Diplomatic Immunity

Associate
Joined
15 Feb 2017
Posts
2,152
Location
the ghetto
If she's been charged, does this mean an arrest warrant will be put out for her?


Normally the charge sheet (
with a non custodial)would include an arrest warrant (with such an offence) so if she ever lands on U.K. soil she would be arrested.

especially with how she left the U.K...

extraditing her to the U.K. is a different kettle of fish though..

I’ve dealt with diplomats in my previous line of work.. most play on it massively.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2011
Posts
21,592
Location
ST4
Should just grab her off the street in the US, throw her on a boat and transfer her to a UK registered vessel in international waters before anyone realises she's even missing. It should work, it's what the Chinese did with Jack Bauer.
 
Associate
Joined
15 Feb 2017
Posts
2,152
Location
the ghetto
Should just grab her off the street in the US, throw her on a boat and transfer her to a UK registered vessel in international waters before anyone realises she's even missing. It should work, it's what the Chinese did with Jack Bauer.

that’s pretty much how they got her out the U.K. from what I understand.

I have my theories because of who uses that air base but I don’t want to get hit with the tin foil hat accusations :D
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Mar 2012
Posts
10,072
Location
West Sussex, England
Sadly that will not happen. She should have been extradited when she first left the country but the Americans decided nope.
Feel for the parents, they only want justice and it’s being denied by the American govt.

She didn't have DA in the end though did she, so she shouldn't have been allowed to leave. Even with DA it shouldn't exclude someone from being above the law. I hope it works out right in the end, it's the last thing a parent should have to go through on top of loosing their child.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jun 2012
Posts
11,259
Will she not just argue that she got confused with the different sides of the roads, how can you charge her for that, it was an accident.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Mar 2012
Posts
10,072
Location
West Sussex, England
Will she not just argue that she got confused with the different sides of the roads, how can you charge her for that, it was an accident.

Not being in control of your vehicle or availing yourself to the prevailing laws is no defence. It was no accident, it was negligence. You can't side step not paying due care and attention with "I got confused".
 
Caporegime
Joined
1 Dec 2010
Posts
52,339
Location
Welling, London
Will she not just argue that she got confused with the different sides of the roads, how can you charge her for that, it was an accident.
Sorry, but that’s lolworthy. When you come to live in a foreign country and wish to drive, it’s your duty to learn the rules of the road and follow them. Anything else is pure negligence.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Sep 2008
Posts
10,053
Location
Burscough
Lawyer Amy Jefress said: "Anne will not return voluntarily to the UK to face a potential jail sentence for what was a terrible but unintentional accident."

Haha! I'm going to use that if the police ever want to arrest me for something....just say you didn't mean it and it'll be alright, you won't even have to prove it so in court!

Absolutely outrageous from the US govt.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Mar 2012
Posts
10,072
Location
West Sussex, England
Lawyer Amy Jefress said: "Anne will not return voluntarily to the UK to face a potential jail sentence for what was a terrible but unintentional accident."

Haha! I'm going to use that if the police ever want to arrest me for something....just say you didn't mean it and it'll be alright, you won't even have to prove it so in court!

Absolutely outrageous from the US govt.

Is her lawyer self funded or supplied by US govt?
 

TJM

TJM

Associate
Joined
10 Jun 2007
Posts
2,378
Will she not just argue that she got confused with the different sides of the roads, how can you charge her for that, it was an accident.
Virtually all deaths involving vehicles are accidents and drivers are regularly prosecuted for causing death by careless or dangerous driving. The question isn't whether she meant to drive on the wrong side of the road for 400 yards but whether a careful and competent driver would have done the same.

I have a feeling that extradition treaty works one way only.

