U.S. diplomat's wife involved in fatal crash should return to UK - foreign minister

[Sujo]

45 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

Which court did she lie to

Thr UK court when she told the judge she had no intention of leaving UK.

 

Edit. Sorry it was police she told, not court. Police then should hold her pending bail application.

Edited December 20, 2019 by Sujo

[cleopatra2]

4 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Thr UK court when she told the judge she had no intention of leaving UK.

She never went to court.

On the day the police interviewed her they made a request for immunity waiver. This was declined.

She left 1 week later.

The police only submitted the file to the CPS after a further interview in the US.

 

[NanLaew]

On 12/18/2019 at 11:16 PM, Scott said:

Diplomatic immunity extends to the immediate family as well as the diplomat.   There are different levels of diplomatic immunity, with lesser staff members at an embassy having functional immunity.  

Sadly, there have been many instances of people abusing their diplomatic immunity, however, on the whole it protects the diplomatic corp in many ways.   It's a case of, 'you don't mess with ours and we won't mess with yours.'   

 

This lady should do the right thing.   The laws in the UK are roughly comparable to the US and she does not face any punishment that she would not receive in the US.  

My understanding from a news article very early in this case was that only the actual US government employees working inside RAF Croughton had automatic, full diplomatic immunity. During the lamentably slow Northamptonshire police accident investigation, something itself that should be peer-reviewed, this higher degree of diplomatic protection was subsequently and unusually afforded the whole family. Subsequently, and in total contradiction of the personal assurances she gave to the police's most senior investigating officers, Anne Sacoolas left the country. Or rather, she was allowed to leave the country. The fact that she has admitted to driving on the wrong side of the road and caused an accident where someone died and subsequently lied about her intention to stay and face the consequences, I do not place much faith in anyone asking this woman to "do the right thing".

 

I blame the Freemasons myself.

 

PS. She's still driving.

 

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/12/15/anne-sacoolas-harry-dunn-crash-suspect-pictured-back-behind/

 

Edited December 20, 2019 by NanLaew

[cleopatra2]

14 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

My understanding from a news article very early in this case was that only the actual US government employees working inside RAF Croughton had automatic, full diplomatic immunity. During the lamentably slow Northamptonshire police accident investigation, something itself that should be peer-reviewed, this higher degree of diplomatic protection was subsequently and unusually afforded the whole family. Subsequently, and in total contradiction of the personal assurances she gave to the police's most senior investigating officers, Anne Sacoolas left the country. Or rather, she was allowed to leave the country. The fact that she has admitted to driving on the wrong side of the road and caused an accident where someone died and subsequently lied about her intention to stay and face the consequences, I do not place much faith in anyone asking this woman to "do the right thing".

 

I blame the Freemasons myself.

 

PS. She's still driving.

 

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/12/15/anne-sacoolas-harry-dunn-crash-suspect-pictured-back-behind/

 

The FCO state she had diplomatic immunity via 1961 VCDR. If her husband was a diplomat then this would extend to family members.

However the situation is not clear because nobody is stating or acknowledging his position.

It should be remembered that the base is considered an extension of the US Embassy and is also associated with events occuring in Yemen.

 

[from the home of CC]

On 12/19/2019 at 11:07 AM, Baerboxer said:

 

Depends what the CPS decides the charges are, if any. She hasn't been charged with anything yet.

 

I did read news reports, not sure how reliable, at the time that suggested she was over the drink-drive limit. 

 

That could make the charges more serious if so. But I guess she'd most likely get a fine, a ban and a suspended sentence at worst.

in some of the states if you kill someone while over the limit you can be convicted of vehicular homicide, with 10 yrs plus in prison not uncommon..

[cleopatra2]

29 minutes ago, from the home of CC said:

in some of the states if you kill someone while over the limit you can be convicted of vehicular homicide, with 10 yrs plus in prison not uncommon..

If  tested over the drink drive limit she would have been detained at the scene and taken for a full alcohol test .

This did not happen

[Sujo]

4 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

If  tested over the drink drive limit she would have been detained at the scene and taken for a full alcohol test .

This did not happen

I dont think she stopped at all. Wasnt that to be one of the charges?

Happy to be corrected on that.

[cleopatra2]

6 minutes ago, Sujo said:

I dont think she stopped at all. Wasnt that to be one of the charges?

Happy to be corrected on that.

She was breathalysed at the scene

[cleopatra2]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

Thr UK court when she told the judge she had no intention of leaving UK.

 

Edit. Sorry it was police she told, not court. Police then should hold her pending bail application.

You do not seem to have a grasp of how the UK courts and police function.

 

Hold her pending bail application ?

 

The police did not arrest her

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, cleopatra2 said:

You do not seem to have a grasp of how the UK courts and police function.

 

Hold her pending bail application ?

 

The police did not arrest her

That was his point. If she would have told police 'I'm leaving as soon as I can', they would have held her.

[evadgib]

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

My understanding from a news article very early in this case was that only the actual US government employees working inside RAF Croughton had automatic, full diplomatic immunity. During the lamentably slow Northamptonshire police accident investigation, something itself that should be peer-reviewed, this higher degree of diplomatic protection was subsequently and unusually afforded the whole family. Subsequently, and in total contradiction of the personal assurances she gave to the police's most senior investigating officers, Anne Sacoolas left the country. Or rather, she was allowed to leave the country. The fact that she has admitted to driving on the wrong side of the road and caused an accident where someone died and subsequently lied about her intention to stay and face the consequences, I do not place much faith in anyone asking this woman to "do the right thing".

 

I blame the Freemasons myself.

 

PS. She's still driving.

