Britain would not block death penalty for IS suspects

By Michael Holden

 

FILE PHOTO: A combination picture shows Alexanda Kotey and Shafee Elsheikh, who the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) claim are British nationals, in these undated handout pictures in Amouda, Syria released February 9, 2018. Syrian Democratic Forces/Handout via REUTERS

 

LONDON (Reuters) - The British government would not object to Washington seeking the death penalty for two British Islamic State militants if they are extradited to the United States, a Home Office minister said on Monday.

 

Security minister Ben Wallace said Britain was prepared to waive its long-standing objection to executions in the case of captured fighters, Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh.

 

The men are suspected of being two of four militants, dubbed "The Beatles" because of their English accents, who took part in the kidnap, torture and murder of Western hostages.

 

"In this instance, and after carefully considered advice, the government took the rare decision not to require assurances in this case," Wallace told the lower house of Parliament.

 

His statement followed a leaked letter published in the Daily Telegraph from British Home Secretary Sajid Javid.

 

The two suspects were captured in Syria in January by a U.S.-backed Syrian force, and Britain and the UnitedStates have been in discussions about how and where they should face justice.

 

According to the Telegraph, Javid wrote to U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions saying Britain was not intending to request that the two men be sent to the United Kingdom, saying a successful prosecution in the United States was more likely.

 

Furthermore, he said Britain would not insist on guarantees the men would not be executed.

 

"I am of the view that there are strong reasons for not requiring a death penalty assurance in this specific case, so no such assurances will be sought," the letter said.

 

"As you are aware, it is the long held position of the UK to seek death penalty assurances, and our decision in this case does not reflect a change in our policy on assistance in U.S. death penalty cases generally, nor the UK Government’s stance on the global abolition of the death penalty."

 

Earlier on Monday Prime Minister Theresa May's spokeswoman said Britain wanted the militants to be tried in the most appropriate jurisdiction.

 

"HAUNT THE GOVERNMENT"

The opposition Labour Party accused Javid of "secretly and unilaterally" abandoning Britain's opposition to the death penalty.

 

"By doing so he is not just playing with the lives of these particular terrorists but those of other Britons - including potentially innocent ones - all over the world," said Labour's Shami Chakrabarti.

 

The government's stance also drew criticism from its own party.

 

Conservative lawmaker Dominic Grieve asked if there was a precedent for the government deviating from its normal policy and why it had not asked for an assurance from the U.S..

 

"Those are the two key questions and until they are answered I have to say ... this issue is going to continue to haunt the government," he said.

 

The most notorious of the four so called "Beatles" was Mohammed Emwazi, known as "Jihadi John", who is believed to have been killed in a U.S.-British missile strike in 2015.

 

He became a public face of Islamic State and appeared in videos showing the murders of U.S. journalists Steven Sotloff and James Foley, U.S. aid worker Abdul-Rahman Kassig, British aid workers David Haines and Alan Henning, Japanese journalist Kenji Goto and other hostages.

 

The mother of James Foley said she did not want the men to be executed if found guilty.

 

"I think that would just make them martyrs in their twisted ideology. I would like them held accountable by being sent to prison for the rest of their lives," Diane Foley told BBC radio.

 

(Additional reporting by Elizabeth Piper and James Davey; Editing by Guy Faulconbridge and Andrew Bolton)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-07-24

Islamic State 'Beatles' duo: UK stance 'a rare decision'

 

The UK's opposition to the death penalty has not changed, the security minister has said - after a government letter about two IS suspects emerged.

 

Ben Wallace said the message from Home Secretary Sajid Javid to the US attorney general - that the UK would not "require assurances" over the death penalty - was a "rare decision".

 

But Labour said the UK was abandoning a "principled opposition". The IS suspects were captured in Syria and could be sent to the US for trial.

 

Full story: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44925638

 

-- © Copyright BBC 2018-07-24

27 minutes ago, webfact said:

"I am of the view that there are strong reasons for not requiring a death penalty assurance in this specific case, so no such assurances will be sought," the letter said.

Yes, yes, yes !!!!

Regardless of whether any of us believe that in this case this a good or a bad decision, it will have ramifications for future cases.

