‘True.’
‘And Richard, don’t bother about the politics of gun rights. A good report here can propel you into your tenured position. Just remember that.’
Richard smiled and walked towards the door. Wasn’t he willing to do anything for a tenured position? In any case he was extremely confident that this time around he would make it. He had enough going his way.
‘And Richard!’ Richard stopped and turned around. ‘Where are we on the prison data?’
‘Data gathering in three prisons is done, James. It is being tabulated and analysed now. I’ll send it to you tomorrow. Will that do?’
‘Yes. That will be fine.’
The door banged shut behind Richard and Deahl got busy with his papers. He had a class to prepare for the next day.
26
3rd October 2007
Mumbai
Cirisha had got up early that day. Gangu Tai had promised to take her to the other end of Dharavi, which housed the glass and metal-forging facilities. A morning cup of coffee for her was always accompanied by a quick checking of emails.
Richard had responded to her email sent a few days ago.
Cirisha,
Hope all is well. I checked with the Snuggles office in Boston. I did apprise them about the issues you had mentioned. I even told them that in case the media picked that up, it would lead to significant erosion of their brand value. But I got a very strange response from them. It’s self-explanatory. Forwarding it to you. I’m off to Chicago for a conference tomorrow morning. James was to go. But he got busy and asked me to go. In case you want something from the Magnificent Mile, drop me an email. I’ll get it. Pay me later.
When she read the response from Snuggles, it irritated her no end. How could that be? How could an MNC lie and that too so blatantly? She wrote back to Richard.
Can you give me the email ID of their compliance/HR or whoever looks into it? It’s a bit unclear from this email. I will write to them. What they are saying is not true. I have seen it with my own eyes. And thanks for the offer on Magnificent Mile. I don’t need anything from there. My needs aren’t so sophisticated.
She looked at her watch. It was past seven. If Gangu Tai had to be met at eight, she had to leave in fifteen minutes. The cup of coffee touched her lips for one last gulp. She dumped the glass into the sink and ran into the bathroom. She was late for the meeting.
27
Mid-October 2007
Mumbai
Shivinder returned to India in the first week of October. Aditya met him the same evening. Skipping the niceties, he got to the point.
‘What’s with this new contract manufacturing in Dharavi? I didn’t know you had one.’
‘Dharavi?’
‘Yes. Cirisha visited a facility which was manufacturing shoes for you.’
‘Are you sure it was for Snuggles?’
‘She showed me the order copy.’
‘It must be manufacturing fakes.’
‘It was signed by Deven Khatri. Dated prior to him running away with our money.’
‘Is it? Let me find out.’
‘Are you sure you are not doing something behind my back? We are in this together. Don’t try to play games with me, Shivinder.’ Aditya was livid.
‘You must be kidding, Adi.’ Shivinder was unfazed. ‘You have helped me when things were difficult. Do you think I will shortchange you?’
‘You better not.’ Aditya walked out of Shivinder’s office, got back in his car and drove to his office. Back home that evening, he wanted to tell Cirisha about his conversation with Shivinder. But he held back. What would he have told her in any case? She knew nothing about his deals with Shivinder.
As they were sitting down for dinner that night, Cirisha’s phone rang. She ran to pick it up.
‘Hello?’
‘Can I speak to Ms Narayanan?’
‘Speaking. May I know who is on the line?’
‘Ms Narayanan, I would like to meet with you sometime tomorrow. Will that be possible?’
‘Well, would you care to introduce yourself?’
‘My name is Nick Rand and I am from Boston.’
‘Do I know you? What is this regarding?’
The moment he told her who he was, she looked up at Aditya. He was busy reading the newspaper while enjoying his rotis. She walked into the bedroom, whispering into her phone.
And when she walked back into the dining room, she was clearly excited.
28
Mid-October 2007
MIT, Boston
‘So it’s clear, James. Very clear,’ Richard said while shutting his laptop. They were in the conference room, debating the data.
‘Hold it! Hold it!’ Deahl exclaimed. ‘Can you pull up that table on the screen again? Let’s go through it once more.’
Richard fiddled with his laptop and in a jiffy the chart was up on the screen. He looked at Deahl, whose eyeballs were fixated on the table on the screen ahead of him. (See facing page)
‘This is only Chicago, right?’
‘Yes,’ Richard replied. ‘And James …’ Richard began to explain, only to be cut short by Deahl, who was holding up his palm to silence him. He wanted to draw his own inferences. ‘So the data indicates that the homicide rate is highest in areas which are high on the poverty scale.’
‘Yes, James. And …’ Richard hesitated.
‘And what?’
‘An even more damning correlation is the combined effect on gun-related crime, of poverty, lack of education, unemployment and concentration of African American people in the neighbourhood.’
‘Yes. That is obvious in this summary. Poor locations with a high African American concentration have a very high homicide rate.’
‘I can understand, James, if the homicide rates in the poor black areas were twice as much as the rates in the white upmarket areas. But here it is roughly fifteen times higher. That is a ridiculously high number.’
