To think this woman needs to return to the UK?

[Hazza000]

What do you all think of the case of the American woman claiming diplomatic immunity for running down and killing that young man Harry Dunn accidentally? She has now fled the uk claiming diplomatic immunity and left a devastated family behind facing a fight for justice?

"putting her in prison will achieve nothing other than making lawyers richer and another prisoner will be burdening uk tax payers."

If you went into any UK Women's prison, that would apply to at least half of the prisoners.

It would apply to the 30% of mentally ill nen in prison.

So why the sudden leniency?

This isn't the first case of a US Diplomat killing someone and not facing justice, not only in the UK but in the rest of the World as well.

There's been all sorts of crimes not answered including sexual ones.

It was the Police that led them to believe she wouldn't leave. It was a month after she left before they found out. That isn't good enough.

Driving on the wrong side of the road isn't a tragic accident, it's dangerous driving. There's been over twenty accidents caused under these circumstances by US Diplomats, including fatal ones. If they can't cope with the change in driving them they should be provided with drivers.

It wasn't "just" an accident though, was it. She was driving on the wrong side of the road. As has been stated by a pp, that's well beyond driving without due care and attention and if anyone from the UK, who couldn't escape by waving the diplomatic immunity card, did it, they'd be charged and probably imprisoned. Death by dangerous driving, isn't that what it's called? Up to 14 years in prison, and a mandatory licence loss of 2 years whether you're imprisoned or not.

That's not trivial, and while it won't (of course!) bring back poor Harry, it would make his parents feel as though there had been some justice for him. As it is, she's just got away with it completely.

Every diplomat from every country has the same priviledges. Its hardly just an american thing

I think it's ridiculous, pointless and cruel to imprison people responsible for genuine car accidents

How is that even relevent at this point? She's not been convicted of anything yet far less is sentencing being described. What matters is that someone has been killed and in any right-thinking society that requires a full and proper examination which should include the alleged responsible party being directly involved. Besides, accidents are very rarely devoid of any fault on anyone's part. They are often avoidable and caused by some degree of negligence. It is right and proper that if such negligence is deemed to be excessive to the point of being criminal then sanctions should be applied.

Every single time any of us get behind the wheel of a vehicle we are in charge of a weapon that could kill. We are required to follow the Highway Code, be vigilant to our surroundings and be careful in our approach.

This stupid women was careless, driving on the wrong side of the road and killed a person.

She absolutely should be held responsible for that, at the very very very least she should not be able to drive anymore, she clearly cannot be trusted to do it.

She deserves consequences to her carelessness. It is obviously unrealistic because of her status as the spouse of a diplomat, to expect that she will be extradited and spend time in a UK prison. However she should lose her license and be required to pay financially to the family, at a minimum to cover funeral expenses.

Diplomatic immunity is important, it stops our diplomats being prosecuted and jailed for no good reason, for revenge etc. The unfortunate side effect is when a tragedy like this happens.

She won't come back to the UK, no chance of that happening.

genuine curiosity: How long had she lived in this country & driven on our roads? (I thought I read 3 years somewhere) She might well have been cleared or had points on her licence rather than prison (I don't think prison was likely tbh) but what kind of signal does this send to others working there. She wasn't serving - & the other thing is this daft idea of having the cars drive on the opposite side in the camp which increased the risk - which brings up the point that it is partially responsible for this situation. Had she been tested for alcohol or drugs? I gather she had a child in the car (was she taking them to school was she distracted?)Was she driving an American car (reverse drive to UK) All of these concerns need to addressed -so it doesn't happen again.

This woman does not have diplomatic immunity, according to Former British ambassador Craig Murray, who is being quite vocal about it on Twitter.
" There is no Jonathan Sacoolas on the official Diplomatic list. Neither Sacoolas nor his wife has any right to claim diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention."
In a recent update he says: " Sky News and the Guardian have started to report that Sacoolas does not have diplomatic immunity. This is a massive reversal in the [mainstream media] line, though to date none have published that he works for NSA or explained the NSA/GCHQ relationship. "
Jonathan Cook says on Twitter: "Sacoolas must be the subject of a DSMA notice given that all mainstream media are referring to him constantly as a “diplomat”, when they all know that is not true."
So it would seem that Mrs Sacoola is being protected because her husband is a spy, not because she has diplomatic immunity.

I think it stinks, frankly. Driving 400 yards on the wrong side of the road is not like a momentary lack of concentration or loss of control.

That's interesting about her possibly not having immunity.
Many years ago when I worked in a govt dept a diplomat's son killed his girlfriend. On purpose. Murder, in other words. DI, and off he popped back to his own country.

Was it an “accident” though, or dangerous driving? She was on the wrong side of the road, and had been for some distance.

There's a thread about this over in another section www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/3711624-diplomatic-immunity-and-car-crash
People on there said she should not even be covered by diplomatic immunity. Of course she should come back, if the principles of governance under law and equality before the law are to be upheld.

Fact is though, we've been choosing to systematically demolish the principle of equality for decades. We've gone back to whoever holds the biggest gun wins. The US has far bigger guns than us and has no intention of making any 'fellow Americans' to submit themselves to the law of a foreign country. Do you really think someone like this gives a damn about a child dying in a foreign country? I hope and pray it doesn't happen to my children and I am deeply sorry for the loss.

So , is it the situation that if you are diplomat or related to a diplomat you have carte blanche to commit any crime you want to in the host country , safe in the knowledge that you can never be prosecuted ?

It’s horrible but that’s how diplomatic immunity works. And to be honest she made a horrible horrible mistake but it was an accident and I do feel a bit sorry for her ... she’s a mother too and I can see why she would flee with her children rather than stay in the UK to potentially end up in a UK prison, being seperated from her children and her family, which wouldn’t bring back the poor boy who was killed but would just ensure that her children’s lives were ruined too. I hate to say it but in her position I think I’d do the same thing rather than risk breaking up my family and being seperated from my husband and children. It’s a horrible, heartbreaking and devastating situation and I feel for everyone involved. But I’m sure this has ruined her life too.

The Dutch have a very clear website on this. Short answer is no, but it's a tricky matter. This is America v the UK though, and we all know what our 'special relationship' with America consists of. Especially at this moment in time.
www.government.nl/topics/embassies-consulates-and-other-representations/diplomatic-immunity
There's also this website that came up in google. www.washingtonian.com/2017/09/14/five-common-misconceptions-about-diplomatic-immunity/

"a horrible horrible mistake". Yeah, just a little. Most crimes could be described as "horrible horrible mistakes". "Will stay with her her whole life"? Not so sure. Some people on here are very idealistic.

PaulRedford - your question reminds me of that line in Lethal Weapon 2, where Joss Ackland has just killed a bunch of people and then pulls out his SA Diplomatic card and shouts "Diplomatic Immunity!" while laughing, assuming it will get him out of everything. Then Riggs shoots him dead. [Yes I KNOW it's a film and not real!]

Yes, then, is the answer. Diplomatic Immunity means they can get away with murder in a foreign country. Depending on how bad it is, they could potentially be prosecuted in their own country (I assume there is some convention that would cover this) but only if their own country felt the need.

She does need to return but she won't unless she is forced. A very sorry situation for all concerned.

It’s horrible but that’s how diplomatic immunity works. And to be honest she made a horrible horrible mistake but it was an accident and I do feel a bit sorry for her ... she’s a mother too and I can see why she would flee with her children rather than stay in the UK to potentially end up in a UK prison, being seperated from her children and her family, which wouldn’t bring back the poor boy who was killed but would just ensure that her children’s lives were ruined too. I hate to say it but in her position I think I’d do the same thing rather than risk breaking up my family and being seperated from my husband and children. It’s a horrible, heartbreaking and devastating situation and I feel for everyone involved. But I’m sure this has ruined her life too.

Are you actually fucking serious?

but it was a tragic accident that she'll live with for the rest of her life.

Driving on the wrong side of the wrong is not a tragic accident, it's incompetence. If you can't cope with driving in a foreign country then don't drive.

She didn't just drive for a short distance on the wrong side, it was 400 yards and she'd been here for 3 weeks at that point.

Diplomatic immunity is not a licence to take the piss.
It's to prevent a rogue nation locking up "enemy" diplomats on trumped up charges.
It can and has been waived in the past.

As I said, it's to protect diplomats and their families from effectively being kidnapped. They can't waive this one or a precedent would be set.
Bollocks of course they could

Morally it is clear cut that she should return and face justice. However it is clear that the US state department will not allow her to do that even if she wants to because of the precedent it sets. Deeply sad.

I think it's ridiculous, pointless and cruel to imprison people responsible for genuine car accidents, ( I'm not talking about joyriding here), and cannot say I blame her for not returning. I'd far rather we released other people serving time for momentary lapses of concentration

Are you fucking kidding and this applies to all similar responses on here. She was driving on the wrong side of the road, she didn't have a momentary lapse of concentration she shouldn't have been driving. I'm sure you would be just as understanding if it was your child she killed. As far it's probably ruined her life - how exactly, she just continues on as normal.

If they waive diplomatic immunity for this, why would anyone agree to be a diplomat and take the risk of being charged with sone charge in a foreign land?
They can't just waive it without serious consequences