US Extradition

[Clitheroekid]

It's perhaps not really suitable for a board devoted to practical legal issues, as I would hope that none of my fellow Fools are likely to face extradition proceedings to the USA, but I was quite shocked to see that permission has been given for Mike Lynch (he of Autonomy fame / infamy) to be extradited to the US - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... dge-rules/

This extradition arrangement only ever seems to work one way, namely that if the US requests extradition of a UK citizen it's handed to them on a plate, but if we ask them to extradite a US citizen (as we did with Anne Sacoolas, the woman who killed the young lad because she was driving on the wrong side of the road) it's always refused.

I certainly have no time for Lynch, but I have very little faith that he would receive a fair trial under the US criminal justice system, and I hope that the Home Secretary will refuse extradition.

[Lootman]

The one-sided nature of the UK/US extradition laws has been known for some time. No idea why we agreed to it. Although the Sacoolas issue is more about diplomatic immunity.

It is still not that easy though. Julian Assange is still in Belmarsh Prison, despite the US trying to extradite him for years and he isn't even a British citizen. And I doubt that Randy Andy will be brought in for questioning at Quantico either.

Where the extradition system does seem to be effective is for white collar financial crimes. If people broke US financial laws and thought they would get away with it because they were in London, then they were in for a surprise. Like the NatWest Three of Enron fame:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NatWest_Three

[UncleEbenezer]

The bizarre thing about the Mike Lynch case is that the entire tech community were shaking our heads at HP at the time of the takeover. Even HP's own finance director at the time, and their (then recent) former chairman, warned against the purchase. Oracle was reported having been touted Autonomy at less than half what HP paid, and rejected it as way overpriced.

I recollect describing the deal as "two-plus-metoo". Oracle had recently acquired Sun, thus acquiring top-end hardware alongside its enterprise software offerings, positioning itself as a competitor to IBM across the entire enterprise market. HP had dreams. Hence the bizarre and ill-fated acquisitions of both EDS (leading provider of IT disasters to government) and Autonomy.

[9873210]

The extradition treaty lets the UK get rid of scallywags, rouges and people the government does not like without having to do the hard work. While the US has to deal with its own miscreants. So yes, very one sided,

[GrahamPlatt]

The extradition treaty lets the UK get rid of scallywags, rouges and people the government does not like without having to do the hard work. While the US has to deal with its own miscreants. So yes, very one sided,

HMG has never liked the reds.

[stewamax]

I recollect describing the deal as "two-plus-metoo". Oracle had recently acquired Sun, thus acquiring top-end hardware alongside its enterprise software offerings, positioning itself as a competitor to IBM across the entire enterprise market. HP had dreams. Hence the bizarre and ill-fated acquisitions of both EDS (leading provider of IT disasters to government) and Autonomy.

Backside protection and potential loss of face trumps common sense: the fear of being left behind by a competitor.
And it is not just a US inanity. The supposedly cautious long-term planning of Japanese businesses goes by the wayside when their benchmarking (‘yokonarabi’) shows that a competitor may steal a march.
In 1989, Sony Group Corp. bought Columbia Pictures (with ‘the lady holding a torch’ logo). Almost immediately, Matsushita Electric bought MCA. Sony was still bruised with massive loss of face stemming from when their Betamax was commercially killed by Matsushita-backed JVC’s VHS and needed to get back in the driving seat .

There was no logic in HP's paying a daft price for Autonomy. They were trying to become another IBM selling IT services rather than kit, seemingly ignoring the fact that IBM had been selling services for a very long time and had merely upped their game.

[GrahamPlatt]

Whatever happened to caveat emptor? Like the NI protocol, it’s no good crying foul after you’ve negotiated, agreed and signed up to a deal. It’s normally the Americans who’re doing the sharp practice (CDOs etc nearly destroying the world economy), but they’re awfully litigious if they’re on the sticky end, and some outcomes of their legal processes beggar belief. If he does get extradited, I don’t give much for his chances.

[Kantwebefriends]

"No idea why we agreed to it". We weren't consulted. It wuz that Toni Blair whodunnit.

[pje16]

Anne Sacoolas
Guilty
why did it take sooooo long
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-n ... e-63328168

[stevensfo]

Anne Sacoolas
Guilty
why did it take sooooo long
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-n ... e-63328168

Claims of diplomatic immunity?

Anne's total and utter panic?

Refusal of the deceased parents to talk to Anne when they were in the next room, invited by Trump?

Anne, from the USA, was driving on the wrong side of the road. I have done exactly the same after coming from Italy to the UK and vice versa, though for not more than 30 seconds. My blood still runs cold at the memory! Ten years ago, I left a cinema with our youngest son and my little nephew and drove the wrong way round a roundabout. Thank God there were no other cars around! Culpa mea, but no malice involved.

Having read the whole story, I think that this is a VERY sad case of a young mother who, although she stopped, waved down a passing car and stayed with the young man till told to leave by the paramedics, then went into panic mode and was probably advised by her husband and officials on the American base to go back home asap and say nothing.

It seems that if she returns to the UK, she will be not be given a prison sentence but will receive a lesser - community sentence? - which will allow her to return to the USA.

The parents just want closure, so I hope that she will come and face justice, then allow the distraught parents to live in peace.

Steve

[pje16]

Anne Sacoolas
Guilty
why did it take sooooo long
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-n ... e-63328168

Claims of diplomatic immunity?

Anne's total and utter panic?

Refusal of the deceased parents to talk to Anne when they were in the next room, invited by Trump?

Anne, from the USA, was driving on the wrong side of the road. I have done exactly the same after coming from Italy to the UK and vice versa, though for not more than 30 seconds. My blood still runs cold at the memory! Ten years ago, I left a cinema with our youngest son and my little nephew and drove the wrong way round a roundabout. Thank God there were no other cars around! Culpa mea, but no malice involved.

Steve

It should not have taken 3 years though

A few years go I drove in California for a month, where (quite logically) you can turn right at a red light as long as nothing to your left is coming
came home and the first red light I came to, sailed straight through it and turned left. A few seconds later it dawned on me what I had done.

Good to know it's not just me

[mutantpoodle]

[quote="Lootman"]The one-sided nature of the UK/US extradition laws has been known for some time. No idea why we agreed to it.

similar to the 'special relationship'........its nearly all one way traffic

[AF62]

It should not have taken 3 years though

Since it transpired after the initial press coverage that she was the more senior ‘spy’ and not simply the housewife of someone with diplomatic immunity, then perhaps it took a while for her masters at Langley to conclude/ unwind the work she was involved in and allow her back to foreign shores to an uncertain fate (assuming that a deal has not already been done with the UK and the sentence is certain).

[pje16]

It should not have taken 3 years though

Since it transpired after the initial press coverage that she was the more senior ‘spy’ and not simply the housewife of someone with diplomatic immunity, then perhaps it took a while for her masters at Langley to conclude/ unwind the work she was involved in and allow her back to foreign shores to an uncertain fate (assuming that a deal has not already been done with the UK and the sentence is certain).

Nevertheless, she knew what she had done and was trying to get off

[AF62]

It should not have taken 3 years though

Since it transpired after the initial press coverage that she was the more senior ‘spy’ and not simply the housewife of someone with diplomatic immunity, then perhaps it took a while for her masters at Langley to conclude/ unwind the work she was involved in and allow her back to foreign shores to an uncertain fate (assuming that a deal has not already been done with the UK and the sentence is certain).

Nevertheless, she knew what she had done and was trying to get off

She certainly knew what she had done, but trying to get off - I rather think that those running her mission from Langley were the ones to instruct her to take the extraction on the military flight when things looked like they were going wrong with the authorities in the UK and she had had no choice in the matter.

Do you think that your average wife of an admin officer could call up her husband’s military bosses and say ‘can you organise a secret flight for me so I can skip the country’?

[Itsallaguess]

The parents just want closure, so I hope that she will come and face justice, then allow the distraught parents to live in peace.

It was just heartbreaking reading the BBC article on this yesterday, when we see just what this incident has done to these parents, and just why they've had to stay motivated throughout the various hurdles placed in their way -

Mrs Charles [Harry's Mum] said the family "didn't wish to separate [the US driver] from her children, it's not their fault".

She said: "Getting to court and getting to where we are now has been the most monumental thing for me because I can talk to [Harry] now and tell him we've done it, promise complete."

"I feel I can breathe easier. I don't have that guilt on my shoulders of not having done it yet."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-63328168

Well done to Harry's parents, and well done to their dedicated legal team, and shame on those who chose to avoid or stand in the way of justice.

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[Maroochydore]

Just a belated observation.

If she has/had diplomatic immunity why could she just not stay here, answer a few questions etc and carry on her life here?

She obviously couldn't be arrested or charged so why furtively skip the country?

[AF62]

She obviously couldn't be arrested or charged so why furtively skip the country?

The question is perhaps better directed to her employer (or at least former employer), the NSA or the CIA, who told her to get on a military flight they had put on especially for her to get her out of the country from RAF Mildenhall.

Originally the belief was she was non-working spouse of an NSA or CIA operative working on the base and benefitted from their diplomatic immunity, and also that although there is an agreement between the US and the UK that excludes the use of diplomatic immunity for incidents like this, due to an error in the drafting of the agreement that exclusion didn't apply to the non-working spouse (although there is a legal debate about that point).

It later transpired that she may not have been a non-working spouse but might have actually been still employed by the US government, in which case that exclusion would not have applied.

However whatever the legal situation it was clear the US government was rather keen to get her out of the UK and back home to the USA as soon as possible and definitely didn't want her questioned in a foreign police station, even one with which it has a 'special relationship, and the UK government was rather keen to facilitate her quick exit to avoid those questions.

[pje16]

Let's face it, would she have gone back to the States if the incident had not happened?
I think not

[Lootman]

Let's face it, would she have gone back to the States if the incident had not happened?
I think not

No. But then who would not do the same thing in her situation, if they could? In the US almost nobody goes to prison for accidentally killing someone with a vehicle, unless they were drunk. But in the UK you can easily get a custodial sentence for that. So from a US perspective our justice system is excessively punitive in cases where clearly there was no intent to cause harm.

It's rather like if you were in some African country where the penalty for accidentally killing someone is 25 years in prison. If that happened to you and the British government offered to smuggle you out of the country, wouldn't you do it? Especially if you can later plead guilty in absentia without any real downside?