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

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

Author
Discussion

Agammemnon

1,628 posts

59 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
mr_spock said:
This lady seems to have been a diplomat, not a military dependent, please don't confuse the two.
The word is dependant not dependent. Please don't confuse the two.

Frank7

6,619 posts

88 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
I’m not for a second taking the diplomat’s wife’s side, or offering this to excuse her, but it only takes a second’s lack of concentration for even the most experienced of drivers to lapse back into thinking that they’re “at home.”
One Christmas, many moons ago, I’d been out with my son and his German wife, they were over from Germany, we got her to drive his LHD Renault back from the pub, she got to a junction where we had to turn right, did so, but started to aim for the right hand side, until we both screamed at her.
Another time, driving from Las Vegas to San Francisco, I got my friend, (a Black Cab driver, as I was), to take over, although he moaned like mad.
He drove perfectly for mile after mile across California, came to a junction, turned left, and stayed on the left until I punched his shoulder.
I came out of the courtyard of a hotel in St. Omer, France, turned right, and pushed across to the left, with my wife calling me all the names under the sun.
The one that’s permanently etched on my brain though, was when I got off a plane in Nassau, Bahamas, from New York City.
I picked up a rental, a LHD yank car, drove out of the parking lot, and took the right hand side, only to almost be blinded by flashing headlights, and deafened by car horns.
Almost all the cars there are LHD, but they drive on the left, maybe because it once was a British colony.

Pinoyuk

422 posts

57 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
Depends on a few things .

1.As a wife etc living on a base (we presume she actually was not working there ) is she subject to Military law as I believe they are in the UK ?

2. Maybe she had no decision in leaving .If her Husband was Ordered to leave . His family would be part of the order and be flown back that day etc .


The only thing that rings true is the contempt The US have for foreign laws etc . They will never change. All this “special relationship” stuff is pure crap .They look down their noses at us .

peterperkins

3,152 posts

243 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
If you or I of previous good character had a lapse in judgement or were negligent whilst driving resulting in a death, and we had a get out jail free card would you/I play it?
I don't think I would but you never know until you are staring down the barrel of difficult choices.

Of course she should face the due process of the law.
However the law in this instance appears to be on her side.

If she has been granted or was eligible for diplomatic immunity officially then we are screwed.
However if she has just been flown out because a few strings have been pulled and there is no substantive claim for DI then......

It's all fairly crap of course for the victims family.. frown


Gargamel

14,996 posts

262 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
Jakg said:
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"?
I am unclear why you are trying to make a fight out of this ? That US foriegn policy only serves the US is not news. Nor is it news that the US stand behind there people, even when they have done bad.

I didn't think that was in doubt. It is the same mentality that sees Trump arrive in basically a tank with wheels, whilst Her Maj has an open topped horse drawn carriage.



eccles

13,740 posts

223 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
mr_spock said:
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.
Having lived near two large American bases in Suffolk for many years I can certainly back you up on this, and Derek is certainly very wrong in this.
The local papers often have cases where American servicemen/ women have broken the law and are up in court. Sometimes the punishments given out by the court can seem a little lenient, but I think this is in the context that the Military will be punishing the transgressor as well, much like our forces.
They drive on the left on these bases, but have American road markings (like four way stops), and their cops are very keen!


Derek Smith

45,685 posts

249 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
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. 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.
Is she aware of the Hague Invasion Act of around the turn of this century?


Chainsaw Rebuild

2,009 posts

103 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
peterperkins said:
If you or I of previous good character had a lapse in judgement or were negligent whilst driving resulting in a death, and we had a get out jail free card would you/I play it?
I don't think I would but you never know until you are staring down the barrel of difficult choices.
This is a good point. Imagine you have had an accident and it looks like a serious jail term is coming your way. As much as you are very sorry and upset, given the choice of jail or flying home what would you honestly do? Or what if it was your wife?

I would get on the plane.

anonymous-user

55 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
Mr_spock said:
This lady seems to have been a diplomat, not a military dependent, please don't confuse the two.
BBC reported, ''The diplomat's wife, who has diplomatic immunity, left the UK despite telling police that she had no plans to.''

The use of diplomatic titles to protect intelligence officers in foreign countries has long been standard practice for the United States.

shirt

22,603 posts

202 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
George Smiley said:
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.
Tbh the big sign at glasgow airport saying to drive on the left often saves me a little embarrassment. At least once on every visit home I will get into the passenger side and wonder where the steering wheel is.

anonymous-user

55 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
Justice must be done. For the boy, for his family, to learn from it. It's no good her running away from it and facing no consequences.
The suggestion about altering the side of the road they drive on in bases to suit the British way seems a no-brainer really, something to consider.
And all this recent talk about nobody being above the law in this country eh?

philv

3,945 posts

215 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
Hopefully the press will discover identity.
And make her life hell.

ClaphamGT3

11,305 posts

244 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
peterperkins said:
Diplomatic immunity is a minefield and it stinks in cases like this.
However we and 141 other countries signed up to it knowing the likely consequences and abuses so can't really complain.

I remember poor PC Fletcher shot and killed by someone from the Libyan embassy in 1984 in London.
All the occupants of said embassy were allowed to leave unmolested under diplomatic immunity. That really rankled.

'Vienna convention and diplomatic protection

The protection of diplomats and their official premises is based on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961, an international treaty; it was signed by 141 countries, including the UK and Libya. It was incorporated into UK law in the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964. among other measures, the act protects diplomats from prosecution for any crime unless the diplomat's home country waives his right to immunity. A country can declare a diplomat from another state to be persona non grata, and demand that they leave the country, but no other action can be taken against them. Diplomatic premises are also protected from entry by the police or security services, unless given permission by the country's ambassador.[15][16]'

The best we can hope for in this case now the suspect is back in the US is some formal apology, a payment and public hand wringing by the US.
I suspect the miscreant's husbands diplomatic career is now likely over as well.

RIP the poor victim..
This is a good and informative post.

When I was a kid my father was a military diplomat. At that time all dependents covered by immunity were briefed on why it existed and why it shouldn’t be abused. It was made very clear that it existed to protect the diplomatic work of the mission, not to be a ‘get out of jail free’ card for breach of the host nations local laws - especially by dependents. I also remember that, in the case of the UK, it was up to the individual Ambassador/High Commissioner/Head of Mission to decide whether to waive immunity and many made clear that, in circumstances such as these, they would always do so.

anonymous-user

55 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
philv said:

And make her life hell.
I don't get this, trial by media. You know nothing of her yet have cast aspersions.
It is patently clear the US government called her whole family back, it not like she fled, she was previously cooperating.
These are peoples lives at stake, and maybe it was big accident, why does having her name in the open make any difference?

anonymous-user

55 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
VK, on US bases in the UK the cars drive on the left. The bases are actually RAF bases.

As noted above, the family of the dead man could sue in England, serving the claim in the US. The problem would be in enforcing a judgment for damages in the US.


Coolbanana

4,417 posts

201 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
Thesprucegoose said:
BBC reported, ''The diplomat's wife, who has diplomatic immunity, left the UK despite telling police that she had no plans to.''

The use of diplomatic titles to protect intelligence officers in foreign countries has long been standard practice for the United States.
Yep, if the husband is an intelligence officer, the US will want to protect his identity. That makes his wife very well protected.
I feel for the victim of the accident and his Family but soon they will have to accept they need to move on.

It is likely the wife was given no choice in the matter either, to protect her husbands identity. She may have started out cooperating and then had some US agents escort her and her family back to the USA under orders.

anonymous-user

55 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
Guys! The woman might be the spook here. It is 2019. Not that it matters which of the couple was the spook.

Cantaloupe

1,056 posts

61 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
This somewhat debunks the motto " no-one is above the law " unless they have a job in Intelligence where a
criminal prosecution would compromise their , or a family member's identity.

anonymous-user

55 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You only missed the point by a bazillion miles. I was laughing at everyday sexism.

For a clear explanation of how immunity works, see further up the thread.

anonymous-user

55 months

Sunday 6th October 2019
quotequote all
I may be wrong, but I have the impression that when a government employs a spy, the Gov does not always describe that person as a spy. But what job the driver did or did not do is irrelevant as she was a beneficiary of immunity.