Lad killed by US wrong side driver, who's done a bunk...
Discussion
Glosphil said:
So if a British tourist drives on the wrong side of the road in the US and kills an American driver then Donald will call it "An unfortunate accident" and ensure the UK driver can return to the UK with no punishment? Or does "America First" mean maximum punishment?
It would probably take a long time before The Donald got involved.Edited by Glosphil on Sunday 9th February 17:53
I got pulled by a sheriff’s deputy once in Georgia, for doing 67 in a 55 mph zone, I grovelled like a kid caught by his mum stealing from her purse.
A friend in the car said, “I don’t think I’ve heard you say sir so many times since we were at school.”
The deputy said, “On your way, and think yourself lucky, if you’d be in the next County, they wouldn’t have wasted time talking to you, you’d have been straight in the slammer.
98elise said:
vaud said:
rdjohn said:
I agree.
The one thing that I would prefer to see come out of this would be for the US to accept that having LHD vehicles driving around their bases on the wrong side of the road, in UK terms, is completely unacceptable to a close ally.
It’s just plain dumb.
Except they don't. Please can we put this myth to bed. Bases drive on the left hand side. They may have LHD vehicles on import, but they drive on the left. The one thing that I would prefer to see come out of this would be for the US to accept that having LHD vehicles driving around their bases on the wrong side of the road, in UK terms, is completely unacceptable to a close ally.
It’s just plain dumb.
"Whyohwhyohwhyohwhy do they let the Americans drive on the right on their bases?"
upon which everyone else goes
"FFS, they don't - do some basic fact checking, bingobrain".
It's a noble tradition.
Glosphil said:
So if a British tourist drives on the wrong side of the road in the US and kills an American driver then Donald will call it "An unfortunate accident" and ensure the UK driver can return to the UK with no punishment? Or does "America First" mean maximum punishment?
It would, as in this case, depend on the status of the individual.Edited by Glosphil on Sunday 9th February 17:53
Immunities and reciprocal arrangements exist for very good reasons in international affairs and need to be respected. As it is, whilst Mrs Sarcoolas will never face justice in a British Court, I very much suspect that the damage to her husbands career and, possibly hers, will represent a significant sanction.
Reading the press on this earlier this morning, the victim’s parents need to calm down. As grieving parents, they were given A LOT of indulgence by both HMG and the US Govt and probably rightly so. Now their behaviour isn’t helping anyone, including themselves.
Breadvan72 said:
When your child is killed by a grossly negligent driver who later runs away to avoid the consequences, I am sure that you will find random people on the internet telling you that you “need to calm down” very helpful.
Indeed, and as for the "indulgence" comment, unf
kingbelievable.Breadvan72 said:
When your child is killed by a grossly negligent driver who later runs away to avoid the consequences, I am sure that you will find random people on the internet telling you that you “need to calm down” very helpful.
I'm very sure I wouldn't BV - that is what creates the challenge in this case; highly emotional has to reconcile with clinically rational. As we see here; those don't make easy bedfellows. The parents will not find their peace by continuing to rage against the machine; they will find it by recognising that justice for their son will come not in the UK courts - or any other I suspect - but in the curtailment of Mr & Mrs Sarcoolas' careersEdited by ClaphamGT3 on Tuesday 11th February 21:37
ClaphamGT3 said:
It would, as in this case, depend on the status of the individual.
Immunities and reciprocal arrangements exist for very good reasons in international affairs and need to be respected. As it is, whilst Mrs Sarcoolas will never face justice in a British Court, I very much suspect that the damage to her husbands career and, possibly hers, will represent a significant sanction.
Reading the press on this earlier this morning, the victim’s parents need to calm down. As grieving parents, they were given A LOT of indulgence by both HMG and the US Govt and probably rightly so. Now their behaviour isn’t helping anyone, including themselves.
And this is not one of them reason, any decent nation would have wavered them rights in this situation and allow justed to be carried out. Especially when it involves one of your closest allies, they no that its not an attack on them diplomatically trying to lock someone up on trumped up charges. Immunities and reciprocal arrangements exist for very good reasons in international affairs and need to be respected. As it is, whilst Mrs Sarcoolas will never face justice in a British Court, I very much suspect that the damage to her husbands career and, possibly hers, will represent a significant sanction.
Reading the press on this earlier this morning, the victim’s parents need to calm down. As grieving parents, they were given A LOT of indulgence by both HMG and the US Govt and probably rightly so. Now their behaviour isn’t helping anyone, including themselves.
Not-The-Messiah said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
It would, as in this case, depend on the status of the individual.
Immunities and reciprocal arrangements exist for very good reasons in international affairs and need to be respected. As it is, whilst Mrs Sarcoolas will never face justice in a British Court, I very much suspect that the damage to her husbands career and, possibly hers, will represent a significant sanction.
Reading the press on this earlier this morning, the victim’s parents need to calm down. As grieving parents, they were given A LOT of indulgence by both HMG and the US Govt and probably rightly so. Now their behaviour isn’t helping anyone, including themselves.
And this is not one of them reason, any decent nation would have wavered them rights in this situation and allow justed to be carried out. Especially when it involves one of your closest allies, they no that its not an attack on them diplomatically trying to lock someone up on trumped up charges. Immunities and reciprocal arrangements exist for very good reasons in international affairs and need to be respected. As it is, whilst Mrs Sarcoolas will never face justice in a British Court, I very much suspect that the damage to her husbands career and, possibly hers, will represent a significant sanction.
Reading the press on this earlier this morning, the victim’s parents need to calm down. As grieving parents, they were given A LOT of indulgence by both HMG and the US Govt and probably rightly so. Now their behaviour isn’t helping anyone, including themselves.
Not-The-Messiah said:
And this is not one of them reason, any decent nation would have wavered them rights in this situation and allow justed to be carried out. Especially when it involves one of your closest allies, they no that its not an attack on them diplomatically trying to lock someone up on trumped up charges.
We'll likely never know if the UK would give up one of their own MI5/6 agents under diplomatic immunity to the US Courts and risk US imprisonment where they would be vulnerable as known spies. This isn't a straightforward case. If it had been a 'normal' US Citizen then the outcome, I do believe, would have been very different. The fact Mrs Sacoolas is a high level Intelligence Officer with the CIA, as it has emerged, does complicate the issue hugely and had she deliberately murdered someone in cold blood, it might have been different again but under the circumstances, like it or not, she did not set out to kill anyone, it was an accident, the circumstances of the accident are understandable albeit not excusable, granted, but she was never going to spend a lengthy time in jail which means the Family were never going to get the justice they would want anyway but even the small risk of such is sufficient for the CIA to not put their Agent in that situation.
As for Mrs Sacoolas' role with the CIA, she is obviously a valuable asset and while her field work is now irreparably compromised, I'd highly doubt she wouldn't be used domestically in a high level handling support role of some sort - her career is not over and the training and character of someone who does her kind of work is unlikely to be unable to 'get over' the loss of life she caused. Whether we like it or not, this woman is not punished, is unlikely to ever be and it is all down to a terrible accident, not intentional. She did show remorse. I do believe it was genuine. The CIA were never going to allow her to be exposed to any Courts for what was, in the end, an accident.
If ever a UK Secret Service operative is involved in a similar situation abroad, then we will discover if the US is alone in protecting its top level security agents. I'm not suggesting it is right but I'm not surprised and I would think the UK would, in fact, protect its own Agents in a similar fashion for a similar situation.
If it were a member of my Family who was the victim, like anyone, I too would want justice and be very angry but under these circumstances and the fact that it was an accident, no abused substances involved, a terrible lapse of judgement but understandable in an 'auto-pilot' kinda way we are all 'guilty' of at some point when driving (to deny it is to be a liar), her diplomatic immunity that, if she is CIA, is pretty much iron-clad and the fact that no significant punishment would be forthcoming anyway, well, best just to move on and let time heal the wounds.
Edited to add: Some here and around the UK are treating this woman as the epitome of evil. She isn't. She is guilty of a crime for an accident, certainly, the degree to which only a Court can decide but for the reasons discussed, she is unlikely to face those charges.
Much worse are the scum who go out for a few pints and then decide they are fine to drive home. How many of you are scum like that or have been? It is only pure luck when those who do that do not cause accidents.
Edited by Coolbananas on Wednesday 12th February 08:43
Coolbananas said:
We'll likely never know if the UK would give up one of their own MI5/6 agents under diplomatic immunity to the US Courts and risk US imprisonment where they would be vulnerable as known spies. This isn't a straightforward case. If it had been a 'normal' US Citizen then the outcome, I do believe, would have been very different.
The fact Mrs Sacoolas is a high level Intelligence Officer with the CIA, as it has emerged, does complicate the issue hugely and had she deliberately murdered someone in cold blood, it might have been different again but under the circumstances, like it or not, she did not set out to kill anyone, it was an accident, the circumstances of the accident are understandable albeit not excusable, granted, but she was never going to spend a lengthy time in jail which means the Family were never going to get the justice they would want anyway but even the small risk of such is sufficient for the CIA to not put their Agent in that situation.
As for Mrs Sacoolas' role with the CIA, she is obviously a valuable asset and while her field work is now irreparably compromised, I'd highly doubt she wouldn't be used domestically in a high level handling support role of some sort - her career is not over and the training and character of someone who does her kind of work is unlikely to be unable to 'get over' the loss of life she caused. Whether we like it or not, this woman is not punished, is unlikely to ever be and it is all down to a terrible accident, not intentional. She did show remorse. I do believe it was genuine. The CIA were never going to allow her to be exposed to any Courts for what was, in the end, an accident.
If ever a UK Secret Service operative is involved in a similar situation abroad, then we will discover if the US is alone in protecting its top level security agents. I'm not suggesting it is right but I'm not surprised and I would think the UK would, in fact, protect its own Agents in a similar fashion for a similar situation.
If it were a member of my Family who was the victim, like anyone, I too would want justice and be very angry but under these circumstances and the fact that it was an accident, no abused substances involved, a terrible lapse of judgement but understandable in an 'auto-pilot' kinda way we are all 'guilty' of at some point when driving (to deny it is to be a liar), her diplomatic immunity that, if she is CIA, is pretty much iron-clad and the fact that no significant punishment would be forthcoming anyway, well, best just to move on and let time heal the wounds.
Edited to add: Some here and around the UK are treating this woman as the epitome of evil. She isn't. She is guilty of a crime for an accident, certainly, the degree to which only a Court can decide but for the reasons discussed, she is unlikely to face those charges.
Much worse are the scum who go out for a few pints and then decide they are fine to drive home. How many of you are scum like that or have been? It is only pure luck when those who do that do not cause accidents.
Disingenuous claptrap. As usual.The fact Mrs Sacoolas is a high level Intelligence Officer with the CIA, as it has emerged, does complicate the issue hugely and had she deliberately murdered someone in cold blood, it might have been different again but under the circumstances, like it or not, she did not set out to kill anyone, it was an accident, the circumstances of the accident are understandable albeit not excusable, granted, but she was never going to spend a lengthy time in jail which means the Family were never going to get the justice they would want anyway but even the small risk of such is sufficient for the CIA to not put their Agent in that situation.
As for Mrs Sacoolas' role with the CIA, she is obviously a valuable asset and while her field work is now irreparably compromised, I'd highly doubt she wouldn't be used domestically in a high level handling support role of some sort - her career is not over and the training and character of someone who does her kind of work is unlikely to be unable to 'get over' the loss of life she caused. Whether we like it or not, this woman is not punished, is unlikely to ever be and it is all down to a terrible accident, not intentional. She did show remorse. I do believe it was genuine. The CIA were never going to allow her to be exposed to any Courts for what was, in the end, an accident.
If ever a UK Secret Service operative is involved in a similar situation abroad, then we will discover if the US is alone in protecting its top level security agents. I'm not suggesting it is right but I'm not surprised and I would think the UK would, in fact, protect its own Agents in a similar fashion for a similar situation.
If it were a member of my Family who was the victim, like anyone, I too would want justice and be very angry but under these circumstances and the fact that it was an accident, no abused substances involved, a terrible lapse of judgement but understandable in an 'auto-pilot' kinda way we are all 'guilty' of at some point when driving (to deny it is to be a liar), her diplomatic immunity that, if she is CIA, is pretty much iron-clad and the fact that no significant punishment would be forthcoming anyway, well, best just to move on and let time heal the wounds.
Edited to add: Some here and around the UK are treating this woman as the epitome of evil. She isn't. She is guilty of a crime for an accident, certainly, the degree to which only a Court can decide but for the reasons discussed, she is unlikely to face those charges.
Much worse are the scum who go out for a few pints and then decide they are fine to drive home. How many of you are scum like that or have been? It is only pure luck when those who do that do not cause accidents.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 12th February 08:43
Coolbananas said:
We'll likely never know if the UK would give up one of their own MI5/6 agents under diplomatic immunity to the US Courts and risk US imprisonment where they would be vulnerable as known spies. This isn't a straightforward case. If it had been a 'normal' US Citizen then the outcome, I do believe, would have been very different.
The fact Mrs Sacoolas is a high level Intelligence Officer with the CIA, as it has emerged, does complicate the issue hugely and had she deliberately murdered someone in cold blood, it might have been different again but under the circumstances, like it or not, she did not set out to kill anyone, it was an accident, the circumstances of the accident are understandable albeit not excusable, granted, but she was never going to spend a lengthy time in jail which means the Family were never going to get the justice they would want anyway but even the small risk of such is sufficient for the CIA to not put their Agent in that situation.
As for Mrs Sacoolas' role with the CIA, she is obviously a valuable asset and while her field work is now irreparably compromised, I'd highly doubt she wouldn't be used domestically in a high level handling support role of some sort - her career is not over and the training and character of someone who does her kind of work is unlikely to be unable to 'get over' the loss of life she caused. Whether we like it or not, this woman is not punished, is unlikely to ever be and it is all down to a terrible accident, not intentional. She did show remorse. I do believe it was genuine. The CIA were never going to allow her to be exposed to any Courts for what was, in the end, an accident.
If ever a UK Secret Service operative is involved in a similar situation abroad, then we will discover if the US is alone in protecting its top level security agents. I'm not suggesting it is right but I'm not surprised and I would think the UK would, in fact, protect its own Agents in a similar fashion for a similar situation.
If it were a member of my Family who was the victim, like anyone, I too would want justice and be very angry but under these circumstances and the fact that it was an accident, no abused substances involved, a terrible lapse of judgement but understandable in an 'auto-pilot' kinda way we are all 'guilty' of at some point when driving (to deny it is to be a liar), her diplomatic immunity that, if she is CIA, is pretty much iron-clad and the fact that no significant punishment would be forthcoming anyway, well, best just to move on and let time heal the wounds.
Edited to add: Some here and around the UK are treating this woman as the epitome of evil. She isn't. She is guilty of a crime for an accident, certainly, the degree to which only a Court can decide but for the reasons discussed, she is unlikely to face those charges.
Much worse are the scum who go out for a few pints and then decide they are fine to drive home. How many of you are scum like that or have been? It is only pure luck when those who do that do not cause accidents.
First of as it been confirmed she is a CIA agent? If she is it show the calibre of high level agents the US have if they can't even drive on the right side of the road in another country.The fact Mrs Sacoolas is a high level Intelligence Officer with the CIA, as it has emerged, does complicate the issue hugely and had she deliberately murdered someone in cold blood, it might have been different again but under the circumstances, like it or not, she did not set out to kill anyone, it was an accident, the circumstances of the accident are understandable albeit not excusable, granted, but she was never going to spend a lengthy time in jail which means the Family were never going to get the justice they would want anyway but even the small risk of such is sufficient for the CIA to not put their Agent in that situation.
As for Mrs Sacoolas' role with the CIA, she is obviously a valuable asset and while her field work is now irreparably compromised, I'd highly doubt she wouldn't be used domestically in a high level handling support role of some sort - her career is not over and the training and character of someone who does her kind of work is unlikely to be unable to 'get over' the loss of life she caused. Whether we like it or not, this woman is not punished, is unlikely to ever be and it is all down to a terrible accident, not intentional. She did show remorse. I do believe it was genuine. The CIA were never going to allow her to be exposed to any Courts for what was, in the end, an accident.
If ever a UK Secret Service operative is involved in a similar situation abroad, then we will discover if the US is alone in protecting its top level security agents. I'm not suggesting it is right but I'm not surprised and I would think the UK would, in fact, protect its own Agents in a similar fashion for a similar situation.
If it were a member of my Family who was the victim, like anyone, I too would want justice and be very angry but under these circumstances and the fact that it was an accident, no abused substances involved, a terrible lapse of judgement but understandable in an 'auto-pilot' kinda way we are all 'guilty' of at some point when driving (to deny it is to be a liar), her diplomatic immunity that, if she is CIA, is pretty much iron-clad and the fact that no significant punishment would be forthcoming anyway, well, best just to move on and let time heal the wounds.
Edited to add: Some here and around the UK are treating this woman as the epitome of evil. She isn't. She is guilty of a crime for an accident, certainly, the degree to which only a Court can decide but for the reasons discussed, she is unlikely to face those charges.
Much worse are the scum who go out for a few pints and then decide they are fine to drive home. How many of you are scum like that or have been? It is only pure luck when those who do that do not cause accidents.
Edited by Coolbananas on Wednesday 12th February 08:43
This rubbish it's just an accident its boring, the family from what I can tell just want proper procedure to take place, I think they have said that doesn't automatically mean prison time. It's more the principal that she's been able to just walk away.
Im almost certain if this was the other way round and this was a UK person who did the same thing in the US. The UK would have allowed justice to take place.
You've really got to question the US decision on this, they have damaged diplomatic and public relations just so some coward incompetent women doesn't need to sit through a few court proceedings. She more than likely would have ended up with a suspended sentence.
They think we don't matter but we do in many ways. Barack Obama thought we didn't matter and treated us as such. But then when he wanted to go to war in Syria and we turned around and went "your on your own then". That was one of the key reason he didn't get his way it turn the American public against the idea.
I went by this place last week on return from Europe trip. Did they not initially put signs up saying something like "Please drive on the left" (the council I mean in the aftermath). Someone pointed out why the "please" its not a request!!!
Well, what I noticed last week was they say "drive on the left" now. I think they have been changed! Not sure, but I reckon it is Northamptonshie council, that are in charge there.....werent they the ones who went into liquidation pretty much in 2018?
Well, what I noticed last week was they say "drive on the left" now. I think they have been changed! Not sure, but I reckon it is Northamptonshie council, that are in charge there.....werent they the ones who went into liquidation pretty much in 2018?
ClaphamGT3 said:
What we can say with certainty is that Donald Trump - for all his other hideous failings - has bent over backwards to support the victim's family and to take as human and as understanding approach to the episode as possible in the circumstances. I can't think of any other US President in recent history who would have even commented on something like this, much less met the victim's family personally
That will be the Donald that had Sarcoolas in the next room when he met the family to try and get a cheap publicity shot ?Another dash cam vid from Thursday this week of some inept tt driving out of this base turning right but onto the wrong side of the road, head onto a car.
Selfish fking muppets, if you cannot drive on the correct side of the road here, stop being a selfish prick and get a fking cab! aholes.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptons...
t driving out of this base turning right but onto the wrong side of the road, head onto a car.Selfish f
king muppets, if you cannot drive on the correct side of the road here, stop being a selfish prick and get a fking cab! aholes.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptons...
Edited by poo at Paul's on Friday 14th February 23:14
poo at Paul's said:
Another dash cam vid from Thursday this week of some inept tt driving out of this base turning right but onto the wrong side of the road, head onto a car.
Selfish fking muppets, if you cannot drive on the correct side of the road here, stop being a selfish prick and get a fking cab! aholes.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptons...
Does it look like LHD?t driving out of this base turning right but onto the wrong side of the road, head onto a car.Selfish f
king muppets, if you cannot drive on the correct side of the road here, stop being a selfish prick and get a fking cab! aholes.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptons...
Any idea of the vehicle and the second one waiting to turn out?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff