Lad killed by US wrong side driver, who's done a bunk...
Discussion
Eyersey1234 said:
I am also struggling to understand why the wife of a US diplomat should get diplomatic immunity. I agree driving on the wrong side of the road abroad is easily done and there but for the grace of God etc she has to live with what she has done for the rest of her life.
I can see why it's logical. Diplomatic immunity exists to protect the business of diplomacy. It isn't designed as a licence for people to break the law in the host country. It's there so that a diplomat can't be hauled up on dodgy charges in order to hold the state he represents to ransom over some diplomatic matter or other. It would lose it's effectiveness if you could simply invent some charges against the wife of the Ambassador instead.Having said that, there is no reason as to why the USA should have waived her immunity, surely? This wasn't in connection with any diplomatic matter at all and the Americans have never tried to suggest that it was.
king good.anonymous said:
[redacted]
I cannot agree that it is shameful or spineless on the UK's part. The whole point of diplomatic immunity is that it is reciprocal. If we could, on a whim, decide not to play by the rules, so could everyone else. British diplomats abroad would find themselves arrested on trumped-up criminal charges and complaint would be met with reference to our not having played by the rules.
The rules on diplomatic immunity are a very necessary thing. That they work injustice in particular case is, I am afraid, a price that has to be paid.
Breadvan72 said:
0ddball said:
Can't say I'm surprised. It's clear that the legal system and the justice system parted ways a long time ago.
That is a silly comment that bears no relation to reality. Here the court had its hands tied by political decisions made some time before the incident. You have moved your goalpost. This individual decision is definitely unjust. The injustice here arises from a political decision, not from the law. The generalisation that the law and justice parted company long ago is incorrect. Unjust decisions occur. I estimate that law and justice coincide in maybe eight civil cases out of ten. In criminal cases, I cannot say what the breakdown is.
Stan the Bat said:
Good that the family is keeping it in the spotlight though.
Nope. The family is in pain understandably. But this action is not going to bring the young man back. And even if they 'win' they will forever be tormented because the lady who caused the death isn't coming back - so they lose. We can't make her. The fact is... The government are not even going to try that hard - if it was a tinpot nation we might expel diplomats, but as it's America we will let it slide. Causing them more pain.
The lawyers should be explaining this in a compassionate way. And allowing them to grieve rather than pursue battles that cannot be won. If they want to create a positive change then they could set up a charitable foundation offering defensive driver training for young people who want to ride motorbikes (not that it would have helped Harry here) or something else which will honor him.
Edited by milkround on Tuesday 24th November 20:07
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff