Jump to content

U.S. denies Britain's extradition request for diplomat's wife


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, mrfill said:

 Just like the pick up truck driver in Thailand who drive the wrong way down carriageways - yes, THAT stupid.

 

It's one thing to drive the wrong way down a road in your home country on a road system you're accustomed to.

 

It's a different thing to be both a new arrival in a country that drives opposite from what you're accustomed, and AFAIK to have been living on a U.S. Air Force Base where the U.S. driving custom (and not the UK one) was followed.

 

It doesn't excuse what happened, or the fact that a young man died as a result. But those nonetheless are factors that any court/judge would consider in mitigation, as do I when considering what to think of this tragedy.

 

I've never driven the wrong way down a road in Thailand. But when I first moved here, and at times thereafter, I at times had the natural reflex to START heading toward the wrong road side before correcting myself. It's a matter of ingrained habits after you've been used to driving a certain way for the prior X decades of your life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2020 at 5:33 AM, sirineou said:

If the Uk does not like the diplomatic immunity concept they should withdraw from the Vienna convention. 

I am looking at this post and I don't understand why it would , so far get a number of "sad" and "confuses reactions.  someone please reply where the confusion lies. perhaps I can explain and alleviate your sadness.

      I think it is straightforward proposition. Nation members of the  Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which the UK is a member enjoy some protections, 

It is not an ala carte convention where you chose parts of it that benefit you, but decline others that you find undesirable. 

A government can ask the country of an accused defendant to decline protection , as it has happened in the past when egregious crimes without defence are committed , and often diplomatic immunity protection is declined by such countries.

   This isn't one of these case. It was an accident, the perpetrator remained at the seen until help and officials arrived.  Then remained in the country for a week.   

None of the hit and run many claim.

The US was asked to decline diplomatic immunity and for reasons of their own the  they refused.

End of story!!

   I am sorry if it ruffles your nationalist feathers but such is the case. 

If the UK does not like the provisions of the  Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations they need to withdraw from it and or initiate another convention.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I concur... but as an American, if a newly arrived Brit had the same thing (mistaken wrong way driving) happen on U.S. roads -- and no other criminal/liability elements were present -- I'd be a whole lot more understanding than many of the posters here who are calling for the woman's head.

 

 

As I said, there is a cultural difference at work here.  I also feel the same way-that this was an accident, a horrible accident.  The lady was not driving drunk.  The lady was not on any sort of drugs.  She made an error-a terrible, horrible, error-but I just don't think this case requires *prison* like some of the posters.

 

I can absolutely see how it could happen.  The wife of this diplomat who had been driving in the right lane in the U.S. her whole life accidentally did this in the U.K.  It could happen to anyone in any country that drives on the opposite side of the road than where they are use to driving.  

 

Putting this lady in jail for some number of years for an accident seems to harsh to me.   

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sure hope the UK has the balls to deny extradition for Assange (anybody and everybody really) to the USA. 

 

She didn't have Diplomatic Imunity and her husband was a Spy, not a dipolmat. So the USA are just saying 'NO' to extradition to the UK for anyone, not just those with diplomatic immunity. 

Edited by IAMHERE
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Caldera said:

What problem do you see? People who abuse children abroad can already be tried at home in many countries, including the U.S.

That is because the domestic law of that country specifically states that a person abusing children abroad is a crime in that country. What you are proposing is that a resident in one country be tried in that country according to the laws of a completely different country

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2020 at 5:27 PM, 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.

 

 

Whilst the comment about diplomatic immunity, for diplomats, spouses and family is relevant, there are things in this case that need answering.

 

The husband appears to be some sort of spook working on an airbase with the USAF. Are spooks and their families given the same diplomatic immunity as genuine diplomats? If so that would suggest all service personnel would be too. Also, did she have diplomatic immunity prior to the accident is a key question. If so, then the US are within their rights. If not, as was speculated, and she was quickly granted it, then that in itself is wrong, very wrong.

 

The case itself. A tragic accident for sure. But was she speeding, under the influence of drugs including alcohol, texting or using a mobile phone? Or was it a case of forgetting to drive on the left? A mistake very common when driving in countries that drive on the opposite side. The circumstances would determine what, if any charges, the police would make. This would then go to the DPP for assessment.

 

It appears the police have charged her, the DPP want to proceed, hence the extradition request. But, without a trial, all the facts won't be known.

 

If she was drunk, speeding, texting etc then she deserves punishment as someone died as a result. If was a genuine very unfortunate mistake then although tragic, accidents happen and she will have to live with it.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Whilst the comment about diplomatic immunity, for diplomats, spouses and family is relevant, there are things in this case that need answering.

 

The husband appears to be some sort of spook working on an airbase with the USAF. Are spooks and their families given the same diplomatic immunity as genuine diplomats? If so that would suggest all service personnel would be too. Also, did she have diplomatic immunity prior to the accident is a key question. If so, then the US are within their rights. If not, as was speculated, and she was quickly granted it, then that in itself is wrong, very wrong.

 

The case itself. A tragic accident for sure. But was she speeding, under the influence of drugs including alcohol, texting or using a mobile phone? Or was it a case of forgetting to drive on the left? A mistake very common when driving in countries that drive on the opposite side. The circumstances would determine what, if any charges, the police would make. This would then go to the DPP for assessment.

 

It appears the police have charged her, the DPP want to proceed, hence the extradition request. But, without a trial, all the facts won't be known.

 

If she was drunk, speeding, texting etc then she deserves punishment as someone died as a result. If was a genuine very unfortunate mistake then although tragic, accidents happen and she will have to live with it.

 

 

 

You make some great points.

 

1) Diplomatic Immunity:  I by no means am an expert here, but from what I have read at least it seems there was agreement that she did have it while in the U.K.  If she did *not* have it then she is subject to all the countries laws just as us non-diplomats here in Thailand are subject to Thai laws.  But I thought I read that both sides agreed she did have it, but that the U.K. wishes the U.S. to waive the immunity.  In the U.S., especially in New York and Washington D.C. the police have to deal with diplomatic immunity all the time.  Indeed, traffic police cannot even stop cars that have diplomatic plates regardless of violations of traffic laws.  Lawbreakers are let off all the time due to diplomatic immunity.  This is the price we pay for diplomacy as it really would not be feasible for diplomats to be subject to the laws of host countries.  

 

2) Other Facts:  It would only be an "accident" if she was not drink driving, under the influence of drugs, texting while driving or otherwise violating some other law.  You are correct without a trial all the facts have not come out.  But I have heard no accusations that she was under any such influence or texting, etc.  If there was even suspicion of such behavior I would think it would come out as this would help the case to waive immunity.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If she is found to have had immunity on the date in question the immunity will stand no matter how long the family protest or attempt to have her arrested while crossing borders (ie going on holiday etc) in the future.

 

The nearest comparison I can think of to highlight the point i'm trying to make is; when a body turns up or a DNA match is made re a cold case many years earlier the perpetrator is still treated as a juvenile if they were under 18 on the day they committed the offence. 

 

HTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Due to this so called "diplomatic immunity" the NYC PD and the Capitol PD in Washington DC have thousands and thousands of unpaid parking tickets as the diplomats park all over the place regardless of the laws.  They openly flout it and have no intention of paying any fines.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

If she was drunk, speeding, texting etc then she deserves punishment as someone died as a result. If was a genuine very unfortunate mistake then although tragic, accidents happen and she will have to live with it.

 

The reporting on the case seems to have been a bit spotty in terms of all the facts. But I did see one report that said the police did administer her a breath test at the scene of the accident, and then later when they charged her, there was nothing about alcohol.

 

The only misdeed I've ever seen mentioned in any of the reports I've read on the case pertained to driving on the wrong side of the road, and nothing other than that.

 

As far as the reasons for the diplomatic immunity, that too seems to have been not fully elaborated. But there have been some UK reports that claim to provide the real explanation. 

 

I posted some links to news reports that claim to provide the explanation for that in a prior post in this thread... here.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IAMHERE said:

I sure hope the UK has the balls to deny extradition for Assange (anybody and everybody really) to the USA. 

 

She didn't have Diplomatic Imunity and her husband was a Spy, not a dipolmat. So the USA are just saying 'NO' to extradition to the UK for anyone, not just those with diplomatic immunity. 

 

She DID have immunity when she was in the UK.... but once she left the UK back to the U.S., obviously that no longer applied. It then became a matter for extradition, which the U.S. has denied.

 

As for how/why she had "diplomatic immunity" when she was in the U.K. -- which is a fact the UK government publicly acknowledged to Parliament, some explanations have been given in the UK media...not so much in the U.S. media, as follows:

 

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Driving on the wrong side of the road is unfortunately common when someone accustomed to driving on one side is in a country which drives on the opposite.

 

There have been tragic cases where Brits have done this in the US just as there cases where Americans have done it in the UK.

 

Does not need for one to have been in any way reckless or drunk. Just usually in a place where there is not initially much  traffic so you don't quickly see cues from where the other cars are.

 

I face this issue every time I go back to the US having lived and driven in Thailand for years, and more than once I have started out on the wrong side there, and  also returning to Thailand from a trip that involved a lot of US driving. Thankfully - and knock on wood - I have always righted myself in time and not had an accident, but i can easily see how one might.

 

So I can sympathize with both victim and the driver. The latter will indeed have to live with this forever.

 

Diplomatic immunity is diplomatic immunity, the US is not going to budge on this, UK government knows this and wouldn't either if the roles were reversed. 

It is the tabloids that keep stirring the pot on this and I doubt it is out of concern for the victim's family.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...