U.S. rebuffs Britain's extradition request for diplomat's wife after fatal crash

[MaxYakov]

They should have confiscated her passport. She could always escape in a diplomatic pouch, though.

[sirineou]

15 hours ago, ThaiPauly said:

In my mind the woman should never have been entitled to DI.

 

If her husband is a diplomat then that's fair enough but why should she be entitled to live here and break every law in the land if she pleases without any consequences at all.

because if the wife of the diplomat was not provided protection under the diplomatic immunity clause  , hostile entities in a country could impose pressure on a diplomat through his family.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations the VCDR extends immunity to family members who form part of the diplomat's household.

It applies to American diplomats in the UK , British diplomats in the US and almost every other countries diplomats ,

That the Americans will create a president by bowing to public pressure on a at best Negligent Homicide case is at the very least uninformed. and would open a pandora's box. 

It was an tragic Accident, the parents were invited to the White House and the President Of the United States took time to meet with them, Anne Sacoolas was not hanging out at the white house by coincidence when they cot there, she was there in a Act of Contrition, to meet with them. I am sure the US government has offered them restitution, as best as one can in situations such as these. What else do they want?

   Anne Sacoolas is not the only one being challenged here , the VCDR pact is being challenged.

 

   

 

[plachon]

43 minutes ago, sirineou said:

because if the wife of the diplomat was not provided protection under the diplomatic immunity clause  , hostile entities in a country could impose pressure on a diplomat through his family.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations the VCDR extends immunity to family members who form part of the diplomat's household.

It applies to American diplomats in the UK , British diplomats in the US and almost every other countries diplomats ,

That the Americans will create a president by bowing to public pressure on a at best Negligent Homicide case is at the very least uninformed. and would open a pandora's box. 

It was an tragic Accident, the parents were invited to the White House and the President Of the United States took time to meet with them, Anne Sacoolas was not hanging out at the white house by coincidence when they cot there, she was there in a Act of Contrition, to meet with them. I am sure the US government has offered them restitution, as best as one can in situations such as these. What else do they want?

   Anne Sacoolas is not the only one being challenged here , the VCDR pact is being challenged.

 

   

 

They want justice, British justice, for their son. It is as simple as that. Trump's interference in the case was another piece of despicableness from that orange toad. He didn't help, he hindered justice and tried to gloss over the seriousness of her flight from it. She needs to be extradited ASAP. Her hubby was not a diplomat, but a CIA agent, by the way. Why should she be given DI? The whole case has highlighted a serious diplomatic failure by UK and the US authorities, that needs to be independently investigated separately from the Dunn case. 

[sirineou]

29 minutes ago, plachon said:

They want justice, British justice, for their son. It is as simple as that. Trump's interference in the case was another piece of despicableness from that orange toad. He didn't help, he hindered justice and tried to gloss over the seriousness of her flight from it. She needs to be extradited ASAP. Her hubby was not a diplomat, but a CIA agent, by the way. Why should she be given DI? The whole case has highlighted a serious diplomatic failure by UK and the US authorities, that needs to be independently investigated separately from the Dunn case. 

Alleged CIA agent. as I am sure there are plenty of UK "diplomats" that could fill the same description.

I sure they want justice for their son, as any good parent would want. The question is what is justice in this instance?If the UK is uncomfortable with the VCDR  they should withdraw from it.

Edited January 12, 2020 by sirineou

[Langsuan Man]

sirineou is correct, unfortunately when the The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations was instituted and revised no one had any idea that the US would pack their Embassies and Consulates with legions of non Diplomats.  No other country has so many agencies "covered" by the Convention

 

We are talking, FBI, DEA, NSA, DHS, CIA, DIA, and a whole bunch more that are classified so we can't even list them.  It is highly unusual for the US Department of State to claim Diplomatic Immunity for such an offense as Drunk Driving.  Most persons serving overseas for the Department are strenuously warned that they will not be "protected" for civil violations

 

IMHO, this situation is because the "sponsor" of the wife involved is a member of one of those alphabet soup agencies listed above, irregardless of what is published 

[Odysseus123]

16 hours ago, George Aylesham said:

So this is how the 'special relationship' works - in this case Britain should refuse to extradite Julian Assange.

"cousins" but not friends...

[soalbundy]

16 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

At least put her on a notice for Interpol so she won't be able to travel outside the US anymore.

I rather think that nobody would want the risk of political fall out by arresting her. This wasn't a calculated murder, it was an unfortunate accident caused by carelessness. No she shouldn't have had diplomatic immunity although I can understand that a spouse could also be used as leverage against a diplomat however her husband was a low grade analyst, not a diplomat. So what about justice? as somebody already said, she would probably just get a slap on the wrist due to the fact that it was an accident, who would be served by this, it won't bring the young man back, he is dead, the parents pain won't be alleviated and the wrist slap won't cause the perpetrator any inconvenience. Her standing trial would be politically correct, all the commas and full stops in the correct place, justice has been done but it will have served no purpose.

[spiekerjozef]

Only 1 option left go there and take her out.

Ask Putin he knows how to deal with these things.

Big thing in the media not long ago and now nobody talks about it anymore.

Edited January 12, 2020 by spiekerjozef

[Odysseus123]

9 minutes ago, spiekerjozef said:

Only 1 option left go there and take her out

Let her rot...in the gutless,moral and ethical stew she has created for herself.

She'll end up eating herself to death anyway.

 

Edited January 12, 2020 by Odysseus123

[sammieuk1]

One more killer on the loose in the US then????

[Chomper Higgot]

A reminder, that ‘special relationship’ thing, it’s a one way street.

 

More to come.

[evadgib]

The biggest recent abuse of VCDR that I can recall saw a hundred or so Chinese thugs batter their way through protesters in London while escorting the Olympic torch en-route to Beijing.

 

I do not recall the complement being returned four years later when it was our turn (& can you imagine if we had tried?)

 

'More equal than others'?

Edited January 12, 2020 by evadgib

[sungod]

17 hours ago, Just Weird said:

Does the term "diplomatic relations" mean anything to you?

Nope, nor to the US either.

[robblok]

Good example of how the USA thinks of the Brits. This is not what diplomatic immunity was designed to be used for. Its certainly not in the spirit of the law.

 

IMHO it only causes more friction then needed. Others said it she would probably not be punished too badly. 

[tgw]

so the initial requests of hearing her just as a witness, to understand what happened, etc. were inaccurate and just a ploy to get the woman into the UK to arrest and charge her there?

 

[soalbundy]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A reminder, that ‘special relationship’ thing, it’s a one way street.

 

More to come.

There never was a 'special relationship' a pragmatic one perhaps formed in WW2 and even then the Americans had to be fooled and pushed into the war through MI6 trickery and forged reports. It's all about 'me' on both sides of the Atlantic and has to be dished up as a special relationship to the public, usually only referred to by the UK, the US has no need unless they need an alibi partner in war so that they can say 'coalition force' to avoid accusations of American aggression.

[Odysseus123]

7 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

There never was a 'special relationship' a pragmatic one perhaps formed in WW2 and even then the Americans had to be fooled and pushed into the war through MI6 trickery and forged reports. It's all about 'me' on both sides of the Atlantic and has to be dished up as a special relationship to the public, usually only referred to by the UK, the US has no need unless they need an alibi partner in war so that they can say 'coalition force' to avoid accusations of American aggression.

"fooled and pushed into war.."

A most bizarre statement.

 

However a zany little Japanese admiral certainly did the trick..followed a few days later by an even more looney little ex water colourist from der Reich.

Edited January 12, 2020 by Odysseus123

[DPKANKAN]

18 hours ago, Just Weird said:

The fact is that she also has that status because of her husband!  It applies to all diplomats and their spouses.