The US are quick to take UK citizens, but won't give up one of their own. :(
https://assets.publishing.service.g...hment_data/file/117673/extradition-review.pdf

Page 472 - we make fewer requests (probably because there are easier places to flee to than the US) but get most of them. The review of UK/US extradition arrangements (beginning on page 231) concludes that they are not unbalanced and makes the good point that a lot of the complaints about the extradition treaty are really about the US's domestic criminal justice system - mindlessly harsh sentences, terrible prisons, etc.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 May 2003
Posts
11,103
Virtually all deaths involving vehicles are accidents and drivers are regularly prosecuted for causing death by careless or dangerous driving. The question isn't whether she meant to drive on the wrong side of the road for 400 yards but whether a careful and competent driver would have done the same.

I think the way she fled the country as soon as she could, speaks volumes.
 
Soldato
Joined
2 Aug 2012
Posts
7,809
Not being in control of your vehicle or availing yourself to the prevailing laws is no defence. It was no accident, it was negligence. You can't side step not paying due care and attention with "I got confused".

And that is the problem,

Of course she was "Negligent" Almost ALL accidents are as a result of "Negligence". Really, should everybody who has an accident, no matter how trivial, while driving automatically face serious criminal charges??

In her case, A type of negligence that I expect every driver who has ever switched between driving LHS and RHS will have been guilty of. but will, the vast majority of the time, have had no more serious consequences than an "Oh Crap" moment.

Sadly, In this particular case, the consequences were fatal. But that fatality does not and should not make the extent of her criminal culpability more serious.

This really comes under the remit of "Driving without due care and attention" and the fact that somebody died should not really be an additional consideration criminally speaking

Sure, she would in the US under similar circumstances, face a "Wrongful Death" civil claim, as sure as night follows day. And being the US it would undoubtedly be a very large one! But, in the absence of any other aggravating factors such as intoxication, her criminal liability probabally would not extend beyond a fine and endorsement. (If anybody knows better, feel free to comment)

Sadly, as a result of the "Daily Mail" lobby who equates "Justice" to being a 21st century version of the code of Hamnuranmbi, the UK has absurd offences such as "Causing death by <Inset minor error here>" for which one can receive penalties based not on what you actually did, but on whatever unfortunate consequences might have arisen simply as a result of misfortune and bad timing.


Latest update to this is that she has now been charged with causing death by dangerous driving

And this is just absurd.

She wasn't drunk, She wasn't speeding. She wasn't driving recklessly. She wasn't driving tired, she wasn't fiddling with her phone, In fact, there were no aggravating factors at all. It was an momentary error that happened to have a serious outcome

The "Dangerous Driving" aspect is based solely on the fact that somebody died.

And "Somebody died so somebody has to go to prison" is not justice, at least not in any civilised jurisdiction anyway.

Were I in her position I do not think I would willingly return to the UK to face a vengeful and unjust legal system either
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Aug 2005
Posts
22,977
Location
Glasgow
Sadly, In this particular case, the consequences were fatal. But that fatality does not and should not make the extent of her criminal culpability more serious.

Why not? If you kill someone whilst driving over the prescribed alcohol limit, you'll face a far tougher penalty versus if you're simply stopped by the police whilst over the same limit. That applies to anything really, the consequences of your actions - be it injuring someone, killing them or having no impact on anyone else at all - are taken into account appropriately, whether they're a result of a deliberate decision or negligent behaviour.
 
Associate
Joined
15 Sep 2005
Posts
1,744
...
She wasn't drunk, She wasn't speeding. She wasn't driving recklessly. She wasn't driving tired, she wasn't fiddling with her phone, In fact, there were no aggravating factors at all...

Those are one person's version of events. You may choose to believe them or not but in law (and for the sake of all those personally involved) it's for the courts to decide on their veracity. What you or I or anyone else thinks doesn't much matter.
 
Permabanned
Joined
26 Sep 2019
Posts
494
It's apparently "inappropriate" to seek her extradition.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-51075235

A spokeswoman for the US State Department said: "It is the position of the United States government that a request to extradite an individual under these circumstances would be an abuse.

"The use of an extradition treaty to attempt to return the spouse of a former diplomat by force would establish an extraordinarily troubling precedent."

Like diplomats and their spouses being held responsible for their crimes. Goodness gracious how awful.
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Mar 2004
Posts
29,913
Location
England
Back
Top Bottom