Have you considered that successful extradition might not be the sole (or even the main) purpose of the issuing of these extradition requests?

Well it does distract attention from the Interpol warrant ... that seems never to have been issued oops kyap kyap

animatic posted

Fair play. In either case, if the fugative harboring country doesn't move on the request by legal means

it reflects squarely on the country more than the prosecutors, regardless of what some will shortly say here,

and also serves to limit all the travel possibilities for any of them, and puts their accusations on the world stage

properly and legally.

Really I assumed you had to have an Extradition Treaty with a country, before you issed a request. My local state Goverment does not bother to make a extradition request for criminals who are Thai nationals, who have fled to Thailand for anything less than a capital crime due to the Extradition Agreement between the US and Thailand. It is not worth their time or effort. It doesn't seem to reflect much on Thailand ...

Animatic you might like this quote about Walt Rostow.

"He had a great ability not to see what he did not want to see."

Have you considered that successful extradition might not be the sole (or even the main) purpose of the issuing of these extradition requests?

Well it does distract attention from the Interpol warrant ... that seems never to have been issued oops kyap kyap

animatic posted

Fair play. In either case, if the fugitive harboring country doesn't move on the request by legal means,

it reflects squarely on the country more than the prosecutors, regardless of what some will shortly say here,

and also serves to limit all the travel possibilities for any of them, and puts their accusations on the world stage

properly and legally.

Really I assumed you had to have an Extradition Treaty with a country, before you issed a request. My local state Goverment does not bother to make a extradition request for criminals who are Thai nationals, who have fled to Thailand for anything less than a capital crime due to the Extradition Agreement between the US and Thailand. It is not worth their time or effort. It doesn't seem to reflect much on Thailand ...

Animatic you might like this quote about Walt Rostow.

"He had a great ability not to see what he did not want to see."

Not sure why you imply I am not seeing something.

Yes, I like the quote, please note also the small phrase I used.

"...by legal means,..." That means de facto that there must be

an extradition treaty, and/or legal mechanism on both countries.

But extradition treaty or not, one nation can ask another to send back it's

national wanted for high crimes, especially terrorism. On the principle of

doesn't hurt to ask, and can be the basis of a treaty to codify the terms.

But, it also means harboring them and ignoring the commonality of extradition treaties,

also reflects badly on the harboring country.

A State is not a country in USA. so it 's country to country.

The extradition treaty exists at a level higher than a state.

But the local prosecutors still can request one through channels.

Not sure what you think I am missing here....

Edited August 16, 201015 yr by animatic