And that is the point!!!!! It should not apply!!!!

[Catoholic]

time to move on.. I am sure it is a very difficult thing to do. Losing a family member, your son, brother, etc regardless of the cause is never easy. however, this was an accident and putting this lady in jail isn't going to fix anything, it is an act of revenge and not justice... now the media will make money selling this tragedy as something more than what is really is... the media and journalist have no soul..  it's time to move on...

[Odysseus123]

2 minutes ago, Catoholic said:

time to move on.. I am sure it is a very difficult thing to do. Losing a family member, your son, brother, etc regardless of the cause is never easy. however, this was an accident and putting this lady in jail isn't going to fix anything, it is an act of revenge and not justice... now the media will make money selling this tragedy as something more than what is really is... the media and journalist have no soul..  it's time to move on...

Another bizarre post.Must be an American.

Edited January 12, 2020 by Odysseus123

[soalbundy]

Just now, Odysseus123 said:

"fooled and pushed into war.."

A most bizarre statement.

 

However a zany little Japanese admiral certainly did the trick..followed 1 day later by an equally zany little ex water colourist from der Reich.

There is an interesting report on Youtube about MI6 during WW2 and the lengths that the British went to to turn Public opinion from isolationism to joining the UK to fight Germany, even using a British 'honey trap' on an influential American senator who was dead against the US entering the war, after she got to work on him he was all for it. Falsified Nazi maps showing how Germany was dividing up all of South America after taking it over (landed on the Presidents desk) etc. etc. etc.

[Odysseus123]

13 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

There is an interesting report on Youtube about MI6 during WW2 and the lengths that the British went to to turn Public opinion from isolationism to joining the UK to fight Germany, even using a British 'honey trap' on an influential American senator who was dead against the US entering the war, after she got to work on him he was all for it. Falsified Nazi maps showing how Germany was dividing up all of South America after taking it over (landed on the Presidents desk) etc. etc. etc.

It really doesn't matter..

 

A zany little admiral dropped bombs on them on the 7th of December,1941..followed up by an idiot and totally murderous German chancellor who, apparently,along with his daffy duck colleagues, did not possess a map of the world.

Edited January 12, 2020 by Odysseus123

[yogi100]

9 minutes ago, Catoholic said:

time to move on.. I am sure it is a very difficult thing to do. Losing a family member, your son, brother, etc regardless of the cause is never easy. however, this was an accident and putting this lady in jail isn't going to fix anything, it is an act of revenge and not justice... now the media will make money selling this tragedy as something more than what is really is... the media and journalist have no soul..  it's time to move on...

It's not a matter of revenge. 

 

It's a case of grieving parents seeing justice done. I'd want it, and so would you.

[DefaultName]

If this was the other way round, would the British comply with the extradition notice? I think so.

 

US media keeps on about the 14 year sentence.  That is the maximum possible sentence for what she's charged with. No way in hell would it apply here, IMO this would be a suspended sentence and probably licence removed (which wouldn't matter to her at all outside the UK).

 

I don't know how she sleeps nights with this on her conscience, let alone drives a car again!

[FritsSikkink]

5 hours ago, soalbundy said:

I rather think that nobody would want the risk of political fall out by arresting her. This wasn't a calculated murder, it was an unfortunate accident caused by carelessness. No she shouldn't have had diplomatic immunity although I can understand that a spouse could also be used as leverage against a diplomat however her husband was a low grade analyst, not a diplomat. So what about justice? as somebody already said, she would probably just get a slap on the wrist due to the fact that it was an accident, who would be served by this, it won't bring the young man back, he is dead, the parents pain won't be alleviated and the wrist slap won't cause the perpetrator any inconvenience. Her standing trial would be politically correct, all the commas and full stops in the correct place, justice has been done but it will have served no purpose.

Your child getting killed and the one caused runs away and doesn't get any penalty won't help the healing process.

[Just Weird]

On 1/11/2020 at 4:45 PM, Sujo said:

On 1/11/2020 at 4:37 PM, Just Weird said:

I agree with you, but that's just not the case when diplomatic immunity is concerned, morality doesn't come into it, whether we like it or not.

He was not a diplomat. He was an intelligence officer which gives priveleges under the geneva convention but a diplomat he was not. It is not clear if his wife has any such immunity under her husbands privilege.

 

But. She certainly does not have diplomatic immunity in the US, she can only claim that in UK. So she should be brought to court to argue she is entitled during extradition proceedings.

 

Edit: immunity is for the uk to give, not the US to say it is.

He had the status of a diplomat, entitled to diplomatic immunity and it is very clear that she has immunity.

 

"She certainly does not have diplomatic immunity in the US, she can only claim that in UK. So she should be brought to court to argue she is entitled during extradition proceedings".

There is no court case in the US regarding the accident, there is only the extradition request from the UK.

 

"immunity is for the uk to give, not the US to say it is".

Diplomatic Immunity is an international convention agreed to by all parties who ratified it!

[Just Weird]

7 hours ago, DPKANKAN said:

On 1/11/2020 at 4:26 PM, Just Weird said:

The fact is that she also has that status because of her husband!  It applies to all diplomats and their spouses.

And that is the point!!!!! It should not apply!!!!

Your opinion of who is entitled to diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention is just that, your opinion, and that does not affect international law, ratified by the UK and the US, no matter how many exclamation marks you use.

Edited January 12, 2020 by Just Weird

[Sujo]

27 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

He had the status of a diplomat, entitled to diplomatic immunity and it is very clear that she has immunity.

 

"She certainly does not have diplomatic immunity in the US, she can only claim that in UK. So she should be brought to court to argue she is entitled during extradition proceedings".

There is no court case in the US regarding the accident, there is only the extradition request from the UK.

 

"immunity is for the uk to give, not the US to say it is".

Diplomatic Immunity is an international convention agreed to by all parties who ratified it!

Diplomatic immunity is giv3n, agreed to by the uk. The US can say she has it but its up to the uk to agree to grant it. Thats why diplomats get expelled.

 

Thete is no court case, correct. Thats why i said her immunity should be decided by a court. The extrradition request should be done through the court. Not unilaterally decided by trump.

 

Btw, it is not very clear she had immunity.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/13/harry-dunn-anne-sacoolas-driver-who-fled-uk-devastated-by-fatal-crash

Edited January 12, 2020 by Sujo

[Just Weird]

26 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Diplomatic immunity is giv3n, agreed to by the uk. The US can say she has it but its up to the uk to agree to grant it. Thats why diplomats get expelled.

 

Thete is no court case, correct. Thats why i said her immunity should be decided by a court. The extrradition request should be done through the court. Not unilaterally decided by trump.

 

Btw, it is not very clear she had immunity.

"Diplomatic immunity is giv3n, agreed to by the uk. The US can say she has it but its up to the uk to agree to grant it".

No, sorry, that's wrong.  All countries who ratified the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations have, obviously, automatically agreed to it, those countries do not hand it out on an individual basis!

 

"...her immunity should be decided by a court. The extrradition request should be done through the court. Not unilaterally decided by trump".

Her immunity is predetermined by the Vienna Convention!  It has not been "unilaterally decided by Mr Trump"! 

If the UK government want to risk taking it to court to have it arbitrated, that is their prerogative.  There is not a cat-in-hells chance that they will do that, though, particularly as the US officially informed the Home Office that the woman would be leaving the UK under diplomatic immunity and the Home Secretary did not object to it until 3 days after he had that information and she had gone.

Edited January 12, 2020 by Just Weird

[bkk6060]

How terrible for the UK to let her leave in the first place.

Very irresponsible..