The government should have just denied her entry if they believed she would violate her visa. I don’t understand the cause for detaining and putting her on the path to deportation.
> The most recent DHS data released this week shows that fewer than 600 people per day have been booked into ICE detention facilities across the country during the first three weeks of February — well below the pace of 1,200 to 1,500 arrests a day that administration officials have said they want.
A quick search shows that in the past, she had posted on social media about being in the U.S. and working. It’s likely that her equipment raised a red flag, and during additional screening, they found those posts. It’s unfortunate for her, but ultimately, it was her own doing.
I know plenty of digital nomads who work in the U.S. without proper visas, but the difference is they keep a low profile. Visa laws aren’t unique to the U.S., and most countries take violations seriously. In fact, the U.S. isn’t even among the strictest.
There’s plenty to be outraged about in the world without making things up.
edit: I'm not going to justify this reddit post with any sources. It's obviously bait and 20 seconds of googling confirms it.
If you'd like to go through the article and provide actual examples I'll help you with being a critical reader. When it says something "amounts" to solitary confinment, that isn't the same as saying she was held in solitary confinment. That's shifty reporting trying to spin the facts without the legal repercussions of directly lying. When you get to the part about her having violent outbursts and punching walls until there is "blood everywhere" you might then ask yourself "could this person be a risk to themselves or a cell mate" or maybe "what are the international consequences if she were to harm herself or someone else while in custody?" The world is never black and white and there are plenty of these points in the article where you should be asking questions and maybe looking to other sources for answers.
The article is using her friend/girlfriend as the primary source, even though she is clearly biased and has no actual information, which she has no right to given she isn't a family member, her lawyer, or the German consulate. It's almost like they are purposely ignoring the actual facts and are trying to manufacture an emotional response to get this to go viral and somehow receive a more favorable outcome. Seriously, find an article that isn't tabloid quality. Even better, do a search of reputable German news sources like der Spiegel. If she were actually being hidden away and mistreated they would be reporting on it in Germany.
From the few facts that are available, it sounds like she would have been released and sent back to Germany had she just admitted she fucked up and plead guilty. My guess, mostly just based on the fact that she was punching walls in jail, she lacks some degree of emotional intelligence, doesn't like the idea of being barred from the US, and thinks she can fight it and win. Now she has to remain in custody until she is tried, which will likely be fairly soon, or a deal is worked out. These are processes that were agreed on (and as the last couple sentences of the article mentions is actively being handled) between the respective governments. Anyone caught doing the same in Germany would face similar consequences.
I think what a lot of commenters here don't realize is that most western countries, including the US and Germany, have artist visas for this specific scenario. These are relatively easy to get and would have allowed her to do what she was doing. Instead she chose to commit a federal offense and is paying the price for that choice. I'm not mentioning this to deflect, I'm directly responding to the article which tries to make it sound like she was "doing everything right" and is being unjustly held.
Jail isn't great but it's not actual torture. It's mostly just uncomfortable and extremely boring. It's not anymore cruel or tortuous than it has to be given the circumstances.
> “She says it was like a horror movie,” Lofving said. “There were people screaming from the rooms all around. They are feeding her through a little mailbox hole. She didn’t have a blanket, she didn’t have a pillow. It’s basically a yoga mat on the ground and a toilet on the corner.”
> Spending that many days in one of CBP’s short-term detention facilities appears to be a violation of the agency's own internal detention standards, which, “generally limit detention in these facilities to 72 hours,” according to a 2023 report from the Office of Inspector General.
> Inspectors conducted unannounced inspections of four short-term facilities in San Diego and El Centro. They found that of the 447 migrants detained in all four stations, 42% of them exceeded the 72-hour standard, with some being there for more than 20 days.
If nothing else, I think it's obvious that most people can't sleep under circumstances like that. After 9+ days of those conditions, you find it at all surprising that she broke?
I find those conditions to be morally repugnant. And frankly, I find attempts at justifying them equally repugnant.
Okay, let's put on our critical reading hat again. What order are these events taking place in? Why isn't the author just using a simple chronological telling of her ordeal? What does it mean to "generally limit" it to 72 hours? That doesn't sound very concrete; what does it mean to be a standard vs a policy, law, or rule? So most detainees are out before 72 hours, does that sound like they are folowing the "general" standard? What is the median amount of time someone is in there? What is the average? How long are the other 42% in there? When does processing take place? Do they process on Saturday? Sunday? What portion were in there for 4-5 days? How many is "some" when it comes to the 20 days? Is one? If the majority are out in 3 days, why do some take longer? How do they ID a foreign national? How do they know who to call or where to send someone who isn't being cooperative with there identity?
You see, things can be a bit more complicated than how a single ragebait article makes it sound?
I had a fun weekend in college that lead to me spending 6 consecutive days in a county jail, so I'll concede that I might have a better understanding of the setting than you do. The being fed through a "mailbox hole" literally means there is a big slot in the middle of the door that they slide a balanced meal through on a cafeteria tray three times a day at standard times, so everyone can just enjoy their meal in relative peace and safety. How would you propose they do that differently? What do the logistics look like for having dozens of short term inmates, that you might know their identity but really have no idea of their personalities, together in a cafeteria? How would you prefer to eat in this situation? Again, pay attention to the wording of the article. "Basically" a yoga mat is not the same as saying she only had a yoga mat. From my experience it was about 1.5" thick and was more similar to a thick backpacking sleeping pad. I did have a springless, elevated, flat metal platform to put my pad on, but I was in the upper Midwest where it's too cold half the year to sleep directly on the floor so they welded this platform to the wall. The toilet is likely a stainless steel, flushing toilet with a sink built into the back. Personally, I'd prefer having a private toilet but I got to have the fun of sharing mine with my methhead cellmate who didn't have a solid shit the three days he was in the cell with me. How would you do her sleeping situation differently? Remember, this isn't a prison, it's a short term facility where you have no idea of who the inmates are. As for what "amounted" to solitary confinement, what does that mean? Well I imagine it's similar to a county jail. You are in your cell most of the day. You get out in small groups to shower and wash up and you may get an hour of physical time where you might have a basketball or more likely you just walk the perimeter of a tiny gym. It isn't torture, it's just really, really boring. Yeah, there were people in there with real emotional issues that would yell and talk loudly to themselves in their cells, but it is a concrete building with heavy doors and it's annoying but not deafening. It's also not 24-7. Try and yell for an hour. Now imagining doing that all day or night? Or maybe you'd relate more if you think about how your voice is the next day after going to a concert or a loud bar with your friends. Also, the guards are just people too. Talk to a local sheriff deputy who works the county jail. They don't want to be there anymore than the inmates. They are doing a job that is all the worst parts of law enforcement, customer service, and day care, all rolled into one. They don't want to listen to yelling all day and night either and do a fairly decent job of going around and quieting people down and distracting the problem people. As for sleep, that is basically all people do in there. It's the best way to pass time.
A day is waking up at 6am for breakfast, sleep, bodyweight workout in cell, shower, sleep, eat lunch, do problems in your head/day dream, sleep, more thinking, dinner at 5pm, think some more, sleep. It's amazing how much you can force yourself to sleep when that is all you have left to do after a couple days of your brain going a mile a minute from the boredom.
It's not a horror film. The other inmates aren't monsters, they are people too. Though I'm sure to her entitled ass, all those unkempt poors might have seemed pretty scary. They are in the same (possibly worse) situation she is. Everyone just wants to get through it and move on. Which brings up a good point, who are the other inmates? While you are worried about the woman who will soon be back in her wealthy and safe country, with arguably one of the best qualities of life in the world, where do they go? While you defend the lady who was free to come and go from the US as she pleased and willfully broke the law knowing she could have filled out a couple forms and paid a fee to be here legally, there are people in those facilities whose only crime is being born in a shitty country. Those people would do anything to be in her position. They would do anything just for the chance to have a fraction of the privilege she has. They packed up their families and migrated thousands of miles, sometimes by foot, just for the chance of asylum. No simple form. No guarantee. Just a chance at a better life. What happens to those people? Do you think they are sitting around crying about how horrible jail was? After they get shipped to another third-world country (which may or may not be the country they are from) with no money or way to support themselves, do you think they'll jump on tik-tok and make countless videos about how poorly they were mistreated? You think they'll capitalize on the outrage?
So go ahead and call me repugnant for not being instantly outraged and daring to think critically about the article. Personally, I find what she did, and the narrative her friend is pushing, to be extremely ignorant and orders of magnitude more repugnant. If the system is so awful and the facility is so crowded that they are having trouble moving people out of it in a timely matter, do you think her being their helped it any? Do you think the resources they are using to deal with her emotionally stunted tantrums are well spent? Do you think the resources they are spending as she tries to weasel out of the consequences are well spent? To be that out of touch and entitled is just gross and you are equally gross and entitled for defending it.
The more detainees they have, and the longer they have them, the more they get paid.