as the intentional infliction of pain or suffering “by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity” for a variety of purposes, such as coercing a confession, or as punishment for an act, or due to discrimination. 8 C.F.R. § 208.18(a)(1). “ ‘An applicant for relief need not show that the harm she [or he] faces is based on one of the five grounds ... required under the INA, but rather must establish a particularized threat of torture.’ ” Bi Xia Qu v. Holder, 618 F.3d 602, 610 (6th Cir.2010) (quoting Cruz-Samayoa v. Holder, 607 F.3d 1145, 1155 (6th Cir.2010)). “ ‘Torture,’ in any of its myriad manifestations, must entail the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain upon an i ir.2010) (<HOLDING>); Villegas v. Mukasey, 523 F.3d 984, 988-89
holding that beyond evidence of inhumane prison conditions a cat claimant must provide some evidence that the authorities act with the specific intent to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering on those detained recognizing as separate from pain and suffering holding that detention in squalid overcrowded cells without adequate food water sanitation exercise or medical treatment in haitian prisons does not constitute torture under cat because there is no evidence that haitian authorities have the specific intent to inflict pain or suffering recognizing as an element of pain and suffering holding that pain and suffering does not survive the death of the injured