Lad killed by US wrong side driver, who's done a bunk...

[RobbyJ]

hutchst said:

This is a secret squirrel base. Are we just assuming that the lady in question was the wife of a diplomat, rather than immune in her own right, or do we have evidence? Women do secret squirrel stuff as well.

No just that all the press articles said she was the wife of a ‘diplomat’.

[Coolbanana]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Are you suggesting she deliberately targeted the motorcyclist, or at the very least, intended to cause a crash? If not, it is an accident. She had a lapse in concentration, drove on the wrong side of the road. How long has she been in the UK? How much driving experience there?

I would be surprised if she wasn't upset by this, that it was a terrible accident and that there were some very intense conversations with her Family and that she is naturally scared of the consequences despite her actions being unintentional. Hence her 'escape'. If she was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, then it is worse, imo, than a lapse and that would be severely negligent.

I'm not condoning what she has done, both the accident nor the escape, but I would imagine most people in her position would leave if they had the opportunity.

Regardless of the heat in the UK, if the US upholds her immunity, she will move on and nowt anyone can do about it. Sad, but true.

[poo at Paul's]

Krikkit said:

She's killed someone through her fault exclusively, she'll live with and no doubt be tormented by that for the rest of her days. A couple of years in prison wouldn't make any odds to me in that situation.

I'll never understand the idea behind "she will have to live with it...." what in her comfy big house, with all her family and friends, as if it all never ever happened?

Like she gives a st?

[poo at Paul's]

Coolbanana said:

I'm not condoning what she has done, both the accident nor the escape, but I would imagine most people in her position would leave if they had the opportunity.

Not everyone is scum.

[Derek Smith]

Mojooo said:

Let me play devils advocate then

I don't really care if I kill some other person through reckless driving but I am scared of doing years in jail.

If the threat of a long jail sentence was removed then I'd be more likely to take chances with my driving.

Do you find that an acceptable state of affairs?

You are unusual.

All the evidence, and by that I mean all the evidence, points to offenders being put off committing offences by a high risk of getting caught. Increasing terms of imprisonment for specific offences does not deter. This has been known for years, and accepted, but politicians like playing to the mob.

No one is suggesting no form of punishment. Other countries manage to get by without incarcerating such a high proportion of their offenders, and most have both lower rates of crimes (although I accept this is not necessarily directly comparable) and lower rates of recidivism. There are other penalties, in fact, many other penalties, which can be imposed which stop short of incarceration.

Why do people ignore the fact that we, and the USA, have high rates of offending and recidivism and yet incarcerate a higher number of offenders than those countries with lower rates of recidivism which do not dish out prison as the norm?

People should read the research. It will force them to confront their prejudices. It will also make them angry that politicians don't do their job.

[RizzoTheRat]

RobbyJ said:

No just that all the press articles said she was the wife of a ‘diplomat’.

Given that it happened near a US military base is it more likely that the husband is military rather than a diplomat, in which case presumably they're covered by either the NATO statement of forces agreement or some kind of bilateral US/UK agreement rather than the Vienna Convention?

[WilliamWoollard]

poo at Paul's said:

Why the fk are these retards allowed to drive on our roads in their yanky LHD cars with no proper training? It appears on the base, they drive on the right and have to swap when they come off base. fking ridiculous idea.

I've been on that base plenty of times and they definitely do not drive on the right.

[Zirconia]

RizzoTheRat said:

RobbyJ said:

No just that all the press articles said she was the wife of a ‘diplomat’.

Given that it happened near a US military base is it more likely that the husband is military rather than a diplomat, in which case presumably they're covered by either the NATO statement of forces agreement or some kind of bilateral US/UK agreement rather than the Vienna Convention?

I understand why cover is extended to immediate family when over seas. It makes sense as to why. However was this cover given to the family before coming to the UK or after this accident?

[mr_spock]

Derek Smith said:

The USA protects its military personnel from prosecutions of, virtually, any act committed overseas. There is a provision for them to be prosecuted in the USA but this is limited, in practice, to low ranking military personnel.

Since I'm sitting next to my fiancee who is a US officer stationed here, I can say this is NOT correct. Military are not diplomats and don't have immunity. The US Military Police and the UK Police will agree who has jurisdiction (e.g. drunk driving while on a base) but there is no escape. They also have to take a course before being allowed to drive even on base, and remember that base roads drive on the same side as the rest of the UK, it's not like they change sides. They can RENT a car just like any tourist could of course.

This lady seems to have been a diplomat, not a military dependent, please don't confuse the two.

[hyphen]

Krikkit said:

She's killed someone through her fault exclusively, she'll live with and no doubt be tormented by that for the rest of her days. A couple of years in prison wouldn't make any odds to me in that situation.

We don't know if she has any previous, or any of her history.

You can't just stereotype her as an average American housewife who has gone back to her subarban home to bake cookies.

I imagine she wasn't even facing a heavy punishment if she had gone to court and , it was accepted to be an accident by a woman of previous good character.

[IanH755]

mr_spock said:

Since I'm sitting next to my fiancee who is a US officer stationed here, I can say this is NOT correct. Military are not diplomats and don't have immunity.

Immunity may not be the best word for this but It is sort of true in some cases like Blue on Blue accidents leading to death, as the two A-10 pilots found out after GW2 when they killed a few Brits and the US refused to send them to the UK for the coroners inquiry and refused to allow them to be interviewed by UK police, effectively granting them immunity by now allowing them UK access to them.

[warch]

mr_spock said:

This lady seems to have been a diplomat, not a military dependent, please don't confuse the two.

Why would the wife of a diplomat or even a diplomat be stationed on a US base? I suspect the Yanks have retrospectively applied diplomatic status on her to avoid her being investigated or charged. I'm not surprised, Yanks don't really care about killing people as long as the people aren't from the US.

[Jakg]

Gargamel said:

Jakg said:

Gargamel said:

Given the US still refuse to pay parking fines or the CC in London on the basis of DI there is no chance in this more serious case.

That's a very different point, and missions from many other countries also don't pay.

Whether CC is a tax vs a "charge for service" is really a legal semantic, although with clear economic effects.

Whereas whether not withdrawing diplomatic immunity in this case is more of a moral dilemma.

It simply illustrates that the US consider themselves to be special and different and able to ignore the law as of the lands they have diplomatic missions in. One need only look at the absolute fortress they operate out of in London.

It's not just the US - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38991069 - or are you saying Germany & Japan "consider themselves special"?

[eharding]

Zarco said:

It is asking for trouble allowing them to drive on the right in the base.

Is that actually the case? - Google's overhead imagery shows road markings on the base set up for driving on the left, and the historical imagery shows it having been that way since at least 2004.

Edited: Just seen WilliamWoollard's first hand account....

[mr_spock]

IanH755 said:

mr_spock said:

Since I'm sitting next to my fiancee who is a US officer stationed here, I can say this is NOT correct. Military are not diplomats and don't have immunity.

Immunity may not be the best word for this but It is sort of true in some cases like Blue on Blue accidents leading to death, as the two A-10 pilots found out after GW2 when they killed a few Brits and the US refused to send them to the UK for the coroners inquiry and refused to allow them to be interviewed by UK police, effectively granting them immunity by now allowing them UK access to them.

That's an operational incident and treated differently. There will have been behind-the-scenes work to compensate families and with the UK military.

[George Smiley]

poo at Paul's said:

I'll never understand the idea behind "she will have to live with it...." what in her comfy big house, with all her family and friends, as if it all never ever happened?

Like she gives a st?

Ted Kennedy managed it

[poo at Paul's]

BY no means confirmed, but local rumour is that the immunity card was played much later in proceedings, not in the immediate aftermath. So was the immunity there or added later?
Also locally being said police believe she was using a phone at the time and military police were first on scene. She had two kids in the car with her.

[SpunkyGlory]

Vanden Saab said:

While what has happened in this case following the accident is totally wrong may I suggest that no amount of training would make the slightest bit of difference. At times all of us will revert to the sub-conscious while driving abroad more so if we drive a lot at home. Having realised this, now when I drive abroad I have a piece of paper stuck to the windscreen in my eyeline saying "drive on the right".
For me it is the only way as I know especially when under pressure my sub-conscious will take over the driving for me and I might end up on the wrong side of the road without it.

This has got to be a joke, right?

[George Smiley]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

It’s a good tip. On a few mornings mid journey after a sleep it’s a very easy mistake to make.

[CellarDoor]

hyphen said:

Krikkit said:

She's killed someone through her fault exclusively, she'll live with and no doubt be tormented by that for the rest of her days. A couple of years in prison wouldn't make any odds to me in that situation.

We don't know if she has any previous, or any of her history.

You can't just stereotype her as an average American housewife who has gone back to her subarban home to bake cookies.

I imagine she wasn't even facing a heavy punishment if she had gone to court and , it was accepted to be an accident by a woman of previous good character.

"Northamptonshire Police confirmed the 42-year-old American suspect had previously confirmed to us that she had no plans to leave the country in the near future but had since fled the country."

These do not appear to be the actions of someone with a good character.