J Palmer didn’t forge any email, documents: Kenny Mendelsohn

Infosys has asked the US court to not consider emails submitted by Jack Jay Palmer as evidence in the visa fraud case, alleging that the documents were forged. However, in an exclusive interview with NDTV, Palmer's attorney, Kenny Mendelsohn, dismissed Infosys's claim, saying that Palmer has not altered or changed any documents.

Below is the complete interview. Watch the accompanying video here.

Q: Mr. Mendelsohn, I am going to start with the big story that Infosys is alleging that Palmer actually has forged crucial evidence. How would you react? 

A: He has not tampered with anything. The main thing talked about is dos and don’ts, which instruct the employees to have their voice detection in the United States. Even the document they claim original is illegal in the United States. Infosys’ testimony has changed its document. There are other ways it attacked Jay Palmer, who actually saw this particular document. This whole time Infosys is… everybody from the fact that they are committing the violation. If chosen they try to attack Jay Palmer and they've gone after him personally. As a result, he is been humiliated. They had his career taken away all because he did what he is supposed to do.

 

Q: I am going to get some more details from you on Jay Palmer, but before that there are two pieces of crucial evidence. One, we are referring to dos and don’ts and another is an email. Can you just talk about what you feel are Infosys allegations here because they are saying that dos and don’ts were tampered with and in the email some phrases were added and modified.

A: Well, with the email, this is not even sent to Mr. Palmer, he was just copied. On the email, he didn't have the ability to change it. Infosys controls this entire document and they were the ones…just because somebody was in Infosys has changed the documents and not Mr. Palmer. With respect to the dos and don’ts, they have had various versions of it, what the testimony is that the human resources department has solved this varied dos and don’ts, which is listed and which isn't. The lady reported it to the HR manager and she contacted Jeffery Freidel, who is the main lawyer for Infosys in the United States, and complained about it being on the website and then the next day it was taken off. So it is really a question of do you believe Mr. Palmer changed the document or Infosys did? We have overwhelming evidences that Infosys is lacking in United States, they lag in sales with the department of labour and when it all comes down to it.

 

Q: Infosys is also arguing that its practices were legal under special provision that actually sometimes allows permanent employees to come on B1-visas instead of H1-B visas. Is that correct? How do you react to that? 

A: That is absolutely not correct. The visa requires a separate process which Infosys does not fall under. The evidence is clear that Infosys was working B1 employees in US against the law, that’s why I have been bringing in the jury and the federal prosecutors and looking into it not just me but, our entire department, our state department, our higher department and of homeland security and department of justice, the securities of exchange commission, and I already have all investigative answers to it, so it’s not just state palmer and me, the entire government who says that Infosys has violated the law. 

Q: On the part of criminal investigation, I know you are directly allowed to speak on the case, but you are also contributing in that investigation. What is the kind of documentation of the extent of the investigation that is already taken place on that count?

A: Mr. Palmer is a co-operating witness with the Federal government, but the government has done a lot more than just talking to Mr. Palmer. They have investigated with clients, with other employees, with other information and it is not only Mr. Palmer. I will point out that my understanding is that Infosys is negotiating with the United States government, trying to work out some type of arrangement regarding these charges.

 

Q: What you are suggesting is that Infosys is willing to negotiate with the United States government but is not willing to mediate with you, as part of mediate with Mr. Jay Palmer because that mediation clearly fell through?

A: Yes. All I can think is that the board and the stock holders don't really understand what is going on in this case. I am not sure they have been a forum; otherwise I wouldn't worry about that. All I can do is that to prepare the case for trail and present it to the judge and the jury.

 

Q: In that case, do you think there could be a settlement? Infosys could go ahead with the settlement with the United States government, is that a possibility or will it fight it as it has been fighting Mr. Palmer's accusations?

A: I am not sure they are fighting the claims by the United States but I don’t think things could get worked out here but they may continue to fight Mr. Palmer but the evidence is fully clear. The Infosys employees who commit the crime and help cover up the crime or protect it and those who report the crime are the ones who get punished. It is not just Palmer, there other employees who suffered as well for just trying to stand up for the United States laws.

 

Q: You know talking about the other whistleblowers; two names have come up already. Are they going to be part of the trial as well? Will they be coming in and providing witness testimony for Mr. Palmer?

A: One is already testified, it is on a videotape that will be played to the judge and the jury, and the other one is going to be at the court to testify. My understanding is that there are others who will support as well.

 

Q: Are we also talking about the clients as well Mr. Mendelsohn because there have been clients name disclosed already including those........used Wal-Mart and Goldman Sachs some of others. Have they approached you, have you spoken to them?

A: There is one other client. He confirmed that the jobs the so-called special act talents were doing were the jobs Americans can do. It is not one big issue. I can even call any of those such as Cisco, Apple or Wal-Mart any of those people to trial.

 

Q: You might be calling those clients as well...

A: I won't be calling them in Palmer's case, that would be left up to the federal or court.

 

Q: Let me get to Mr. Palmer's state of mind as well. He is been under significant (pressure). Apparently he is still getting death threats, can you talk about that, the fact that he is been denied bonuses and is getting death threats?

A: This is just as been horrible. They have put him on the bench now for 16 months, no system access. His whole career is been lost. He can't get another job in the industry; he can't get another job paying this kind of money. And he worries about his every day; everything he has worked for the last 25 years has been taken away from him. Only because he followed Infosys’s whistleblower power rules in the ratio of Infosys’s Jeffrey Friedel. As a result his life is been shattered. 

Q: Why hasn't he quit as of now?

A: Because he doesn’t have any other thing to do, he can't get another job right now. When he used to work on old projects, they used to bill out twice the amount he was been paid. So they made a big profit throughout the years. Yet it is clear from not just the testimony but Infosys is hiring every day. They are applying for visas every day and they have thousands of jobs which Palmer can do but they won't let him do the work. It is all because they are trying to punish him. The problem is the way the handle it scares the other employees. Their intention was to hurt Mr. Palmer and the other employees from reporting crimes.