Poorest Locations in Chicago
Richest Locations in Chicago
‘Our story will be simple. Places high on the poverty scale, low on education and high on unemployment will be high on drug abuse, alcoholism, violence and resultant gun-related homicide. Children born in these areas are less likely to have a normal childhood and hence are more likely to grow up into violent teens.’
‘Yes. Children reared in such environments have a high propensity to turn to crime.’
‘And if you want to pull them away from crime, taking away guns is not an option. Focusing on their economic development is probably the only way out.’ And he looked at Richard. ‘So we have a story.’
Richard smiled. ‘We have a very good story, if the Chicago example were to be looked at. It screams from every nook and corner of the city that gun control hasn’t worked. Economic development and social initiatives to get the African American community into the mainstream will bear more results than any change to the Second Amendment.’
‘Wonderful, Richard! Let’s also look at gun ownership patterns over the year across the United States and see if there is anything for us to report. A few more examples like Chicago will add meat to the study.’
‘Sir,’ said Richard and shut down his laptop. He had made his point. He then opened his notepad where he had jotted down some notes. ‘James, just a couple of points that I wanted to discuss with you, if you have the time.’
‘Tell me.’
‘The prison data for three locations has been compiled.’
‘Of felons convicted of gun crime?’
‘Yes. The results there are a bit warped.’
Deahl just raised his eyebrows.
‘We interviewed felons across a few prisons. The purpose was to figure out if they would have committed the crimes for which they had been convicted had they not had easy access to guns. Our hypothesis going in was that the non-availability of guns would not have prevented these crimes. That these felons would have committed the crime irrespective. If not guns, they would have m
ade use of some other weapon of destruction.’
‘That would prove beyond doubt that gun control would not have stopped the crimes that did take place.’
‘Absolutely. That’s why we interviewed these convicts in detail, asked them relevant questions and compiled this data. However, James, when I look at the data which has come in from inmates in Vermont, it presents an entirely different picture.’
James hastily turned towards him. ‘What do you mean?’ There was a touch of concern in his voice.
‘Data from Vermont suggests that without guns the convicts would not have committed those crimes.’ Deahl’s look turned to that of anxiety. He closed his eyes and let out a deep sigh. Shoulders drooping, he looked at Richard and asked him, ‘Are you sure, Richard?’
‘Yes, James. That’s how it looks as of now.’
‘Have we got data from any other prison?’
‘Florida. We interviewed seventeen inmates. Same result. Sixteen said that without guns they would not have had the courage to commit the crimes for which they got arrested. Phoenix. Same result. Eighteen out of twenty-two inmates said they wouldn’t have done it. Surprisingly, it points to the fact that had guns not been so freely available, over 80 per cent of gun-related crimes, many of them leading to homicide, would not have been committed.’
‘This is bad news.’ Deahl went into deep thought. His palms moved up to cover his face and he rubbed his eyes with his fingers.
‘We will dig deeper into this. Maybe there is more to this.’
‘The Chicago example proves that gun control has not yielded results. The convict interview shows that gun control could have prevented crime. We are back to square one.’ He looked at Richard. ‘Who is helping you in data gathering?’
‘Caroline and Philip. It’s just the two of them and me on this prison assignment. I did the Vermont, Florida and Phoenix interviews myself.’
‘Great. You focus on the Chicago analysis. Ask Caroline and Philip to see me. I will oversee this directly. It is of critical importance to our research.’
Richard was surprised, but didn’t show any emotion. After all, Deahl had committed to his tenure this time around. He would rather play along. ‘James, I’m off to the Boston prison tomorrow. They have given us permission to meet their inmates. This meeting has come about after numerous rounds of discussions with them. They needed a fair bit of convincing.’
‘It’s OK. Don’t bother. I will coordinate that. Just ask Caroline and Philip to see me. As I said, I need you to focus on the Chicago data. That’s the most critical piece for me.’
Richard got up from his chair. He had a confused look on his face. He was wondering why Deahl didn’t want him involved in the prison interviews. ‘OK. I’ll let them know,’ he said and walked out of the room.
The research report was due in a month. They could at best stretch it to two. Any later than that and Lucier would flip.
29
November 2007
Coimbatore
Narayanan’s phenomenal success had attracted a number of people to the emu trade. The most prosperous emu farmer of Tamil Nadu launched a new scheme in November 2007. The paper emu scheme.
It was a big hit. The scheme was simple. Invest two lakh rupees and have six emu chicks allocated to you. Unlike earlier schemes where the customer would take the chicks and rear them at a farm set up on his own land, this time around, Narayanan set up his own mammoth emu farm and simply allocated a specific number of emus to the customer. These chicks would then be reared on Narayanan’s own farms.
For the investment made, the investor would get a fixed return of ten thousand rupees per month for the first two years. After two years, the money realized from the emu meat, skin, toenails and any other by-product would be passed on to the investor after retaining a certain service fee.
