We've been asked to support a woman's fight against extradition: please tell us what you think

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello,

We've been contacted by the human rights group Liberty to see whether we can support their efforts to stop a woman called Eileen Clark from being extradited to the USA to stand trial for international parental kidnapping.

You can read more about the background details here and here, but here's an edited version:

In 1986 Eileen married John Clark. The relationship quickly descended into serious psychological control, threats of violence and many occasions of physical violence. After almost ten years, Eileen took her three children and moved to California, then eventually moved back to the UK. In her absence, her husband divorced her and took proceedings against her for custody of the children. Eileen was charged with a state-level offence called 'custodial interference'.

In 2008, the state authorities in the US became aware that Eileen was in the UK. The federal authorities stepped in - Liberty believes following behind-the-scenes pressure from John Clark - and effectively upgraded the charges to something called 'international parental kidnapping', which carries a prison sentence of up to 3 years.

In 2010, a formal extradition request was made. Eileen tried to appeal against the extradition order through the British courts but her appeal was dismissed. The very strong and compelling evidence that Eileen was a victim of serious domestic violence and abuse was not properly considered by the courts in this country.

Liberty took on the case after Eileen had exhausted her appeal rights. Liberty says it has been shocked to discover the extent of the evidence of domestic abuse and even more shocked to learn that the British courts have not been able to look at this evidence.

According to Liberty, it is the Extradition Act 2003 which has allowed this case to get so far. It says that the Act has removed huge swathes of judicial discretion to prevent extradition from taking place where, for example, it is not in the interests of justice. All that remains now is for Eileen to make representations to the Home Secretary that her removal should be blocked on human rights grounds.

As ever, we'd be interested to hear what you think.

Thanks,
MNHQ

Maryz, no I would not want him arrested. As much as I might hate him and want to see him suffer, I would be concentrating my time and efforts on rebuilding a relationship with my children.

Having the parent who brought them up extradited and imprisonned in another country would not be helpful to this end.

What Squiffy said. In fact, I'm going to go further. Please don't back this specific case. I think the mother's actions, although entirely understandable, fall into a very grey area - she removed her children from one jurisdiction to another without the consent of the other parent. It's the thin end of the wedge.

I would absolutely support a campaign against the Extradition Act 2003.

I think Liberty is a very trustworthy organisation, and with them completely backing this campaign, and having read the details, which clearly show evidence of an abusive relationship, I'd encourage you to support this case.

I totally agree with you about custody cases Maryz, but this is not a custody case.

I disagree with supporting this particular case. Cases shouldn't be decided by looking at who is shooting the loudest.

The wider issue of the Act itself, I think, is a valid campaign.

Hi all,

Thanks very much for your comments. It seems on balance that we should think about supporting a wider campaign on the Extradition Act but not concentrate specifically on this case, so we'll look into that. We'll also flag this thread up to Liberty and see whether they have answers to any of your specific points.

Thanks,
MNHQ

Yes support her please.

And I think it's a disgrace that the 2003 extradition act is being used for this. Wasn't it meant to be for terrorism type stuff only?

I think you can certainly use her case as an example of why the Act is wrong.

If she was from the UK then I could understand the use of this case, but from what I understand she is a us citizen who came to the UK to avoid the us justice system. Even the ex husband she had in the UK was Canadian. There are far better cases that Mn should use ie Gary Mckinnon.
Reading the other side of the story on the internet opens up far too many holes.

Not sure about this case as I've not read much of the background, on the surface I'd say yes though.

E. G. Nowhere does it mention if the husband was also abusive towards the children. If he was an abusive husband but a fantastic father (IYSWIM) surely he should be able to see his kids

Had to respond to this, an abusive husband being a fantastic father is a contradiction in terms.

Yes, please support her, and all mothers fighting unjust extradition requests under the pernicious extradition act. eg Julia O'Dwyer (mother of Richard), Janis Sharp (mother of Gary McKinnon) etc. There is also the horrific case of Liz Prosser: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/lawreports/7614752/Court-backs-sick-mothers-extradition-to-US-on-kidnap-charge.html

The extradition act allows any British citizen to be extradited to America without a shred of evidence. We should surely have the same right that American citizens do to contest the evidence before anyone is extradited. This is not too much to ask.

And given the appalling state of the US judicial system - 98% of defendents do not even get a trial, but are coerced (arguably by torture or the threat of torture) into a plea-bargain instead - should we really be extraditing anyone to such a place, whatever their alleged crime?

Also, the extradition act 2003 did not become law until 2004 (or possibly even later), yet it is routinely being applied retrospectively - eg in the cases of Ian Norris, Christopher Tappin and Gary McKinnon. This means that even if you do something which is not a crime now, in the future you could be extradited for it, if America so decides. And yes, that is supposed to be prohibited by the human rights act.

The extradition act is also being used to imprison people in this country without trial and without evidence of any offence - eg Babar Ahmad, 8 years and counting, Talha Ahasan, 6 years, to name but two. And we call ourselves a civilised country...

Any chance of a webchat with other victims of extradition law? What about Janis Sharp, d'you think she would come on? Didn't you award her the Liberty Human Rights Award?

Yes, I think we should support this.

I think we should support this.

Yes, support her case.

Hi all,

Thanks for your further comments.

As I posted below/above (according to taste) back in May, the balance of opinion on this thread seemed to be to make wider points about extradition law rather than concentrating specifically on this case. Do have a look at Liberty's Extradition Watch campaign if you'd like to take further action.

We held a webchat with Julia O'Dwyer earlier this week to highlight the issue and we'll continue to look for ways to reflect your views on this.

Thanks
MNHQ

First check the 'other side' of the story, if there is one, and then, all being as it seems from the Liberty report, yes do support it. And yes, in the context that the extradition act should be reformed.