48 356 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT, 3d SERIES rogators are attempting to extract a confession, is when torture most commonly occurs in North Korea; indeed, it would be unusual if torture did not occur in this phase.’’ Id. Similarly, Bob Collins, an expert having extensive familiarity with North Korean interrogation methods, see Collins Expert Decl. ¶¶ 1–7, noted that Otto’s purported ‘‘confession,’’ which was full of patently false statements and unnatural language, see id. ¶ 27, indicates the confession was ‘‘most likely dictated to [Otto] in advance and the product of torture,’’ id. ¶¶ 27–28. Professor Sung-Yoon Lee, who specializes in Korean Studies at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, see Lee Expert Decl. ¶ 1, similarly concluded that ‘‘Otto was likely tortured by North Korean agents while detained in order to obtain a confession from him,’’ because it is a ‘‘routinized way through which North Korea obtains confessions from individuals in its custody,’’ id. ¶ 24. Second, Otto was likely tortured based on the nature of the North Korean crime to which he was forced to confess and for which he was convicted: removing a poster that said, ‘‘Let’s arm ourselves strongly with Kim Jong-il patriotism!’’ Collins Expert Decl. ¶ 21. According to Mr. Hawk, ‘‘North Korea almost certainly tortured Otto’’ because this crime would carry a penalty of ‘‘particularly brutal treatment’’ in North Korea, Hawk Expert Decl. ¶ 38, or even the penalty of ‘‘execution,’’ H’rg Tr. (Rough) at 97 (Expert David Hawk). Mr. Collins confirms that, ‘‘[a] crime of the nature of which Otto was accused is in fact the ultimate crime in North Korea;’’ and North Koreans suspected of similar political offenses ‘‘are seized and deported without judicial process to political prison camps TTT where they are routinely tortured and mistreated.’’ Collins Expert Decl. ¶ 22. Third, North Korea ‘‘most likely further tortured’’ Otto after his trial and sentencing ‘‘for their own intelligence and foreign relations purposes.’’ Id. ¶ 30. Indeed, North Korea probably ‘‘both seized and maintained custody of Otto’’ and then ‘‘systematically tortured’’ him to ‘‘further certain policy goals: namely, in order to deter the United States from responding either with military action or sanctions in the face of North Korea’s increased nuclear and conventional weapons testing.’’ Lee Expert Decl. ¶¶ 20, 25. Fourth, the general fact of Otto’s detention in North Korea suggests he was tortured. For example, Mr. Hawk opined that in all North Korean detention facilities, prisoners ‘‘are uniformly treated with brutality and disregard for human rights.’’ Hawk Expert Decl. ¶ 13. The ‘‘practice of torture permeates the North Korean prison and detention system,’’ id. ¶ 20, and ‘‘is particularly common TTT during interrogations,’’ id. ¶ 23. Likewise, Mr. Collins explained that he is ‘‘aware of hundreds of North Koreans TTT who have been subject to’’ torture, Collins Expert Decl. ¶ 27, and concluded Otto was likely tortured based on that ‘‘routine’’ practice, id. ¶¶ 18, 28. According to Professor Lee, given the expected and routinized nature of torture in North Korean facilities, North Korean interrogators ‘‘would have found it unpatriotic not to use torture to get what they want.’’ H’rg Tr. (Rough) at 126 (Expert Prof. Sung-Yoon Lee). Fifth, notably, several torture methods regularly employed by North Korea are ‘‘consistent with Otto’s condition when he returned.’’ Collins Expert Decl. ¶ 31. Dr. Daniel Kanter, the neurologist who cared for Otto when he returned to the United States, concluded Otto’s brain damage resulted from the cessation or significant reduction of blood flow to the brain for five to twenty minutes, which can be caused by