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

[Opl]

8 hours 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...

This lady did'nt bother to even meet Harry Dunn's parents while she was still in the UK - not at the hospital where Harry Dunn's  has been taken to, for instance - so that Harry Dunn's parents were desperate to know if she even tried to comfort their son after the accident. Sad. 

But she was OK to meet them at the WH with US Presisent when Harry Dunn's parents went to the US seeking for justice - they refused the photo op.

This is a quest for righteousness at least and of course justice, and not revenge as you label it.

But OK , it's not within your scope of comprehension, so... move on.       

Edited January 12, 2020 by Opl

[Sujo]

51 minutes ago, Just Weird 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".

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.

Your are missing the point. She is in the US. She does not have diplomatic immunity there. UK should request extradition. Its for the UK court to decide if she has it. Not the US.

 

She left after saying she had no intention to leave. Could have waited for a response before leaving.

[Sujo]

Just imagine trump if this had happened in reverse. Would be sanctions and threats of bombings.

[Just Weird]

14 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Your are missing the point. She is in the US. She does not have diplomatic immunity there. UK should request extradition. Its for the UK court to decide if she has it. Not the US.

 

She left after saying she had no intention to leave. Could have waited for a response before leaving.

You're the one who is missing the point! 

 

There is no charge against her in the US so she does not need DI there. The UK has requested extradition and the US has refused the request and provided an explanation for the decision.

 

It is not for a UK court to decide if she has immunity, the Vienna Convention decided that when the UK and the US ratified it.

 

"Could have waited for a response before leaving".

She could have but only if her government hadn't decided to remove her...after the US had informed the UK that it was taking her back to the US.  The UK knew that she was going!

Edited January 12, 2020 by Just Weird

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Just Weird said:

You're the one who is missing the point! 

 

There is no charge against her in the US so she does not need DI there. The UK has requested extradition and the US has refused the request and provided an explanation for the decision.

 

It is not for a UK court to decide if she has immunity, the Vienna Convention decided that when the UK and the US ratified it.

 

"Could have waited for a response before leaving".

She could have but only if her government hadn't decided to remove her...after the US had informed the UK that it was taking her back to the US.  The UK knew that she was going!

The extradition request is the charge. That is for a court to decide.

 

the uk alone decides if someone has immunity because they must agree to it. You dont have immunity just because your own govt says you do. Thats why the courts decide.

 

she is in the US, she has no immunity there. So the extradition request should be through normal court procedure.

[Catoholic]

1 hour ago, Opl said:

Harry Dunn's parents went to the US seeking for justice

Harry Dunn's death was an accident. The lady wasn't drunk or malicious, she made a mistake.  Where is the "justice" placing this person in jail? Answer: There is no justice found in that action. It is only revenge.  And I'm not faulting Harry's parents at all for their reaction.

 

This story is only an opportunity for the media to make money sensationalizing a horrible accident. 

 

Those that read, write and post comments about this story only increase the value of the media's investment and the media only cares about their money. They don't care one iota about Harry Dunn, the Dunn family, the lady who made the mistake or any animosity that this story generates. That is the sad truth. 

 

Justice is an excellence of the soul and injustice is a vice (Socrates) ...

[Opl]

25 minutes ago, Catoholic said:

Harry Dunn's death was an accident. The lady wasn't drunk or malicious, she made a mistake.  Where is the "justice" placing this person in jail? Answer: There is no justice found in that action. It is only revenge.  And I'm not faulting Harry's parents at all for their reaction.

 

This story is only an opportunity for the media to make money sensationalizing a horrible accident. 

 

Those that read, write and post comments about this story only increase the value of the media's investment and the media only cares about their money. They don't care one iota about Harry Dunn, the Dunn family, the lady who made the mistake or any animosity that this story generates. That is the sad truth. 

 

Justice is an excellence of the soul and injustice is a vice (Socrates) ...

The sad truth is that she escaped all legal proceeding after killing Harry Dunn: It's a hit and run after a fatal crash, and the CCTV showed she was 100% responsible.

It's the waiver of the immunity the family is asking, so that the lady can be accountable of her action, not jail.

In this case, diplomatic immunity  is equivalent to complicity.

Maybe this case and the media coverage will help modify this cause of injustice, in opposition to what you stand for ( just mourn and shut up).    

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Catoholic said:

Harry Dunn's death was an accident. The lady wasn't drunk or malicious, she made a mistake.  Where is the "justice" placing this person in jail? Answer: There is no justice found in that action. It is only revenge.  And I'm not faulting Harry's parents at all for their reaction.

 

This story is only an opportunity for the media to make money sensationalizing a horrible accident. 

 

Those that read, write and post comments about this story only increase the value of the media's investment and the media only cares about their money. They don't care one iota about Harry Dunn, the Dunn family, the lady who made the mistake or any animosity that this story generates. That is the sad truth. 

 

Justice is an excellence of the soul and injustice is a vice (Socrates) ...

I havent seen where they asked her to jailed. But i have seen them ask for her to face the consequences of her actions.

 

It is not likely she would be jailed anyway.

[NanLaew]

On 1/11/2020 at 2:50 PM, alanrchase said:

As I understand it there is a question about when she was given diplomatic immunity. Did she have it before the accident or was she given it after the accident?

I recall reading that for the actual US government employees, although having diplomatic immunity, this status is waived in the event of such a happenstance. This was through an agreement established quite a while ago between US State Department and UK Foreign Office. Therefore, if her husband had been the driver, he would have been arrested and prosecuted. However, this waiver was never extended to the family of any government employee which is why it was belatedly exercised and the wife of the government employee, under sustaining diplomatic immunity, was legally allowed to leave the country.

Edited January 12, 2020 by NanLaew

[sungod]

9 hours ago, Catoholic said:

Harry Dunn's death was an accident. The lady wasn't drunk or malicious, she made a mistake. 

 

 

For normal human beings, that would be what a court of law would decide, not an opinion of someone on a forum.

 

Harry Dunn's parents aren't asking for her to be hanged, simply to face the charges in a court.

[Langsuan Man]

Diplomat Immunity is location specific.  If you have Diplomatic Immunity in the UK, that does not give you Diplomatic Immunity in Germany, or France, or Ireland or anywhere else on earth for that matter

 

Diplomatic Immunity is conferred by the hosting country by bilateral agreement in addition to the Geneva Convention.  There is a list maintained by every foreign government and lists the name of those individuals that are "accredited" by the host government.  In many cases, but not all, it is a tit for tat arrangement (quid pro quo).  If you have X number of diplomats that have full Diplomatic Immunity then the US will have a list with exactly the same X number that have full Diplomatic Immunity

 

In the ancient past I was required to assist local law enforcement agencies in "checking" the list in the US if a person attempted to claim Diplomatic Immunity, to determine two things:   # 1 were they on the list, # 2 what type of diplomatic immunity was involved.  There are two types of Diplomatic Immunity, Full Diplomatic Immunity, as in this situation in the UK, and Transactional Diplomatic Immunity, which confers limited immunity for actions related to a specific position or activity

 

So when you want to start all the US bashing, don't forget the UK Foreign Ministry granted putting this "dependent" on the list  

[evadgib]

This identical accident on an English road gives some idea as to what actually happened.

The rider in this clip survived.

 

 

[stevenl]

15 minutes ago, evadgib said:

This identical accident on an English road gives some idea as to what actually happened.

The rider in this clip survived.

 

 

In the accident in the video he was driving too fast and overshot the curve. Completely different from the accident at hand.

[evadgib]

14 minutes ago, stevenl said:

In the accident in the video he was driving too fast and overshot the curve. Completely different from the accident at hand.

...on the wrong side of a British road and hit a motorbike ????

[DefaultName]

16 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

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

Very irresponsible..

She spoke to the police, said she'd do so again - there was no suggestion of detaining her for an accident - then snuck out of the country without anyone on the British side knowing anything about it until she was gone and out of reach.  OK, that was probably orchestrated by US officials, but she wasn't in handcuffs, she could have said no.

 

Besides anything legal/diplomatic, where is her honour?  She could fly back tomorrow if she had any.

[NanLaew]

1 hour ago, DefaultName said:

She spoke to the police, said she'd do so again - there was no suggestion of detaining her for an accident - then snuck out of the country without anyone on the British side knowing anything about it until she was gone and out of reach.  OK, that was probably orchestrated by US officials, but she wasn't in handcuffs, she could have said no.

 

Besides anything legal/diplomatic, where is her honour?  She could fly back tomorrow if she had any.

The Home Office, being responsible for UK immigration, security and law and order, would have been made aware by the US that she was leaving. With the UK being legally unable to prevent her from leaving but aware that attempts could be made to 'detain' her as she transited a UK airport on departure, the US authorities decided that she be flown out of the UK on an American military aircraft from the air base where her husband was employed.

 

So she had the legal right to depart the UK and neither the US State Department (tasked with the guardianship of all US nationals overseas) or UK Foreign Office (tasked with oversight of foreigners on UK diplomatic license) colluded to subvert justice here.

 

Now, if we want to talk about her personal, moral responsibilities or honor then yes, I agree wholeheartedly that her decision to evade UK justice was and still is abhorrent. As pointed out earlier, she could have been charged with causing death by dangerous driving, probably given a non-custodial, suspended sentence due to her diplomatic status and subsequently deported and not allowed to return. Whether she received bad counsel that encouraged her to flee or personally chose to ignore any good counsel that would have encouraged her to face the charges is only something we can speculate on. I prefer to think that she conflated the very harsh punishment she would expect for committing the equivalent vehicular homicide in the US with what she would have expected in the UK and chose to ignore or disbelieve good counsel. It is now entirely up to her as a mother and human being to do what is morally expected of someone who has unwillingly killed the child of another mother and human being.

Edited January 13, 2020 by NanLaew

[Nyezhov]

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

The Home Office, being responsible for UK immigration, security and law and order, would have been made aware by the US that she was leaving. With the UK being legally unable to prevent her from leaving but aware that attempts could be made to 'detain' her as she transited a UK airport on departure, the US authorities decided that she be flown out of the UK on an American military aircraft from the air base where her husband was employed.

 

So she had the legal right to depart the UK and neither the US State Department (tasked with the guardianship of all US nationals overseas) or UK Foreign Office (tasked with oversight of foreigners on UK diplomatic license) colluded to subvert justice here.

 

Now, if we want to talk about her personal, moral responsibilities or honor then yes, I agree wholeheartedly that her decision to evade UK justice was and still is abhorrent. As pointed out earlier, she could have been charged with causing death by dangerous driving, probably given a non-custodial, suspended sentence due to her diplomatic status and subsequently deported and not allowed to return. Whether she received bad counsel that encouraged her to flee or personally chose to ignore any good counsel that would have encouraged her to face the charges is only something we can speculate on. I prefer to think that she conflated the very harsh punishment she would expect for committing the equivalent vehicular homicide in the US with what she would have expected in the UK and chose to ignore or disbelieve good counsel. It is now entirely up to her as a mother and human being to do what is morally expected of someone who has unwillingly killed the child of another mother and human being.

Bravo!

[Rimmer]

An inflammatory post has been removed

[Bruntoid]

It is clear the coward will not return however let’s hope the weight of her victims parents mourning at the loss of their son will be a heavy enough sentence for her! 

[DefaultName]

1 hour ago, Bruntoid said:

It is clear the coward will not return however let’s hope the weight of her victims parents mourning at the loss of their son will be a heavy enough sentence for her! 

Doubt it, she wouldn't be driving again if that was the case.

[bigwilly]

Maybe the Brits should stop being one of Americas puppets and let Julian Assange walk too. All hands on deck to fight the bush fires.

Regards BW.