 

This decision will come back to haunt future ‘extradition requests’, in which people held by British authorities awaiting extradition to the US will argue in court that their extradition places them at risk of execution.

 

My prediction is the first person to make this argument will be Assange when he gets tossed onto the street by his Ecuadorian hosts. (An eviction that is currently being prepared).

 

Far better let these vile criminals rot their life in a US prison and protect one of the most valuable tools to fight crime and protect society, the extradition process.

Edited July 24, 20187 yr by Chomper Higgot

If they are guilty. GOOD RIDDANCE. No loss to society.!!

Disappointing but not surprising to see a Tory Home Secretary playing to the base.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Happiness is a warm gun, bang bang shoot shoot.

They deserve the death penalty,the UK must have some axes and

a chopping block,left lying around from Tudor times,put them to

good use.

regards Worgeordie

A very bad decision by a government that has made so many bad decisions over the years. The decline of the UK continues.

"Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh are alleged to have been members of a four-man cell of Isis executioners in Syria and Iraq responsible for killing a number of high-profile western captives."

 

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/23/uk-will-not-oppose-us-death-penalty-for-isis-beatles

 

how some people can show compassion to people who are allegedly so evil is beyond beggars belief.

Seriously !!

 

People are getting hot under the collar that these murdering b@st@rds might get the death penalty in the US for crimes committed in Syria. 

 

Perhaps they are innocent and only went to Syria to buy GOATS ??

Just now, vogie said:

"Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh are alleged to have been members of a four-man cell of Isis executioners in Syria and Iraq responsible for killing a number of high-profile western captives."

 

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/23/uk-will-not-oppose-us-death-penalty-for-isis-beatles

 

how some people can show compassion to people who are allegedly so evil is beyond beggars belief.

 

It is absolutley nothing to do with compassion, and any attempt to suggest otherwise is either a failure of your comprehension of the point, or a deliberate attempt to smear those opposed to the death penalty.

 

Lock them up in solitary in the worst cell in the lowest standard prison we have for the rest of their lives - there is nothing compassionate about my feelings towards them. However the death penalty was rightly abolished in the UK, and our government HAD a policy of not extraditing people to other countries for crimes that could result in their receiving death penalty. This is a sleazy and nasty way for the UK to wash its hands of our own problem.

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

and our government HAD a policy of not extraditing people to other countries for crimes that could result in their receiving death penalty.

 

 They have not been extradited. They were captured in Syria.

 

5 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

This is a sleazy and nasty way for the UK to wash its hands of our own problem.

 

How is it a UK problem ? They were caught in Syria. It ceased to be a UK problem the day they left the UK to go to Syria and commence their murderous regime.

 

 

10 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

This is a sleazy and nasty way for the UK to wash its hands of our own problem.

Yeah, I read something similar somewhere; apparently, it'll be easier to prosecute them under US law and this eases the way.

2 minutes ago, nausea said:

Yeah, I read something similar somewhere; apparently, it'll be easier to prosecute them under US law and this eases the way.

Yes, it says that in the article, but if the evidence is so overwhelming, why are British courts unable to do what US courts can?

8 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

 

 They have not been extradited. They were captured in Syria.

So have them tried in Syria under Syrian law.

 

13 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

How is it a UK problem ? They were caught in Syria. It ceased to be a UK problem the day they left the UK to go to Syria and commence their murderous regime.

It is a UK problem because they are UK citizens.

6 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Yes, it says that in the article, but if the evidence is so overwhelming, why are British courts unable to do what US courts can?

Might be something to do with

 

Quote

The case of Kotey and Elsheikh is complicated by the fact they have been stripped of British citizenship – a move confirmed by Wallace in the Commons on Monday. 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/23/uk-will-not-oppose-us-death-penalty-for-isis-beatles

 

 

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

t is a UK problem because they are UK citizens.

Are they ??

 

Read my comment above and feel free to feel totally embarrassed ??

bye bye losers..don't count on all those virgins your buddy mohamend promised..but the good new is ..you can bugger each other until the cows come home.. burn baby burn

4 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Are they ??

 

Read my comment above and feel free to feel totally embarrassed ??

Embarrassed for how far the UK has fallen, and how low it will stoop to pander to the US - definitely.

 

 

The logic of liberal progressives 

 

Howl against a trial in the US as it might lead to the death penalty.

 

Instead call for 

 

15 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

So have them tried in Syria under Syrian law.

Where the likely result would be no trial and a 9mm in the back of the nut, deposited in a shallow grave close to a mud road.

 

Brilliance ??

 

Edited July 24, 20187 yr by The Renegade

8 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Might be something to do with

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/23/uk-will-not-oppose-us-death-penalty-for-isis-beatles

 

 

Presumably they don't have US citizenship so why is the US a better location to try them? As you point out, the UK washed their hands of them a couple of days ago, but they were, I assume, British citizens when they committed their crimes - try them in the country where the offence took place and face the full consequences of that country's legal system, including death penalty if the court sees fit, or repatriate them to the UK and face an English court of law.

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

The logic of liberal progressives 

 

Howl against a trial in the US as it might lead to the death penalty.

 

Instead call for 

 

Where the likely result would be no trial and a 9mm in the back of the nut net to a shallow grave close to a mud road.

 

Brilliance ??

 

An utter failure on your part to understand the principle here - a bit of a pattern with you.

 

They committed a crime in Syria. While I disagree with the death penalty in general, they went there and must face the consequences there. The UK government has no ability to intercede in that process. They are, however, actively facilitating the same for a third party country.

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

As you point out, the UK washed their hands of them a couple of days ago, but they were, I assume, British citizens when they committed their crimes

You really need to sort out your English comprehension problem.

 

I did not say that the UK washed their hands of them a few days ago. The article said:

 

Quote

The case of Kotey and Elsheikh is complicated by the fact they have been stripped of British citizenship – a move confirmed by Wallace in the Commons on Monday. 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/23/uk-will-not-oppose-us-death-penalty-for-isis-beatles

 

The article does not confirm when they were stripped of British Citizenship - Only that they have been.

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

An utter failure on your part to understand the principle here

The utter failure belongs to you.

 

Enjoy.

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

An utter failure on your part to understand the principle here - a bit of a pattern with you.

 

They committed a crime in Syria. While I disagree with the death penalty in general, they went there and must face the consequences there. The UK government has no ability to intercede in that process. They are, however, actively facilitating the same for a third party country.

The British Gov does have the ability to prosecute Brits in the UK for crimes committed abroad

IS members don't fear death because they think 100% they are chosen by God to do right things like beheading Muslims first like their close members of their families, secondly they adore killing westerns.

God will reward those who kills them because they are called dogs of hell fire.

 

33 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Yes, it says that in the article, but if the evidence is so overwhelming, why are British courts unable to do what US courts can?

Good question.

 

"Perhaps the real motivation is the government's desperation to avoid having to try these two men in Britain.

Cases like these are extremely difficult to prosecute because of the difficulty in obtaining evidence, finding witnesses, and establishing what crimes have been committed in which jurisdiction.

And in his letter, Mr Javid argues that a more successful prosecution is more likely in the US where laws are different to the UK." (BBC).

 

Sounds a bit Pontius Pilate'ish  to me irrespective of the final sentence, which comes over as more of an afterthought, a justification, than a real reason.

2 minutes ago, nausea said:

Good question.

 

"Perhaps the real motivation is the government's desperation to avoid having to try these two men in Britain.

Cases like these are extremely difficult to prosecute because of the difficulty in obtaining evidence, finding witnesses, and establishing what crimes have been committed in which jurisdiction.

And in his letter, Mr Javid argues that a more successful prosecution is more likely in the US where laws are different to the UK." (BBC).

 

Sounds a bit Pontius Pilate'ish  to me irrespective of the final sentence, which comes over as more of an afterthought, a justification, than a real reason.

I suspect that you may be right about washing their hands of the problem, however I cannot help but wonder if this is the thin end of the wedge. Once we leave the EU, the UK will no longer be bound by the EU's anti capital punishment stance.  Hopefully this won't open the door to a change in UK position.

9 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I suspect that you may be right about washing their hands of the problem, however I cannot help but wonder if this is the thin end of the wedge. Once we leave the EU, the UK will no longer be bound by the EU's anti capital punishment stance.  Hopefully this won't open the door to a change in UK position.

Hopefully it will, the problem we had had getting rid of Abu Qatada, thanks to the ECHR.