Tuesday, October 26, 2010

The Many Abuses Of Asylum

Two immigration fraudsters are in the news, using asylum to game the system to avoid deportation. Irma Medrano and Josephine Edu are immigrants, one illegal, the other legal, respectively, who are in the process of deportation. Medrano has been in the U.S. illegally since 1995 and Edu since 1989.
First Medrano:
A Mountain View woman who fled a violent husband and entered the United States illegally in 1995 faces imminent deportation to El Salvador, where her husband has been looking for her, her lawyer said Monday.

Irma Medrano, 44, is being held by immigration authorities at a jail in Yuba City (Sutter County) and could be deported as soon as today, said attorney Aubra Fletcher. She said the government has refused to delay Medrano's case to let her apply for political asylum and has disputed her claim that her life would be in danger in El Salvador.

Medrano's relatives in San Salvador have reported that her husband has come to look for her after he learned that she was on the verge of being deported, Fletcher said. She said police protection has improved little since the early 1990s, when Medrano's husband tried to strangle her with a belt and a police officer allegedly told her, "We can't do anything because it's your husband."

But lawyers for the Department of Homeland Security said conditions for women have improved in El Salvador. The number of female legislators and Supreme Court justices has increased, the government said, and police nationwide have undergone training in preventing rape and child abuse.
"The government and police of El Salvador are far more willing and far better able to address (Medrano's) concerns regarding her husband," government lawyers told the Board of Immigration Appeals, which is considering her case.

Medrano's case "has undergone exhaustive review by judges at all levels of our legal system," said Virginia Kice, spokeswoman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
However, what the propogandists at the SF Chronicle want you to concentrate on, the allegations of abuse, are in fact, fraudulent.
Medrano said she left her homeland after years of abuse and settled in the Bay Area, where her sister, who had left El Salvador under similar circumstances, is now a U.S. citizen. Medrano left her two children with relatives in El Salvador and now has two more children, both U.S. citizens, with another man who was later deported.

She gained temporary legal status in 2001 when the United States granted refuge to Salvadorans because of an earthquake in their country. But her status was revoked because of two misdemeanor traffic convictions, for a hit-and-run causing property damage and driving without a license, and authorities moved to deport her in 2006.

Immigration courts rejected her claim for legal residence, saying she had not shown that her children would suffer extraordinary hardship if she were deported.
The important issues here are that she knew about the asylum system for abuse victims when she entered, but did not use it and, importantly, she tried once for legal permanent residence, but failed. Therefore she had to make something up to get another chance. Of course the thing she made up was that her allegedly abusive husband that she never divorced, was looking for her. Other than her less than credible claim that she was abused at all, there is no evidence that her husband has any intent on doing anything and no evidence that the police will not protect her.
Interestingly enough though the police in this country have no legal obligation to protect anyone, so why are people receiving asylum for issues that occur routinely in the U.S. Of course because of fraud in the asylum system created first by judges then by Congress with the insane idea that victims of general crime are "persecuted." Well, wife beating occurs in the U.S. Why are we giving welfare and green cards to foreigners for something that also happens here. It is not as if she is fighting against a dictatorial government in the name of democracy. She is only allegedly concerned about crime. Not to mention that she had two children out of wedlock here with another illegal alien and committed numerous crimes here. So even while she had legal status, she was flouting the law, aiding and abetting an illegal alien, the father of her other two children while he was here illegally.
Then we have Edu, claiming unlikely stories of abuse for demonstrating against the Nigerian government back in the early 80s. Nigeria certainly has changed alot, from a dictatorship to a barely functioning quasi-democratic kleptocracy. Her story:
Immigration officials who ordered the deportation of a Southern California woman to Nigeria told her she could avoid torture in her homeland - where police had repeatedly raped and beaten her decades earlier - if she refrained from dissident political activity.

That prompted an indignant ruling Tuesday from a federal appeals court in San Francisco, which said the law protects both free speech and the right to be free from brutality.

Josephine Edu "cannot be forced to choose between her conscience and torture," the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in a 3-0 decision shielding her from deportation.
Of course, far into the story, we get the real story. She is a criminal. A dangerous and violent one at that.

Edu, 47, who lives in the Los Angeles area, entered the United States in 1989 and became a legal resident in 1993 after marrying a U.S. citizen. But she was ordered deported after being convicted of assault with a deadly weapon in 2002 for slashing her work supervisor with a piece of glass, the court said.
Her appeal relied on an international treaty that prohibits a person from being deported to a country where he or she is likely to be tortured.

Edu, trained as a nurse and midwife in the Niger Delta, joined a politically active group of doctors and nurses as a young woman. When the group staged demonstrations calling for jobs and government services, Edu said, police responded violently.
It appears that Nigerians like Edu are violence prone:

She testified that officers beat her at a peaceful rally in 1983, then took her to a barracks and raped her during another protest a few days later.

Military officers sexually assaulted her at three subsequent demonstrations, Edu said, the last one in December 1987, when a high-ranking officer beat her unconscious, raped her after she awoke and told subordinates to dump her at a hospital.
Of course, Nigeria has changed alot since the 80s, but the Hearing Officers at the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) had an agenda and that is refuge for violent immigrants.

U.S. immigration courts said they believed Edu's testimony that conditions in Nigeria had not improved and that she was likely to be tortured if she returned.
However, the Board of Immigration Appeals was not as credulous as the activist Hearing Officer:
But in a 2006 ruling, the Board of Immigration Appeals granted the federal government's request for deportation and said Edu "could avoid torture by refraining from activities that would put her in danger."
However, our Mexican masters who run the kritarchy disagreed:
That contradicts the purpose of the treaty against torture, the federal appeals court said Tuesday.

"We reject the (immigration board's) decision that in order to avoid torture she must simply give up an activity that most countries (including Nigeria) ... guarantee to their citizens," Judge Ferdinand Fernandez said in the court's ruling.
But the story of her alleged abuse, even if true, would hardly be relevant since Nigeria has changed so much since 1987, but the story lacks credibility given its convience to protect a dangerous criminal from deportation.
While Edu was not actually applying for asylum, but claiming protection under the Convention Against Torture, something akin to an asylum claim, it still shows how fraudulent claims and a lack of dealing with reality run our immigration system. And is openly abused by convicted criminals. Our asylum laws were certainly not written to protect criminals in the U.S., but to protect those who fought on the side of democracy against communism and dictatorships. Not criminals or even crime victims. Or to give those being deported another run at a green card.

No comments: