Jump to content
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Sign in to follow this  
galenkia

Why Is Diplomatic Immunity Still Allowed?.

Recommended Posts

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7541569/Stepfather-British-teen-killed-car-crash-diplomats-wife-AMERICAN.html

For anyone who cannot access the link,its about a 19 year old British lad who was killed in a head on collision on his motorbike by the wife of a US diplomat who was driving on the wrong side of the road.The woman spoke with police,told then she would be staying in the country,then the family fled to the US and the US embassy refuses to name them.

How the f**k can diplomats do what they like,break any laws they like,then f**k off and not face justice?.

How would you feel if that was your son?.

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never understood this law. 

I was so happy when Danny Glover just said f—k it and shot that South African in Lethal Weapon 2......”it’s just been revoked”

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It is there, to protect honest diplomats (does such a critter really exist?) from abuse and worse from some less than polite and friendly governments. Unfortunately, the system is rather widely abused. And the abuse is facilitated by some governments which should know better.

Edited by Freee!!
  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Up 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My brother used to be a diplomat and enjoyed all the benefits including not paying tax but was also required to carry a firearm at all times and was on call 24/7 including disappearing one Christmas day and being in South Africa the next day to shadow Tony Blair. Could never get a straight answer from him as to what he did or where he was going. I used to borrow his "xxxDxxx" registered Jag when in London thinking I was James Bond (I wish 555).

To answer the original point, it's written into the Geneva convention to protect diplomats from detention or prosecution by any foreign power, right or wrong.

  • Great Info 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this specific case its not the law that is wrong, it is the lack of ethics of the person in question. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also the government at fault most good ones will lift imunity and return the accused

Had a incident here in NZ Where Malaysian embassy official was caught with his pants down in a woman's apartment  he was eventually returned to face the judge

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nickrock said:

It's also the government at fault most good ones will lift imunity and return the accused

Had a incident here in NZ Where Malaysian embassy official was caught with his pants down in a woman's apartment  he was eventually returned to face the judge

But we all know by now the government of the USA isn't among the good ones anymore.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the USA wanted something from you then you would see that person appear magically as if nothing happened , no different from most other countries

  • Great Info 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nickrock said:

If the USA wanted something from you then you would see that person appear magically as if nothing happened , no different from most other countries

No official complain from the UK, ... imagine it had been a Russian ? It would become the nr 1 story of the month ! 

But cant say anything to Big Bully, they're allies....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thai Spice said:

In this specific case its not the law that is wrong, it is the lack of ethics of the person in question. 

 

It wasn't ethics it was Northamptonshire.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been named as 41 year old Anne Sacoolas and shes unfortunately definately covered under Diplomatic immunity  because of some special arrangement this last 25 years over this particular RAF Base as it contains American spying equipment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its just abused as can clearly be seen from this latest tragedy, time for a complete rethink imo.

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RR007 said:

Been named as 41 year old Anne Sacoolas and shes unfortunately definately covered under Diplomatic immunity  because of some special arrangement this last 25 years over this particular RAF Base as it contains American spying equipment

According to The Telegraph, Sacoolas’ 12-year-old son was in the front seat of her car at the time of the crash. The newspaper reports that Sacoolas admitted liability after getting out of her car. But when police went to her home at the Croughton base and told her Dunn had died, lawyers and U.S. Embassy officials stepped in.

https://heavy.com/news/2019/10/anne-sacoolas/

 

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Pumpuynarak said:

Its just abused as can clearly be seen from this latest tragedy, time for a complete rethink imo.

This is just a "grab the headlines" example.  The thing has always been abused, with more or less discrecy, by everybody...

Spies are registered as commercial attaché.

Military attaché, what you think is their job ?

The "valise diplomatique" is pretty handy as well....

Not to speak of this one

images.jpeg-1.jpg

 

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, karon steve said:

It wasn't ethics it was Northamptonshire.

 

chris-eubank-has-just-written-a-book-about-ethics-if-5892578.png

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2019 at 8:33 AM, galenkia said:

How the f**k can diplomats do what they like,break any laws they like,then f**k off and not face justice?.

How would you feel if that was your son?.

IMO any person accused or convicted of a serious crime should be extradited and handed over to the jurisdiction of the foreign state in which the crime was committed.

Diplomatic immunity is BS.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.qebholliswhiteman.co.uk/cms/document/causing_death_by_careless_driving.pdf

 

My condolences also go to the family of the deceased for their loss.

 

The issue I raise is the range of available sentences for the offence of causing death by careless driving and indeed the very nature of that offence.  The above article which is rather lengthy explains a lot about the offence and perhaps the reasons it was created.  Careless driving is driving which falls below the standard of driving of a competent and considerate driver.  A driver suffering a momentary lapse in concentration may commit the offence of careless driving.  If nothing happens the driver breaths  a sigh of relief and goes on his way. If something serious happens with fatal consequences the driver on conviction faces imprisonment.  My point is that it is the same degree of carelessness in both cases, making likely consequences become a bit of a lottery.

I think and hope that this case may focus the minds of our legislature on this aspect of road traffic law.

  • Like 1
  • Great Info 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read today on MSN News that the lady in question was NOT entitled to DI according to Dominic Rabb FS, if so WTF was she allowed to leave the UK ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Pumpuynarak said:

I read today on MSN News that the lady in question was NOT entitled to DI according to Dominic Rabb FS, if so WTF was she allowed to leave the UK ? 

 

Guess she was just demonstrating how "a Brexit" should be done.

 

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Pumpuynarak said:

I read today on MSN News that the lady in question was NOT entitled to DI according to Dominic Rabb FS, if so WTF was she allowed to leave the UK ? 

It's one of those Catch-22 situations. She no longer has Diplomatic Immunity because she has left the UK.

Anne Sacoolas, 42, left the UK shortly after the collision between Dunn’s motorbike and a car
outside RAF Croughton in Northamptonshire on 27 August.

She is believed to have been driving the car but while she met with Northamptonshire police no
investigation followed after the force was advised by the UK government that she had the protective
status granted to foreign diplomats.

But after days of controversy surrounding the case, a letter from Dominic Raab to Dunn’s family
seen by the BBC has suggested that her return to the US has rendered that status irrelevant.
“The US have now informed us that they too consider that immunity is no longer pertinent,” the
foreign secretary’s letter says.

“We have pressed strongly for a waiver of immunity, so that justice can be done … Whilst the US
government has steadfastly declined to give that waiver, that is not the end of the matter.”

It added: “We have looked at this very carefully … the UK government’s position is that immunity,
and therefore any question of waiver, is no longer relevant in Mrs Sacoolas’ case, because she has
returned home.

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

 

  • Great Info 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, fygjam said:

It's one of those Catch-22 situations. She no longer has Diplomatic Immunity because she has left the UK.

and if me aunt had balls she'd be me uncle lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pumpuynarak said:

and if me aunt had balls she'd be me uncle lol

 

It's now just a straight case of extradition assuming that she won't return to the UK willingly.

Now who does the UK currently hold that the yanks want extradited?

 

  • Thumbs Up 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, fygjam said:

 

It's now just a straight case of extradition assuming that she won't return to the UK willingly.

Now who does the UK currently hold that the yanks want extradited?

 

No way the Americans are gonna extradite one of their citizens to the UK !   Except maybe if it was for a really hideous crime. In this case we are speaking of a simple (although deadly) traffic accident.

Just my view.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, fygjam said:

It's now just a straight case of extradition assuming that she won't return to the UK willingly.

Now who does the UK currently hold that the yanks want extradited badly enough?

FTFY. Everybody knows those Yanks won't extradite anybody. I refer to the Hague Invasion Act as a case in point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...