Diplomatic Immunity

The government can push for the US to prosecute her under the equivilant causing death by dangerous laws in the states.

However, even if she was tried in the UK, it would be unlikely she would be jailed as it does seem like a genuine accident. This used to happen all the time around here (several US air bases, East Anglian fast country roads, bad combination) with that in mind it's easier to expell her and ban her from entering the country.
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
A guy* at school went to see this at the cinema and took photos (using a camera) of the part in the film where Patsy Kensit had her fried eggs on display. Also, when she drowns, which was a bit weird thinking about it. Chap became a bit of a pre-internet and pre-mobile phone legend by getting the photos processed at Boots and shared them with his friends, including me, at school.


*not me
Click to expand...

You lived on the fast lane.
 
With regard to extradition treaties both the European Arrest Warrant and UK-US Extradition Treaty are travesties of justice justified by the bogeyman of "international terrorism" something neither of which have ever been really used to expedite.
 
I believe it was originally stated that this woman's American husband was a spy, which figures given the location and accepted purposes of the base, and that bringing her name in to the media could risk his safety and of course the secrecy of the US operations he might be involved in. Now the Daily Mail has published her name I think that excuse is somewhat specious.

Back in the good old days when diplomatic cars sported a CD plate I had a customer with such a vehicle. Very handy for shopping in Manchester, you could dump it pretty much anywhere and never get a ticket...
 
PlacidCasual said:
With regard to extradition treaties both the European Arrest Warrant and UK-US Extradition Treaty are travesties of justice justified by the bogeyman of "international terrorism" something neither of which have ever been really used to expedite.
Click to expand...

Careful, the UK "watch list" is growing exponentially and they don't tell you that you are on it! ;)
 
PlacidCasual said:
With regard to extradition treaties both the European Arrest Warrant and UK-US Extradition Treaty are travesties of justice justified by the bogeyman of "international terrorism" something neither of which have ever been really used to expedite.
Click to expand...

I dont think extradition is relevant as she cant be charged with a crime due to DI, therefore there's nothing to extradite her for.

The whole thing feels shameful. I was reading about it yesterday and there is a long list of incidents ignored due to DI, from murder/rape/child abuse to simpler stuff like numerous parking and traffic fines.

The US response is pitiful, we feel sorry, we will consider this at the highest level, we wont waive diplomatic immunity though so move on.

Makes the lads death feel cheapened. Just pretend to comply a bit then skoot back to the US and keep a low profile till it blows over.
 
Thecaferacer said:
Out of interest why do you believe that?
Click to expand...
Neither requires Prima Facie evidence be provided. Historically before extradition could be approved you had to demonstrate an offense had taken place, that the offense was criminal in both jurisdictions and that there was a reasonable evidence to suggest the case should proceed.

So the NatWest 3 worked in the UK, for a UK company the Serious Fraud Office decided there was no case to answer but they were extradited to the US where the justice system was used to force them into a plea bargain of guilt. No one likes bankers so who gives crap.

A UK holiday maker in Greece (forget his name) was accused of murder after he'd left Greece and returned to the UK. The crime happened after he had left Greece, UK border agency, plus travel firm, plus airline could demonstrate he had left Greece arrived in UK before crime occurred. He was extradited under the EAW and spent over a year awaiting trial with his parents having to raise money for his legal defence before he was released, cos you know he didn't do it not being in the country and all. The parents of Aysha King were arrested in Spain at the behest of the South Central Health Board and Hampshire Police because they decided to seek alternative treatment for their child.

In all these cases the judge (UK or EU) who ordered arrest and deportation had no choice in the matter their only role was to confirm that the person before them was the person requested not that a was crime committed or that it was reasonable that the extraditee had a reasonable case to answer. Which would happen in any UK case following a charge and before trial.

The number of cases like this is too large, both treaties should be scrapped immediately and proper extradition treaties where some evidence has to be presented to a UK judge introduced. The way things were before the bogeyman.

@Minstadave I agree, I was at a tangent to main topic and wasn't suggesting it was. Someone mentioned extradition and needed to get my disapproval off my chest. I hate the way so many UK politicians lined up behind these travesties of justice to "protect the free World" or some other bull poo.
 
It isn't exactly a new thing, this is fairly standard procedure by the US when it comes to any incidents like this, just pull the people out of the country and obstruct any investigation. Yes it does abuse diplomatic immunity and they should have wavered it in a case like this.

They also use diplomatic immunity to rack up and avoid paying the congestion charge in London.
 
wolfie138 said:
as far as I can tell even if she'd stayed it would make little difference to the legal outcome.
Click to expand...

Impossible to say that given the investigation has been obstructed and evidence lost in the process. She may have been distracted or under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time, there could have been faults with her vehicle or some other factors involved that aren't accounted for given one person died and the other fled.
 
TheVoice said:
Impossible to say that given the investigation has been obstructed and evidence lost in the process. She may have been distracted or under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time, there could have been faults with her vehicle or some other factors involved that aren't accounted for given one person died and the other fled.
Click to expand...
that's why I said "as far as I can tell".
 
In the current world climate DI is not going away any time soon, put yourself in the shoes of a diplomat in say China or some African country, you would welcome its protection. not that it isn't abused, but it is needed...
 
PlacidCasual said:
Neither requires Prima Facie evidence be provided. Historically before extradition could be approved you had to demonstrate an offense had taken place, that the offense was criminal in both jurisdictions and that there was a reasonable evidence to suggest the case should proceed.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point and there will always be examples of misuse, however the EAW has actively been used to good effect in both sending people back to their home countries for serious crimes and vice versa. This is pertinent in some rape cases where other countries have shall we say a far more lax approach to what constitutes rape.

Diplomatic immunity is essential for ensuring the safety of the diplomats in foreign countries to prevent harassment or falling foul of Draconian new laws in places with poor human rights records.
 
This is just the establishment pressing that boot on your face, but you know, keep voting for it, i'm sure it'll change any day now...

If you happen to be raped or murdered by a Saudi Arabian Diplomat (or not even), tough ****, you're less than worthless. https://www.propublica.org/article/...o-flee-while-u-s-officials-look-the-other-way
If you happen to be run over and killed by a US Diplomat, tough ****, you clearly deserved it.
If you happen to be poisoned by a Russian, the government wont do anything about it because it's knee deep in that dirty money, better just stay indoors for the rest of your life, because they aren't going to help you.

Just deal with it, because you're a pleb and they aren't, the law doesn't work for you.
 
Last edited:
I think this is an unfortunate accident based on what I read. If she had stayed in the UK and apologised, I think that would have gone some way to help the family.

I don’t think she should have run away, it shows a lack of empathy and that she’s just looking out for number one.

I don’t think she, as the wife should have DI, Just the persons working on behalf of said government.
 
StriderX said:
This is just the establishment pressing that boot on your face, but you know, keep voting for it, i'm sure it'll change any day now...

If you happen to be raped or murdered by a Saudi Arabian Diplomat (or not even), tough ****, you're less than worthless. https://www.propublica.org/article/...o-flee-while-u-s-officials-look-the-other-way
If you happen to be run over and killed by a US Diplomat, tough ****, you clearly deserved it.
If you happen to be poisoned by a Russian, the government wont do anything about it because it's knee deep in that dirty money.

Just deal with it, because you're a pleb and they aren't, the law doesn't work for you.
Click to expand...

You are aware that diplomatic immunity wasn't voted for and it's a custom dating back literally 1000s of years and codified in the Vienna convention in 1961. This isn't some new thing that's allows all the people you think are the elite to go around committing crimes like young aristocrats.

What it does in real terms is prevent diplomats and their female family being sentenced to death in Islamic countries for breaches of Sharia, being executed in Africa for getting in to a car accident or any other of grave punishment for offences that don't exist in the West.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom