snoop1130 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 U.S. denies Britain's extradition request for diplomat's wife FILE PHOTO: Harry Dunn's mother Charlotte Charles poses in front of a banner outside the Buckingham Palace as people demonstrate during U.S. President Donald Trump's visit for NATO summit, in London, Britain December 3, 2019. REUTERS/Dylan Martinez/File Photo WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States has declined Britain’s request for the extradition of a U.S. diplomat’s wife who was involved in a car crash last year that killed a British teenager, the State Department said on Thursday. British prosecutors have requested the extradition of Anne Sacoolas over the crash last August in which 19-year-old Briton Harry Dunn was killed while riding his motorbike. “At the time the accident occurred, and for the duration of her stay in the UK, the U.S. citizen driver in this case had immunity from criminal jurisdiction,” a State Department representative said in a statement. “If the United States were to grant the UK’s extradition request, it would render the invocation of diplomatic immunity a practical nullity and would set an extraordinarily troubling precedent,” the statement said. Dunn’s family has said Sacoolas was driving on the wrong side of the road at the time of the crash near an air force base in central England used by the U.S. military. Sacoolas was given diplomatic immunity and left Britain shortly after the accident. Her lawyer has said that she would not return voluntarily to Britain to possibly face jail for “a terrible but unintentional accident.” British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said Sacoolas was wrong to use diplomatic immunity to leave Britain and has urged U.S. President Donald Trump to reconsider the U.S. position. Dunn’s parents met Trump at the White House in October. Trump hoped to persuade them meet to Sacoolas, who was in the building at the same time, but they declined. -- © Copyright Reuters 2020-01-24 Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ThaiPauly Posted January 24, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 24, 2020 Diabolical, That is the kind of attitude I would expect from a country like Iran, not one of our closest allies. The woman made an awful mistake, she should be made to pay for it, immunity or not. I really feel sorry for the victim's family, they must be heartbroken that they cannot get justice for their son 18 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 24, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 24, 2020 Of course it's sad and regrettable that someone died in a traffic collision. That notwithstanding, however, it's hard to see how the woman involved would not be covered by diplomatic immunity, as the wife of a U.S. Embassy officer there. If some country wants to take the position that the family members of their Embassy officers should not be covered by diplomatic immunity when abroad, they're likely to quickly find their embassy staff's family members being held de facto hostage by any number of adversary governments. 4 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post cmarshall Posted January 24, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 24, 2020 She may not have had immunity, which would explain why she scarpered after telling the British police that she would not leave the country. It is not clear that her husband, Jonathan Sacoolas, was actually a registered diplomat at the time of the accident. The report is that she was driving on the wrong side of the road, so the fault would have been entirely hers. If true, the State Department is lying. 13 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 15 minutes ago, cmarshall said: She may not have had immunity, which would explain why she scarpered after telling the British police that she would not leave the country. It is not clear that her husband, Jonathan Sacoolas, was actually a registered diplomat at the time of the accident. The report is that she was driving on the wrong side of the road, so the fault would have been entirely hers. If true, the State Department is lying. I don't think there's any formal "registration" process that exclusively invokes or applies diplomatic immunity, as per the BBC report below. And FWIW, American do, and always have, driven on the opposite side of the road than Britons do... But hopefully, they only do that when in their respective home countries!!! Quote Who else receives immunity? Diplomatic immunity is by no means restricted to those named on the Diplomatic List from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Drivers, cooks and other support staff whose names do not appear but have been accredited to Britain ("the receiving state") have the same diplomatic status and immunity as those listed. The level of immunity varies and depends on rank and "ranges from immunity from criminal and civil and administrative jurisdiction to immunity for official acts only", according to the Crown Prosecution Service. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49984737 Edited January 24, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 If the Uk does not like the diplomatic immunity concept they should withdraw from the Vienna convention. 2 2 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 Quote How far does diplomatic immunity go? It depends on your rank. Top diplomatic officers have full immunity, as do their deputies and families. That means ambassadors can commit just about any crime—from jaywalking to murder—and still be immune from prosecution. They can’t be arrested or forced to testify in court. (This category would probably include al-Madadi, who serves as third secretary in the Qatari embassy.) Lower-ranking officials have a weaker type of protection called “functional immunity.” These officials are covered only for crimes committed within the scope of their regular work responsibilities. If, for example, a consular official got into a fistfight during a meeting with a U.S. official, he would be protected from prosecution. If the fight occurred at a bar over the weekend, he would not. Service staff for an embassy or consulate, from the kitchen employees to the valets, have no immunity whatsoever. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/04/how-far-does-diplomatic-immunity-go.html 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleopatra2 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 34 minutes ago, cmarshall said: She may not have had immunity, which would explain why she scarpered after telling the British police that she would not leave the country. It is not clear that her husband, Jonathan Sacoolas, was actually a registered diplomat at the time of the accident. The report is that she was driving on the wrong side of the road, so the fault would have been entirely hers. If true, the State Department is lying. The Foreign Secretary stated in Parliament that the woman had diplomatic immunity Under UK law this is sufficient evidence of immunity 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evadgib Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 Harry Dunn case: Foreign Secretary's statement, 24 January 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post cmarshall Posted January 24, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, cleopatra2 said: The Foreign Secretary stated in Parliament that the woman had diplomatic immunity Under UK law this is sufficient evidence of immunity Then why did she run? And why are the Brits asking for her extradition if she can't be prosecuted? Edited January 24, 2020 by cmarshall 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasThBKK Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 4 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: I don't think there's any formal "registration" process that exclusively invokes or applies diplomatic immunity, as per the BBC report below. Having an diplomatic passport doesn't grant you diplomatic immunity, you have to be registered as a diplomat in a certain country and the host country has to accept your diplomatic role. Then it is granted to you and your family depending on the level of your own diplomatic relation. Your immunity is so to say bound to the country that accepted it, if you go out for holiday etc you are no longer under diplomatic immunity. Case earlier where germany arrested an iranian diplomatic that was based in austria on his holiday and then austria stripping him off his immunity: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45705799 Case above doesn't surprise me at all tho, germany for example never extradits their own citizen, diplomatic immunity or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animalmagic Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 13 hours ago, cleopatra2 said: The Foreign Secretary stated in Parliament that the woman had diplomatic immunity Under UK law this is sufficient evidence of immunity You are probably correct. However, I am way past believing anything a politician says anywhere! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Lacessit Posted January 25, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 25, 2020 Perhaps it is time the concept of diplomatic immunity is reviewed. As a diplomat, I could get plastered, drive a car, mow down a few pedestrians, and walk away scot free. Certain nationalities do abuse diplomatic immunity. I'm wondering how many diplomatic bags are used to courier drugs. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, Lacessit said: Perhaps it is time the concept of diplomatic immunity is reviewed. As a diplomat, I could get plastered, drive a car, mow down a few pedestrians, and walk away scot free. Certain nationalities do abuse diplomatic immunity. I'm wondering how many diplomatic bags are used to courier drugs. I am sure all these things happen and more. But consider the alternative. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post robblok Posted January 25, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 25, 2020 10 minutes ago, sirineou said: I am sure all these things happen and more. But consider the alternative. Yes how about the diplomats really stick to the rules that is the alternative using diplomatic freedom as it is meant not as a cover. Its fun to see how the US bullies the UK. The UK is now far less powerful and will be bending over to the US all the time. Now the Brits know how the relation will be. US will tell the Brits what they have to do and the Brits have to smile and accept it. 3 1 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmarshall Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 23 minutes ago, robblok said: Yes how about the diplomats really stick to the rules that is the alternative using diplomatic freedom as it is meant not as a cover. Its fun to see how the US bullies the UK. The UK is now far less powerful and will be bending over to the US all the time. Now the Brits know how the relation will be. US will tell the Brits what they have to do and the Brits have to smile and accept it. Yes, but that has been the case at least since Suez at least and probably during WWII also. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 32 minutes ago, robblok said: Yes how about the diplomats really stick to the rules that is the alternative using diplomatic freedom as it is meant not as a cover. Its fun to see how the US bullies the UK. The UK is now far less powerful and will be bending over to the US all the time. Now the Brits know how the relation will be. US will tell the Brits what they have to do and the Brits have to smile and accept it. Sure we should all stick to the rule, It would be a wonderful world. You guys start first. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardColeman Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 Best way to hit an American manslaughetring absconder is by their own civil legal system and sue her until she is living in the streets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 11 hours ago, cmarshall said: Then why did she run? And why are the Brits asking for her extradition if she can't be prosecuted? Because the country of the person having diplomatic immunity always has the OPTION to waive that immunity, if they choose to. In this case, the U.S. declined to waive her immunity. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 1 hour ago, Lacessit said: Perhaps it is time the concept of diplomatic immunity is reviewed. As a diplomat, I could get plastered, drive a car, mow down a few pedestrians, and walk away scot free. Certain nationalities do abuse diplomatic immunity. I'm wondering how many diplomatic bags are used to courier drugs. It's happened in the U.S. as well... U.S. citizens have been victimized by criminal or other bad behavior by foreign nationals there with diplomatic immunity. That's the way the system works, because to have otherwise, would open up foreign diplomats around the world and their families to all kinds of potential persecution. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robblok Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 11 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: Because the country of the person having diplomatic immunity always has the OPTION to waive that immunity, if they choose to. In this case, the U.S. declined to waive her immunity. Yes I mean the US could have done something good and just but it just protects its own. As you said the law is to protect diplomats from unjust persecution and in this case there is no such thing. Its a just claim to hold her responsible for what she has done. So it would be fair to waive it and let true justice take its cause. That is how you treat your allies and friends. Not the way the US treats them now by using the letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, robblok said: Not the way the US treats them now by using the letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law. The spirit of the law, so to speak, is that diplomats and their families are immune from prosecution. It doesn't matter whether it's a case of persecution or whether they ran over and killed someone while plastered drunk. The immunity applies regardless of the type of incident involved. I can't say for certain, but I'd wager, it's relatively rare that any countries waive diplomatic immunity when their government employees are facing prosecution. It has happened, but I'd say certainly is the exception... And I'm talking around the world... not just cases involving the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robblok Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: The spirit of the law, so to speak, is that diplomats and their families are immune from prosecution. It doesn't matter whether it's a case of persecution or whether they ran over and killed someone while plastered drunk. The immunity applies regardless of the type of incident involved. I can't say for certain, but I'd wager, it's relatively rare that any countries waive diplomatic immunity when their government employees are facing prosecution. It has happened, but I'd say certainly is the exception... And I'm talking around the world... not just cases involving the U.S. You yourself say its to protect for kinds of persecution... that meaning unjust things. This is a perfectly sound case. I am not saying the US is any more bad then other countries but its just stupid what they are doing here. Let the person face justice or at least in their own countries. This is not how you treat your allies. The spirit of the law is to protect from unjust persecution nothing more nothing less not to get out of real legal trouble. (everyone with half a brain knows it was set up for that) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFun Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 16 hours ago, sirineou said: If the Uk does not like the diplomatic immunity concept they should withdraw from the Vienna convention. Cool, so, if we do that we can drone strike her yeah? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFun Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 26 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: The spirit of the law, so to speak, is that diplomats and their families are immune from prosecution. It doesn't matter whether it's a case of persecution or whether they ran over and killed someone while plastered drunk. The immunity applies regardless of the type of incident involved. I can't say for certain, but I'd wager, it's relatively rare that any countries waive diplomatic immunity when their government employees are facing prosecution. It has happened, but I'd say certainly is the exception... And I'm talking around the world... not just cases involving the U.S. Of course the US would take this same perspective if it were the other way around. When will Brits learn this 'special relationship' is fluff talk. One way maybe but both ways, never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Bundooman Posted January 25, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 25, 2020 16 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: Of course it's sad and regrettable that someone died in a traffic collision. That notwithstanding, however, it's hard to see how the woman involved would not be covered by diplomatic immunity, as the wife of a U.S. Embassy officer there. If some country wants to take the position that the family members of their Embassy officers should not be covered by diplomatic immunity when abroad, they're likely to quickly find their embassy staff's family members being held de facto hostage by any number of adversary governments. You have to be American, right? She didn't have immunity. She did something wrong. She fled the country. If she had immunity - why did she run? She wasn't going to be held accountable if she had immunity, would she? Fleeing the scene of the accident is something Thai are castigated for on this forum. Does that include you? She didn't even have the decency to say anything to the parents personally. Their son was killed. She just ran. How sickening is that? The USA expects every country to abide by its own extradition rules, but isn't prepared to do the same when one of their criminals, (and yes, she is a criminal), is under the extradition process. I agree with your 3rd sentence, but she didn't have the immunity. Why not? Why didn't she have immunity? Too arrogant? But of course. She is American. 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 (edited) ,,, Edited January 25, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bundooman Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 16 hours ago, sirineou said: If the Uk does not like the diplomatic immunity concept they should withdraw from the Vienna convention. Stupid, stupid response. Not even worth posting really...…... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 Et tu, Brutus??? Quote Seventeen British envoys avoided trial for serious crimes last year Wednesday 29 November 2006 Seventeen British diplomats got off scot-free after being accused of serious offences including serious assault abroad last year by claiming diplomatic immunity. Each was accused of an offence which could have cost them at least a year in jail if they had not been protected by their diplomatic status. The allegations included serious assault, where the victims suffered injuries, and drunken driving in Muslim countries where alcohol is illegal. Complaints raised with the British authorities included two allegations that British staff had committed assaults causing actual bodily harm, one in Jordan and the other in Saudi Arabia. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/seventeen-british-envoys-avoided-trial-for-serious-crimes-last-year-426249.html 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bundooman Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 2 hours ago, animalmagic said: You are probably correct. However, I am way past believing anything a politician says anywhere! 2 hours ago, robblok said: Yes how about the diplomats really stick to the rules that is the alternative using diplomatic freedom as it is meant not as a cover. Its fun to see how the US bullies the UK. The UK is now far less powerful and will be bending over to the US all the time. Now the Brits know how the relation will be. US will tell the Brits what they have to do and the Brits have to smile and accept it. Possibly very true. Delighted that it is fun for you to see how the UK is 'bullied' by the US. What happy fun that must be for you. Happy endings every day? Which means, as your closest ally, we join the ranks of every other country around the world that despises you, doesn't trust you and like everyone else, know that you, the most powerful nation on earth at the moment, will never be an empire. Your country is falling apart pal - you can thank yourselves for that! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now