 

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/12/15/anne-sacoolas-harry-dunn-crash-suspect-pictured-back-behind/

 

My understanding is that any immunity will apply if she ever returns simply because it applied (or so we are told) at the time. If immunity does not apply or is found to have been erroneously applied the authorities (plod, HO and/or FCO) can expect to be pursued via the courts.

 

The answer will surely be on the front page of her passport as per this example or perhaps on the type of visa (Dip Spouse/Family) if hers is a regular passport.

 

Edited December 20, 2019 by evadgib

[cleopatra2]

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

That was his point. If she would have told police 'I'm leaving as soon as I can', they would have held her.

But she left 2 weeks later . ( my earlier comment about 1 week is erroneous ). 

The US informed the FCO of her imminent departure along with the fact that she left on a US Air Force flight suggests that possibly she was unaware of the plans to leave UK.

 

 

[NanLaew]

2 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

The FCO state she had diplomatic immunity via 1961 VCDR. If her husband was a diplomat then this would extend to family members.

However the situation is not clear because nobody is stating or acknowledging his position.

It should be remembered that the base is considered an extension of the US Embassy and is also associated with events occuring in Yemen.

There is much being made of after-the-fact arrangements and statements by the FCO as to exactly what diplomatic immunity she had at the time of the accident. Regardless of her husband's role, she did not work inside the base and whatever is happening in Yemen cannot be more irrelevant.

[NanLaew]

2 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

You do not seem to have a grasp of how the UK courts and police function.

 

Hold her pending bail application ?

 

The police did not arrest her

On August 27 Sacoolas admits to being involved in a fatal road accident where she was driving on the wrong side of the road at the time of the collision. She is breathalyzed at the scene. The initial police investigation shows that CCTV images confirm a car was on the wrong side of the road after exiting the air base. Sacoolas is interviewed by the police the following day at her home and when diplomatic immunity was 'mentioned', the Chief Constable claims to have requested an immunity waiver from the FCO the same day. On October 16th, the FCO advises the police that the the waiver is declined and that Sacoolas has already left the country. There's no verification of exactly when Sacoolas left as she departed on a US military aircraft.

 

On 1st November, after Sacoolas was interviewed by Northamptonshire police in the US, a completed file was finally submitted to the CPS.

 

It smells.

Edited December 20, 2019 by NanLaew

[cleopatra2]

36 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

On August 27 Sacoolas admits to being involved in a fatal road accident where she was driving on the wrong side of the road at the time of the collision. She is breathalyzed at the scene. The initial police investigation shows that CCTV images confirm a car was on the wrong side of the road after exiting the air base. Sacoolas is interviewed by the police the following day at her home and when diplomatic immunity was 'mentioned', the Chief Constable claims to have requested an immunity waiver from the FCO the same day. On October 16th, the FCO advises the police that the the waiver is declined and that Sacoolas has already left the country. There's no verification of exactly when Sacoolas left as she departed on a US military aircraft.

 

On 1st November, after Sacoolas was interviewed by Northamptonshire police in the US, a completed file was finally submitted to the CPS.

 

It smells.

Only the US could waiver the immunity.

I suspect that the US withdrew the family from the UK either at the FCO request or themselves.

 

[cleopatra2]

The CPS have now prosecuted and started extradition proceedings.

 

The immunity issue arises from a UK US treaty from 1995 for the Croughton base.

Intepretation gives family members more protection than the officers on the base.

Edited December 20, 2019 by cleopatra2

[NanLaew]

2 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

Only the US could waiver the immunity.

Correct. The FCO petitions the US to grant the waiver. The US declined.

 

2 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

I suspect that the US withdrew the family from the UK either at the FCO request or themselves.

To suggest that the FCO requested that they leave is quite absurd. The Americans don't take instruction from the FCO. The Americans pulled their own ahead of the inevitable firestorm.

Edited December 20, 2019 by NanLaew

[NanLaew]

It does appear that the anomaly whereby family members of US staff based at RAF Croughton appear to have greater diplomatic protection than the staff themselves was exercised here. If it had been Mrs Sacoolas's husband that had been driving and killed Harry Dunn, under arrangements agreed in 1964 where American staff members at the base “pre-waived” their immunity against criminal prosecution in the UK, he would have been arrested and charged.

 

Dominic Raab is to start talks with the US to rectify this anomaly that prevails from the same 1964 diplomatic arrangement.

 

The extradition request will be the remit of Nick Adderley, the chief constable of Northamptonshire police.

 

Good luck with that.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/20/anne-sacoolas-charged-over-death-of-harry-dunn

Edited December 20, 2019 by NanLaew

[cleopatra2]

26 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Correct. The FCO petitions the US to grant the waiver. The US declined.

 

To suggest that the FCO requested that they leave is quite absurd. The Americans don't take instruction from the FCO. The Americans pulled their own ahead of the inevitable firestorm.

The FCO claim if waiver to immunity not forthcoming they request immediate removal

 

https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2018-12-18/HCWS1197/

[NanLaew]

4 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

The FCO claim if waiver to immunity not forthcoming they request immediate removal

 

https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2018-12-18/HCWS1197/

That's interesting, thanks. So the US declined the waiver knowing the FCO would subsequently asked for her removal and the US hastily and happily complied.

 

I quoted an article in the Guardian earlier that states, "The extradition issue will be in the first instance a matter for Nick Adderley, the chief constable of Northamptonshire police."

 

Just a few minutes ago, on Sky News, Chief Constable Nick Adderley stated that it is now the duty of the CPS to proceed with the extradition procedures and that the Northamptonshire police can do or say nothing further that may prejudice the case or any trial.

 

All (still) speaking with forked tongues. I reckon someone in the FCO's Lodge is more powerful than Nick's.