A full-grown emu was expected to fetch thirty thousand rupees. For six emus, the amount would be a lakh and eighty thousand. The monthly payment of ten thousand rupees meant a realization of two lakh and forty thousand rupees for the customer over two years. After deducting Narayanan’s share in this, the investor would get roughly three and a half lakh rupees for an investment of two lakhs. All this, with no effort from the customer. This scheme was particularly designed to appeal to people living in apartments and small houses, people who did not have the space to set up their own farms to rear emus. The middle class loved it and demand skyrocketed.
In the span of just a month after the launch of the scheme, Narayanan was able to sign on five thousand customers. An amount of over hundred crores was collected in a month. If all went well, through the sale of emu oil, meat, toenails and skin, Narayanan expected to make a profit of fifty crores in this business. Perhaps even more.
The corpus in GB2 Geneva was growing by the day.
30
December 2007
MIT, Boston
It was a chilly December morning when Deahl walked into his office. There was a spring in his step that day. The lounge chair was to his right. He flung his bag on it and walked to his desk. The black chair was where he had left it the night before. He pulled it back, sat down and looked at the table in front of him. The tiny red light on the bottom right corner of the telephone instrument was blinking. Nonchalantly, he stretched out his right hand and flicked the button next to the light. He was in a great mood.
‘Morning, James. Can you please call me once you get in? I need to speak with you,’ the voice on the telephone crackled. A smile lit up his face. So the feathers had been ruffled. He had expected that. He got up, pushed his chair back and walked out of his room. In a few minutes, he reached his destination. He pushed open the door and walked in.
‘Yes, Gordon. You wanted me to call you. I thought I might as well come over and grab a coffee with you.’ Gordon Meier, the provost of MIT, looked up from the pile of papers on his table as Deahl strode into his cabin.
‘Hey, James. Good to see you.’ He got up to welcome Deahl into his room. His secretary walked in at the same time. ‘Should I get you another cup of coffee, Gordon?’ Gordon nodded and she left, shutting the door behind her.
‘Is this necessary, James?’ he asked the moment they were alone.
‘What are you referring to?’
‘You know very well what I am referring to, James. Over the weekend I read the research report, which you plan to send out for peer reviews.’
‘I didn’t send it to you. How did you get it?’
‘The OSP did. They were concerned about the impact of the research.’
‘Impact! Have I said anything wrong in my report, Gordon?’
‘Technically …’ he said, thinking for a moment before continuing, ‘… no. Technically nothing is wrong. It’s an extensive research. But given the public mood and the general drift against gun activism, do we really need to muddy the waters by releasing something as controversial as your report? There is already a fair bit of shit going around, given that the ten-year ban on assault rifles was allowed to just lapse into obscurity.’
‘That was two years ago, Gordon.’ Deahl remembered that in 1994 the Bill Clinton administration had banned nineteen types of assault weapons. The ban was in force for a period of ten years and, unless explicitly authorized by the Congress, was to lapse in 2004. Congress did not act on the ban, causing it to lapse.
‘In its hundred and fifty years of existence, James, MIT has steered clear of political affiliations. This breaks the tradition. Your report is too volatile.’
‘My research is the reality, Gordon. Everything else is fantasy. Political or non-political, I don’t know. My report calls a spade a spade.’
‘James, I understand where you are coming from. You have been a part of this university for a long time. Don’t you think this could eventually lead to erosion of credibility for our university? We will be branded as siding with the Republicans. The only university in the entire United States of America to get such a reputation. I can’t let this happen, James.’
&
nbsp; ‘On the contrary, the public at large will respect the honesty of this university. Our credibility will only improve.’
The argument went on for another fifteen minutes. Finding it inconclusive, the provost finally took a tough stance. ‘I will disallow this university from putting its official sanction on this research.’
‘Must I remind you, Gordon, that the very basis of giving academicians a tenure is to make sure that they don’t succumb to bullying of the sort that I am being subjected to right now, and to make sure that they speak their mind.’
‘James, you have the right to speak out against gun control if your research states so. But you are wrong in doing so at the behest of the NRA. It kills any objectivity that the research was expected to have in the first place. It is a case of moral drudgery. How can you accept and complete a research which has been sponsored by the NRA and present a result favourable to them in exactly the same manner that they wanted?’
‘Firstly, if the research findings are data backed, I really don’t care what the findings are. And secondly, it is not an NRA-sponsored research.’
‘It is.’
‘Says who?’ demanded Deahl.
‘Me.’ It was Cardoza. He had just walked into the room and was standing at the door listening to the two of them. The dean of the Social Psychology department was with him.
‘When you walk into a discussion, courtesy demands that you knock,’ an irritated Deahl snapped at him. Cardoza and the dean ignored his snub.
‘Lucier had met me with the research request. I had turned him down. In you he found an ally. The funds for research were funnelled in through the Department of Social Justice and Equality, Government of Arizona, so that no one could connect the dots. I can say with complete confidence that the research has been compromised.’
‘Ridiculous. This accusation is nonsensical.’
Bankerupt (Ravi Subramanian) Page 11