By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Nurul Amin Shah Alam, a nearly blind Rohingya refugee from Burma, has been found dead after going missing following his release from custody. Border Patrol agents dropped Shah Alam off at a coffee shop approximately five miles from his home, failing to notify his family or legal representative. The cause of death was determined to be health-related, with authorities investigating the circumstances surrounding his release and subsequent death.
Read the original article here
The recent death of Nurul Amin Shah Alam, a nearly blind Rohingya refugee from Burma, in Buffalo, New York, has cast a dark shadow over the promises of safety and refuge in the United States. Shah Alam, found dead on Tuesday evening, had been released by U.S. Border Patrol agents just days prior, dropped off at a doughnut shop and left to navigate his way home, a journey of five miles, with a significant visual impairment. This abandonment, according to those who knew him and are advocating for him, has led to an entirely avoidable tragedy.
City Hall spokesperson Ian Ott confirmed that B District officers discovered Shah Alam’s body on Perry Street shortly after 8:30 p.m. Tuesday, responding to a call about a deceased individual. The Erie County Medical Examiner has since identified Shah Alam, and his family has been notified. While homicide detectives are reportedly investigating the circumstances surrounding his death, the Medical Examiner has determined the cause to be “health related in nature,” ruling out both exposure and homicide as the direct cause of his demise.
The frustration and devastation are palpable among those who knew Shah Alam and his family. Imran Fazel, an advocate for Rohingya refugees, expressed disbelief and a profound sense of insecurity, stating that he never imagined such an experience would befall anyone seeking refuge in the United States. The incident has shaken the faith in the country’s commitment to welcoming those in need of safety and protection.
Shah Alam had been reported missing since February 19th. He had been in custody at the Erie County Holding Center and was released after posting bail. Prior to his release, the Erie County Sheriff’s Office had been alerted to an immigration detainer placed on him and had contacted U.S. Border Patrol. Benjamin Macaluso, an attorney representing Shah Alam, detailed that Border Patrol agents took custody of him from the Holding Center on Thursday afternoon.
Shah Alam had agreed to a plea deal with the Erie County District Attorney’s office, pleading guilty to charges of trespassing and possession of a weapon, which, in this instance, was a curtain rod he used as a walking stick. This plea was a strategic move to address the immigration detainer and avoid further detention by immigration agencies. After securing his release on bail, Border Patrol agents then transported him, not to a detention center as his attorney expected, but to a Tim Hortons on Niagara Street in the Black Rock neighborhood, dropping him off around 8 p.m.
The family of Shah Alam resides in the Broadway-Fillmore neighborhood on the East Side of Buffalo, a considerable distance from the Black Rock neighborhood. A spokesperson for Border Patrol stated that agents offered Shah Alam a “courtesy ride” to a coffee shop, which they deemed a “warm, safe location near his last known address” as an alternative to releasing him directly from the Border Patrol station. The spokesperson further claimed that Shah Alam exhibited “no signs of distress, mobility issues, or disabilities requiring special assistance.”
This assertion is met with significant skepticism, given Shah Alam’s documented visual impairment and his reliance on a curtain rod as a walking aid. Crucially, neither Shah Alam’s attorney nor his family were notified of his release to the coffee shop. Macaluso had anticipated that Shah Alam would be transferred to an ICE detention center in Batavia. The lack of communication left Macaluso and the family searching for him from Friday through Sunday, with Macaluso eventually filing a missing persons report on Sunday.
Adding to the confusion, a detective reportedly closed the missing persons case for several hours on Monday, mistakenly believing Shah Alam was in custody at the ICE detention facility in Batavia, before the case was reopened. The subsequent discovery of Shah Alam’s death has amplified calls for accountability and raised serious questions about the procedures and ethical considerations guiding the actions of Border Patrol agents. The claim that he showed no signs of needing assistance is particularly jarring when considering his blindness and his use of a repurposed household item as a cane.
The narrative that Shah Alam was not in distress and did not require special assistance starkly contrasts with the reality of his situation. Dropping a man with a severe visual impairment, who had just been released from custody and was unfamiliar with his immediate surroundings, five miles from his home, is seen by many as a dereliction of duty and an act of profound cruelty. The fact that he was carrying a curtain rod, a necessity for his mobility, and was charged with its possession as a “weapon” further highlights the Kafkaesque nature of his legal entanglements and subsequent abandonment.
The sentiment that this incident reflects a systemic issue, where vulnerable individuals are treated with a disturbing lack of humanity, is widespread. The argument that “cruelty is the point” in such situations suggests a deeper disillusionment with the principles of compassion and human dignity. The response from the community, particularly in Buffalo, a city known for its welcoming spirit towards refugees and immigrants, has been one of deep sorrow and outrage. This event has served as a stark reminder that the impact of national policies can be felt acutely at the local level, shattering any illusions of safety and comfort.
The tragedy of Shah Alam’s death is compounded by the circumstances of his release and subsequent disappearance. The lack of transparency and communication from Border Patrol agents has fueled suspicions and demands for a thorough and independent investigation. The determination of his death as “health related” by the Medical Examiner, while technically ruling out homicide or exposure, does little to alleviate the feeling that his vulnerability was exploited, leading to his untimely end. The question remains whether the conditions and stress he experienced following his abandonment, combined with his underlying health conditions, contributed to his death, even if not directly by exposure. The heartbreaking reality is that a man seeking refuge, a man in a vulnerable state, died alone and seemingly forgotten, a stark indictment of the system designed to protect and process him.