Jump to content

UK police to interview U.S. diplomat's wife about fatal crash


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

Would you sing the same song if it was your son who got killed? Normal people stay around, administer first aid and call an ambulance and the cops after having been involved in an accident, especially if they’re innocent, they don’t run back to the fort! 

Did she leave the sheen of the accident? I did not read that in the OP.

But all I know about this case is from the OP, in fact I just went back and reread it to make sure I had not missed it. Can you please send me a link to further information that says she left the sheen of the accident? if she did it would be a totally different issue, and i am surprised the OP did not mention it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 10/22/2019 at 7:08 PM, mtls2005 said:

 

The husband works for the NSA - believe she (or both) were recently arrived at this posting - and diplomatic immunity for non-diplomats appears to be something specially negotiated between the two countries for ~ 25 years?

 

No clue why she did a runner, after two weeks, if she has diplomatic immunity? Or if she was innocent?

 

The attempted shark-jumping of the parents at the WH was unusually cruel and vulgar.

 

 

What happened at the very white house was even more vulgar and tasteless than Trumps normal daily behavior. They were caught in a trap by men totally devoid of compassion, hearts and souls. Empty suits with only one agenda. 

 

Not to worry. All of these utter fools will be gone in just 14 months. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, sirineou said:

Did she leave the sheen of the accident? I did not read that in the OP.

But all I know about this case is from the OP, in fact I just went back and reread it to make sure I had not missed it. Can you please send me a link to further information that says she left the sheen of the accident? if she did it would be a totally different issue, and i am surprised the OP did not mention it.

I assumed she left the scene of the accident, otherwise the police would have her statement already and therefore there would be no need to fly two cops all the way to the US to “interview” her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

I assumed she left the scene of the accident, otherwise the police would have her statement already and therefore there would be no need to fly two cops all the way to the US to “interview” her.

It has being reported that she remained in the country for about 10 days, if she had left the seen of the accident and was in the country for 10 days, I think it is the fault of the UK authorities for not interviewing her or restricting her traveling.

Any links of other articles that support your assumption would be appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2019 at 5:32 PM, sirineou said:

It has being reported that she remained in the country for about 10 days, if she had left the seen of the accident and was in the country for 10 days, I think it is the fault of the UK authorities for not interviewing her or restricting her traveling.

Any links of other articles that support your assumption would be appreciated.

Leaving the scene of an accident you’re involved in is illegal. It’s called hit and run. Since she has diplomatic immunity there was nothing the cops could do to stop her from leaving. Either way, she made a beeline instead of taking responsibility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

Leaving the scene of an accident you’re involved in is illegal. It’s called hit and run. Since she has diplomatic immunity there was nothing the cops could do to stop her from leaving. Either way, she made a beeline instead of taking responsibility. 

Dis she really leave the scene of the accident? IMO that would be very bad.

Can someone please provide a link to an article where it is reported that she left the scene of the accident?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

Dis she really leave the scene of the accident? IMO that would be very bad.

Can someone please provide a link to an article where it is reported that she left the scene of the accident?

It's my understanding that she did not leave the scene of the accident; she fled the UK, though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scott said:

It's my understanding that she did not leave the scene of the accident; she fled the UK, though.

 

 since there were no restrictions on her travels (is that true?) then I don't think the term "fled" applies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, sirineou said:

 since there were no restrictions on her travels (is that true?) then I don't think the term "fled" applies.

UK Police wanted to interview her. She knew that and left. So yes, I think the term 'fled' is very appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

UK Police wanted to interview her. She knew that and left. So yes, I think the term 'fled' is very appropriate.

I dont know the particulars of this case , so what I say below might not be correct, So far no one has provided a link to any publication that contradicts what I say.

    If the police did not want her to leave they should had placed travel restrictions on her or confiscated  her passport. 

Did they?   Link please

If they did not she had every right to travel, thus she did not "Fled" she departed after (from what I was told in this thread) 10 days post accident. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stevenl said:

UK Police wanted to interview her. She knew that and left. So yes, I think the term 'fled' is very appropriate.

"Britain was warned the suspect in the death of a teenage motorcyclist would leave the country but couldn't do anything to stop it."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVxmhQ-UIgY

 

"Family spokesman Radd Seiger said US National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien told the family during the meeting that Mrs Sacoolas "was never coming back" to the UK.

Mrs Sacoolas was said to be covered by diplomatic immunity as the spouse of a US intelligence official, though that protection is now in dispute.

Northamptonshire Police said it will be submitting a file to the Crown Prosecution Service "very soon" on the fatal collision that led to the Mr Dunn's death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sirineou said:

I dont know the particulars of this case , so what I say below might not be correct, So far no one has provided a link to any publication that contradicts what I say.

    If the police did not want her to leave they should had placed travel restrictions on her or confiscated  her passport. 

Did they?   Link please

If they did not she had every right to travel, thus she did not "Fled" she departed after (from what I was told in this thread) 10 days post accident. 

They could not restrict her travelling due to her having diplomatic immunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stevenl said:

They could not restrict her travelling due to her having diplomatic immunity.

 So so far nothing illegal has occurred and she did not fled but rather departed as it was her right to do,. If indeed she has committed a crime. she should be charged and , begin extradition proceedings to bring her back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, sirineou said:

 So so far nothing illegal has occurred and she did not fled but rather departed as it was her right to do,. If indeed she has committed a crime. she should be charged and , begin extradition proceedings to bring her back. 

Well… but it's still true that she was'nt on the scene anymore when Harry Dunn's father arrived 40mn after the accident occured. So they could'nt meet when she still was in the UK.  As you said it was her right to do so. Harry Dunn's father was concerned " Did she go to comfort my son?". She probably did, and left only after the rescue team took the victim in charge, but was'nt there any more to comfort Harry Dunn's parents, which - in my personal view is in some aspects can be considered as failing to face the situation - could be qualified as " fleeing" too, BUT thanks to the benefit of Diplomatic immunity it is'nt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Opl said:

Well… but it's still true that she was'nt on the scene anymore when Harry Dunn's father arrived 40mn after the accident occured. So they could'nt meet when she still was in the UK.  As you said it was her right to do so. Harry Dunn's father was concerned " Did she go to comfort my son?". She probably did, and left only after the rescue team took the victim in charge, but was'nt there any more to comfort Harry Dunn's parents, which - in my personal view is in some aspects can be considered as failing to face the situation - could be qualified as " fleeing" too, BUT thanks to the benefit of Diplomatic immunity it is'nt. 

 So if I understand this correctly, she did not leave the scene of the accident until help arrives, and her only "crime" so far (as far as the scene of the accident issue is concerned)   is that she did not  remain to meet and  confront the parents. I wonder, did she know the parents were coming? and was the severity of the injuries apparent at the time? What was the state of her mind after a horrific accident? 

I am not trying to excuse her just considering a different narrative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sirineou said:

 So if I understand this correctly, she did not leave the scene of the accident until help arrives, and her only "crime" so far (as far as the scene of the accident issue is concerned)   is that she did not  remain to meet and  confront the parents. I wonder, did she know the parents were coming? and was the severity of the injuries apparent at the time? What was the state of her mind after a horrific accident? 

I am not trying to excuse her just considering a different narrative. 

Her crime is she did not take responsibility but left, or fled, the country.

 

Did she have that right, probably, although right now that is cast into doubt. Was she morally wrong, yes, no doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, sirineou said:

 So if I understand this correctly, she did not leave the scene of the accident until help arrives, and her only "crime" so far (as far as the scene of the accident issue is concerned)   is that she did not  remain to meet and  confront the parents. I wonder, did she know the parents were coming? and was the severity of the injuries apparent at the time? What was the state of her mind after a horrific accident? 

I am not trying to excuse her just considering a different narrative. 

That's what I understood. After all, it's all a matter of personal attitude.  If you were in her shoes, what would have been your behaviour?

I do find puzzling your question about her knowing or ignoring if the parents would be - or not-  able to rush to the scene.. for in other circumstances, other people, would also try to go to the hospital and share the concern - maybe the pain - but every person is different. I'm not judging. But in the end there are conséquences she is able to escape thanks to her status, again.        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Opl said:

That's what I understood. After all, it's all a matter of personal attitude.  If you were in her shoes, what would have been your behaviour?

I do find puzzling your question about her knowing or ignoring if the parents would be - or not-  able to rush to the scene.. for in other circumstances, other people, would also try to go to the hospital and share the concern - maybe the pain - but every person is different. I'm not judging. But in the end there are conséquences she is able to escape thanks to her status, again.        

A most reasonable response above. 

As far as to "I do find puzzling your question about her knowing or ignoring if the parents would be - or not-  able to rush to the scene. " I was only speculating if she knew his parents were coming , to wait for them, as it was suggested she should had, and  if she was even in a state of mind to consider such things. I am sure she must had being pretty shook up her self.

Easy to clinically judge from the comfort of our armchair, but put yourself in her situation. A woman along , in a foreign country, involved in a horrific accident, a bloody young man on the ground. 

Exactly!! what would you do if you were in her shoes. What would your wife do, what would my wife do?

I like to think I will do all the things you described, but I don't know. 

  I don't know what her state of mind was after the accident, I know if it was my wife, she would be a basket case . Who knows? After she settled down I am sure she was offered legal advice. I am sure she followed such legal advice. 

Perhaps she is a good person who reacted improperly in some people's minds, Perhaps she is a vile inconsiderate person.  I don't know her and wont venture to speculate. 

All I have spoken about so far is the legality of the situation and some of the terms thrown about 

 What I see so far is an accident,  with nothing illegal proven , and a lot of biased emotional opinions..

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/22/2019 at 6:07 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

How high is the chance that she will ever go to jail for this even if she is guilty? Maybe 1% or less?

 

But if the USA wants Julian Assange then the UK jumps...

 

I don't like Americans doing stupid stuff overseas. I detest it. That said, and unfortunately, the woman in question has diplomatic immunity. And while I am a fan of Julian Assange, he does not have diplomatic immunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sirineou said:

A most reasonable response above. 

As far as to "I do find puzzling your question about her knowing or ignoring if the parents would be - or not-  able to rush to the scene. " I was only speculating if she knew his parents were coming , to wait for them, as it was suggested she should had, and  if she was even in a state of mind to consider such things. I am sure she must had being pretty shook up her self.

Easy to clinically judge from the comfort of our armchair, but put yourself in her situation. A woman along , in a foreign country, involved in a horrific accident, a bloody young man on the ground. 

Exactly!! what would you do if you were in her shoes. What would your wife do, what would my wife do?

I like to think I will do all the things you described, but I don't know. 

  I don't know what her state of mind was after the accident, I know if it was my wife, she would be a basket case . Who knows? After she settled down I am sure she was offered legal advice. I am sure she followed such legal advice. 

Perhaps she is a good person who reacted improperly in some people's minds, Perhaps she is a vile inconsiderate person.  I don't know her and wont venture to speculate. 

All I have spoken about so far is the legality of the situation and some of the terms thrown about 

 What I see so far is an accident,  with nothing illegal proven , and a lot of biased emotional opinions..

 

 

 

An accident with nothing illegal proven? Even Trump admitted she was in the wrong, there is no question about that.

The uproar concerns the aftermath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

An accident with nothing illegal proven? Even Trump admitted she was in the wrong, there is no question about that.

The uproar concerns the aftermath.

if something illegal has occurred she should be charges  and begin extradition proceedings to bring her back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sirineou said:

if something illegal has occurred she should be charges  and begin extradition proceedings to bring her back.

It appears to me the problem is the concept of diplomatic immunity. Unless the rules are changed, we will continue to see incidents like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Crazy Alex said:

It appears to me the problem is the concept of diplomatic immunity. Unless the rules are changed, we will continue to see incidents like this.

 The rules will not change because the problems such rule change will create. will far outnumber the problems it will solve. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, sirineou said:

if something illegal has occurred she should be charges  and begin extradition proceedings to bring her back.

Could happen, since she is back in the USA her diplomatic immunity isn't applicable anymore. However I think the extradition treaty involves criminal activity. I don't know if she committed a crime and whether this would be covered by the treaty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Could happen, since she is back in the USA her diplomatic immunity isn't applicable anymore. However I think the extradition treaty involves criminal activity. I don't know if she committed a crime and whether this would be covered by the treaty.

Perhaps responsible governments should, at the very least, consider implementing sanctions against people who abuse their diplomatic immunity. I suspect that is lacking worldwide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Perhaps responsible governments should, at the very least, consider implementing sanctions against people who abuse their diplomatic immunity. I suspect that is lacking worldwide.

Yes, but U.S Diplomats don't come top of mind when refering to diplomatic immunity abuses, but it's OOT 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe police didnt interview her in UK earlier because she told a judge she was not leaving the UK.

 

But then did. So at great cost police had to go to US.

 

Only real recourse for UK is to ban her and her husband from being diplomats in UK and maybe denying any diplomatic posting for anyone until she returns.

 

Wont hold my breath on that though. If it was a diplomat from Togo then maybe.

 

But the US is not known for doing the right thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2019 at 7:33 AM, sirineou said:

I dont know the particulars of this case , so what I say below might not be correct, So far no one has provided a link to any publication that contradicts what I say.

    If the police did not want her to leave they should had placed travel restrictions on her or confiscated  her passport. 

Did they?   Link please

If they did not she had every right to travel, thus she did not "Fled" she departed after (from what I was told in this thread) 10 days post accident. 

According to Wikipedia, she talked to the cops and promised to NOT leave the country, but left anyway. The US will not remove her diplomatic immunity based on the fact that it was an accident. She drove on the wrong side of the road, which lead to a head-on collision. 
 

So, clearly she fled! Which goes to show what kind of person she is! She should’ve faced the music! 
 

Again, they could NOT restrict her travels nor confiscate her passport because of diplomatic immunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously diplomatic immunity laws need to be revised, such that killing another person is excluded.

Here's a thought - Boris declares the entire US embassy in London persona non grata until she returns to the UK. He could out-trump Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...