b.    Aggravated Manslaughter

 

Steven K. Contreras did recklessly cause the death of Dr. Divyendu Sinha under circumstances manifesting 

extreme indifference to human life.


________ NOT GUILTY [X

________ GUILTY [  ]

 

If you find defendant not guilty of 5b, please move to 5c.

 

c.     Reckless Manslaughter

 

Steven K. Contreras did recklessly cause the death of Dr. Divyendu Sinha. 

  

________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________GUILTY [  ] HUNG JURY- Could not come to an agreement


Count 6:

a.     Aggravated Assault

 

Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt to cause serious bodily injury to  A.S. (Ashish Sinha.)


________ NOT GUILTY [X

________GUILTY [  ]

 

If you find defendant not guilty of 6a, please move to 6b.

 

b.    Significant Bodily Injury

 

Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt to cause significant bodily injury to  A.S. (Ashish Sinha.)

 ________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________ GUILTY [X]

 

If you find defendant not guilty of 6b, please move to 6c.

 

c.     Simple Assault

 

Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt a simple assault on  A.S. (Ashish Sinha.)

 

________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________ GUILTY [  ]


Count 7:

a.     Aggravated Assault

 

Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt to cause serious bodily injury to  R.S. (Ravi Sinha.)

 

________ NOT GUILTY [X

 ________ GUILTY [  ]

 

If you find defendant not guilty of 7a, please move to 7b.

 

b.    Significant Bodily Injury

 

Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt to cause significant bodily injury to  R.S. (Ravi Sinha.)

 

________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________ GUILTY [X]

 

If you find defendant not guilty of 7b, please move to 7c.

 

c.     Simple Assault

 

Steven K. Contreras did purposely attempt a simple assault on  R.S. (Ravi Sinha.)

 

_________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________ GUILTY [  ]



Count 8:

Riot

 

Steven K. Contreras did participate, within a group of four (4) persons, in a course of disorderly conduct with purpose to commit 

or facilitate the commission of a crime.

  

________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

________ GUILTY [X]



Count 9:

Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution

Steven K. Contreras with purpose to hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment of another person, that is, 

Julian C. Daley and/or Christian M. Tinli and/or Christopher Conway and/or Cash Q. Johnson did suppress, by way of concealment 

or destruction, any evidence of a crime, or tamper with a document or other source of information, regardless of its admissibility in evidence, which might aid in the discovery or apprehension of the said Julian C. Daley and/or Christian M. Tinli and/or Christopher Conway and/or Cash Q. Johnson or in the lodging of a charge against Julian C. Daley and/or Christian M. Tinli and/or Christopher Conway and/or Cash Q. Johnson and/or volunteered false information to a law enforcement officer.

  

________ NOT GUILTY [  ] 

 ________ GUILTY [X]

 

If you find the defendant guilty, please check the offense that the defendant hindered:


______Riot [  ]

______Aggravated Assault on any party, serious. [  ]

______Aggravated Assault on any party, significant. [X]

______Criminal Mischief [X]


Count 10:

Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution

Steven K. Contreras with purpose to hinder his own apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment did suppress, by way 

of concealment or destruction, evidence of a crime, or tampered with a document or other source of information, regardless of its 

admissibility in evidence, which might aid in his discovery or apprehension, or in the lodging of a charge against the said 

defendant and/or volunteered false information to a law enforcement officer.

  

________ NOT GUILTY [X

 ________ GUILTY [  ]

 

If you find the defendant guilty, please check the offense that the defendant hindered:


______ Riot [  ]

______ Aggravated Assault on any party, serious. [  ]

_______ Aggravated Assault on any party, significant. [  ]

_______ Criminal Mischief [  ]

 

================================================

Hildaraja's Blog

about my reactions and responses to men and affairs

બોઝિલ

EXISTANCE ON THE EARTH IS STILL BOZIL ..

Just Me With . . .

a blog without a niche

રઝળપાટ

- મારી કલમ ના પગલા

World Hindu Economic Forum

Making Society Prosperous

Suchetausa's Blog

Just another WordPress.com weblog

Guruprasad's Portal

Inspirational, Insightful, Informative..

Aksharnaad.com

અંતરની અનુભૂતિનો અક્ષર ધ્વનિ..

Ramani's blog

Health Mantras Hinduism Research Global Hinduism History Science Vedic Tamil Texts

Jayshree Merchant

Gujarati Writer & Poet

થીગડું

તૂટી-ફૂટી ગયેલા વિચારો પર કલમ થી માર્યું એક થીગડું.....

Swami Vivekananda

Let noble thoughts come to us from all sides, news too..

ACTA INDICA

The Saint Thomas In India History Hoax

2ndlook

Take a 2ndlook | Different Picture, Different Story

उत्तरापथ

तक्षशिला से मगध तक यात्रा एक संकल्प की . . .

Vicharak1's Weblog

My thoughts and useful articles from media

%d bloggers like this: