How can Ann Sacolas live with her actions?

[GrumblyMumblyisnotJumbly]

Fell so dreadfully sorry for Harry Dunn's family. The high court has ruled that Ann Sacolas DID have diplomatic immunity. She did not work at the base. She drove on the wrong side of the road. She caused Harry's death. She has not taken responsibility for her actions. How would she feel if it had been her child killed?

Latest ruling says she had immunity, but it seems to be ongoing. The case for saying she did not have immunity definitely isn't TOTAL nonsense. So I'd say it was debatable.

Even Dominic Raab says, (today I think), that he is "standing with the Dunn family". And isn't he pally with the stbxPOTUS? Or am I getting him mixed up with someone else? If it is espionage or whatever, the UK government don't seem to be in full agreement with whatever it is. And I also thought Trump was always falling out with his intelligence agencies. It's murky stuff. I'm not sure what to think of any of them, but I'm not inclined to think well of them tbh. Except the grieving family, who really haven't done a thing to deserve this.

I think my 'takeaway' is that mixing politics with policing and the the justice system makes for messy outcomes. I suppose it has to happen though in some circumstances.

It's a tough one,but I think a strong person would have forfeited their immunity and stood trial. A few months of tough trial (her family could have been with her in the UK during that) followed by, absolute worse case, a couple of months in prison, and then everyone could move on with their life. Instead nobody can properly move on and she sets a rather poor example for her own family who, worst case - would have managed without her just fine with frequent video calls/visits for a month or two in prison (extremely unlikely).

Wrap it up how every you like, what she's doing is fleeing/avoiding justice after a tragic accident. Horrible to live with and a terrible message to give her family.

If it is espionage.. I think by her being pathetic and running away she has brought so much attention to herself and the case and everyone's wondering why she's so special to get helped to disappear that its hardly been good spying and sneaky peaky stuff is it? Surely a CIA spy should have been able to hold up to police/courts and if prison was on the cards she could have coped for the relatively short time it would have (wrongly) have been.

@Cam77

It's a tough one,but I think a strong person would have forfeited their immunity and stood trial. A few months of tough trial (her family could have been with her in the UK during that) followed by, absolute worse case, a couple of months in prison, and then everyone could move on with their life. Instead nobody can properly move on and she sets a rather poor example for her own family who, worst case - would have managed without her just fine with frequent video calls/visits for a month or two in prison (extremely unlikely).

Would you really have done that though? If your options were a) imprisonment in a foreign country, away from your children. A terrifying prospect. Or b) legally and with your governments support, leave, and go home.

You would really choose the option that takes you away from your child, your family and puts you in prison.

It’s very easy to say what you should do, but when you are in that situation, not many would.

Not had time to see if this has been said, and it probably has, but saying sorry would be admitting guilt and she will just have been advised to keep quiet. I think it's wrong she won't be punished but we don't really know how she feels.

Would you really have done that though?
If your options were
a) imprisonment in a foreign country, away from your children. A terrifying prospect.
Or
b) legally and with your governments support, leave, and go home.

You would really choose the option that takes you away from your child, your family and puts you in prison.

It’s very easy to say what you should do, but when you are in that situation, not many would.

So, in the heat of the moment, and especially since her government instructed her to leave, her actions were wrong, but understandable. However, the heat of the moment is long gone. Imprisonment was not, and probably still isn't, a definite prospect. First offence, clearly not a deliberate act of violence etc. I imagine it would be a short sentence at worst, in a country whose prison system is probably a lot more bearable than the country in which she currently resides. There is also a question mark over whether she really did have immunity.

Unless someone is advising ber that she would be locked away for a long time if she came back, then the, "I was terrified for my CHILDREN and panicked and ran away", line, no longer really holds water. She is no longer panicking. She is being invited to the White House! Apparently supported by the leader of the free world.

@RunningFromInsanity what makes you think she'd have been imprisoned? If she were, it would be for a very short time and not in awful conditions.

Those people saying they'd have done the same: killed someone's child and run away from justice leaving them bereft, without apology or remorse and without closure are selfish and morally reprehensible.
I hope I don't know any of you.

Btw, do people remember that guy whose negligence killed a young woman when he was drunk and trying to show off his boat? He went on the run and it took ages to find him. Do pps on here think he shouldn't have been brought back to face justice because ...?

A) it won't bring her back, so what's the point?
B) he must have been scared and panicking and didn't want to go to prison and be away from his family?

@JaJaDingDong

How does Anne Sacolas feel?

She probably feels bloody awful, just like anyone would who'd killed someone accidentally.

She'll be living her own sentence for the rest of her life - she's not ever going to forget she killed someone and ran away.

There's not a lot to be gained even if it was agreed she didn't have immunity - she's not going to come back to the UK to face the music.

That's daft logic.

Most people who accidentally kill or injure someone because of drunk or careless driving feel terrible about it and live wih guilt for the rest of their lives. I'm sure even some people who commit crimes deliberately are racked by remorse later. But that's not an excuse for them not to face justice for what they have done. 'Feeling bloody awful' does not equal a 'life sentence'. If it did, all a lawyer would need to say is 'My client feels bloody awful, your honour. Please drop all charges'.

I'm always uncomfortable about "justice" for a mistake. This one had awful consequences and Harry's family must be in unimaginable pain. She made a dreadful mistake, it should never have happened but she didn't do it deliberately. I think we've all made a mistake on the road at some point, usually, thankfully, there are no consequences.

I think the Americans behaved badly in whisking her away and I suspect there's more to it than we're being told there, but I don't think she personally is responsible for the fact that she's not facing justice. I suspect the Americans wouldn't let her if she wanted to.

Oh, well if she didn't do it deliberately that's OK then 🙄

I’m so desperately sad for his family. They’ve shown such dignity and kindness that she does not deserve. And they’re better people than me, my reaction to someone murdering my child so carelessly would be much less respectable. I don’t know how any mum can support her. Shame on her for her actions, and what a cop out to say she was only doing what the government told her to do to evade justice. Speaks volumes about her character, and implies she’s hardly the type to be eaten up by guilt. There’s something high level going on here, she must be an intelligence asset to get special treatment. I support what a pp said about making her spy job as hard as possible. I hope she does the right thing and returns to the U.K. to face justice and let everyone move forward.

@SoupDragon

Oh, well if she didn't do it deliberately that's OK then 🙄

Yes you're right that's exactly what I said

@JanewaysBun

I didn't realise that they drive on the other side of the road In that base. That's fucking mental! I'm surprised an accident hasn't happened sooner, I would actually not drive at all In that situation as no way could my "auto driving mode" switch over at the gate. I specifically have never driven on holiday for this reason as my driving brain is programmed to the left side only.

Forgive my naivety - is this standard for bases all over the world?

They drive on the LEFT in RAF Croughton, exactly the same as the rest of England.
Take a look at google maps. You can clearly see the road markings within the base. I don’t know by so many people think that they drive on the right within the base.

It wasn't deliberate, she wasn't drunk, she wasn't using drugs, she is a mother to children who are still dependent on her, it was probably a first offence, she had just exited the compound where they drive on the other side, it probably wouldn't be in the public interest for her to spend a significant time in jail, she isn't a danger to anyone any more. These are all mitigating circumstances which would be taken into account by any law in the land. She probably would be shown leniency for all of these reasons. But the option isn't usually there for people to opt out of the justice system. There are reasons for this, which I probably don't need to explain.

Nobody is saying that she should serve the maximum sentence in prison. In fact, it just wouldn't happen. There are thresholds of severity of offences that the driver has to have committed in order for them to receive the maximum sentence. She doesn't meet any of them.

"Justice" doesn't mean punishment. It can be a good thing for all parties, for various reasons.

Any court in the land*

I feel sorry for the Dunn family, I'm sure everyone does including Anne Sacolas. I'm pretty sure that she'd turn back the clock if she could but on the other hand she has young children doesn't she? Maybe she feels that to leave them without a mother wouldn't be the right thing for her to do. It is very difficult.

@MyTwoBengals Because while most bases are set out like that, US personnel frequently drive using American rules and this sort of becomes the norm with time. This can create disorientation when exiting, and that's why it's not supposed to be the case - people in the base know to expect that, and make allowances even when they keep to the rules themselves. This was actually an argument at Bastion/Leatherneck long ago, where most Afghan vehicles are set up to drive on the left, despite the roads being set up to drive on the right. Because most troops simply drove 'in the middle', this didn't cause as many off-base issues as it might do somewhere like the UK.

Maybe she feels that to leave them without a mother wouldn't be the right thing for her to do

So true. Again, this would be something the courts would take into account. Believe it or not, judges don't tend to want to throw mothers of little kids into prison without a really good reason. The issue is, why does she get to decide not to "do the prison thing"? That is for the courts to decide, UNLESS you're a highly privileged US military wife.

I imagine that if I were in AS's position I'd have done all I could to make amends: go to police, face consequences, apologies to the Dunn family, donation towards funeral or a cause that was in their interests. All that may have served to help them feel a little better; at least, justice would have been served. Would any of that really make people feel any better about their child being dead? Particularly the donation towards the funeral, that would enrage me not make me feel better.

So true. Again, this would be something the courts would take into account. Believe it or not, judges don't tend to want to throw mothers of little kids into prison without a really good reason. The issue is, why does she get to decide not to "do the prison thing"? That is for the courts to decide, UNLESS you're a highly privileged US military wife.

Well she gets to choose because she was put on a flight home. I don't think it is necessarily anything to do with being a US military wife, I think the US are fairly notorious for wanting other countries to extradite to them but they don't like doing it the other way round. I think they see it as protecting US citizens, might be misplaced but that is their culture.

Would any of that really make people feel any better about their child being dead?

Re returning to go to court, the family have repeatedly asked her to do this. So I'm guessing, yes, it is something they would want.

Again, defendants don't get to opt out because "would that really make you feel better victims"? Maybe it wouldn't! But that doesn't mean the defendant gets to skip that part please and thank you. That actually isn't how the justice system works.

I'm a US citizen myself @ancientgran. I'll be sure to bear your assessment in mind if I ever get caught committing a crime. Fly me out of here will you Donny? What? No?

@PabloHoneyBee so funny but it wasn't what i said was it? I said they weren't keen on their citizens being extradited, that would involve putting you on a plane and sending you somewhere else. I hope that explains it for you.