Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

US diplomat's wife flees home claiming diplomatic immunity after fatal collision

«134

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,760 ✭✭✭Effects


    killing a 19 year old cyclist.

    Motorcyclist.

    But yeah. Total scumbags. Face up to what you've done. Doubtful you'd even spend time in prison, but take responsibility.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,457 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    So does she face some sort of charges in the US?

    Or can you go about killing people and claiming diplomatic immunity with zero consequence?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,969 ✭✭✭✭alchemist33


    Effects wrote: »
    Motorcyclist.

    Thanks, edited now


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭NotToScale


    It's the Trump Whitehouse so think about what a sensible government, with ethics and morals would do. Then just assume they'll do the complete opposite.

    RIP Harry Dunn and my sincere condolences to his family and friends. It's an awful thing to have happened and it looks like it was a tragic accident, but whatever the circumstances it's compounded by cowardly hiding behind diplomatic protocol.

    It just comes across as extreme arrogance by the US Government. It's not as if the UK is incapable of reasonably, fairly and proportionately investigating a fatal road accident and providing extremely high standards of due process.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭Augme


    Really feel for the family here. I can only imagine how angry and frustrating this must be. Such a cowardly act by the wife the the US. No surprises really though.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    NotToScale wrote: »
    It's the Trump Whitehouse so think about what a sensible government, with ethics and morals would do. Then just assume they'll do the complete opposite.

    RIP Harry Dunn and my sincere condolences to his family and friends. It's an awful thing to have happened, whatever the circumstances and it's compounded by cowardly hiding behind diplomatic protocol.

    Trump is nothing got to do with it. The woman in question invoked immunity in a cowardly act of avoiding the consequences of her actions. Diplomatic immunity as it stands needs to be re-examined it was not intended to allow those that invoke it to behave illegally.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭NotToScale


    Trump is nothing got to do with it. The woman in question invoked immunity in a cowardly act of avoiding the consequences of her actions. Diplomatic immunity as it stands needs to be re-examined it was not intended to allow those that invoke it to behave illegally.

    "Police applied for a waiver of the immunity to pursue the case, but their request was rejected."

    That's a decision made by the Ambassador in London or the State Department. So effectively, the Trump administration.

    I mean can you imagine Ireland or even the UK insisting on that if a spouse of a diplomat were to have had a similar accident in NY or DC?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    NotToScale wrote: »
    "Police applied for a waiver of the immunity to pursue the case, but their request was rejected."

    That's a decision made by the Ambassador in London or the State Department. So effectively, the Trump administration.

    I mean can you imagine Ireland or even the UK insisting on that if a spouse of a diplomat were to have had a similar accident in NY or DC?
    The state department is behaving in the same manner as other government would deal with a request, regardless who the office holder is.
    Can you provide a link to any government which removed diplomatic immunity status from any of its citizens. I certainly can't. Similar incidents happened in 93 and 97 in Russia , US didn't remove immunity from there citizens then either and I'm positive Trump wasn't president then.


  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 47,336 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    Ridiculous that diplomatic immunity can cover families of diplomats as well. Presumably it exists as there may be things in a diplomat's line of work that flirt with the boundaries of legality, but their families wouldn't be involved in anything like that. It's like saying that parliamentary privilege extends to families of TDs, MPs, etc., so they can say whatever they like about whoever they like with no consequences.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    DI might cover accidents but probably not premeditated murder?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,049 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Diplomatic immunity has always had problems but usually severe violations of local law (eg. Attempted rape by Malaysian diplomat in 2014) get processed.

    Political situation here being Trump not fawning in love with the UK - but he does have supporters there, and supporters in the US largely claim to be adamantly pro life (while getting on Facebook to rave about how we need bullets and bayonets at the border)

    Could go either way; without public outrage Trump will sit on it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    Trump is nothing got to do with it. The woman in question invoked immunity in a cowardly act of avoiding the consequences of her actions. Diplomatic immunity as it stands needs to be re-examined it was not intended to allow those that invoke it to behave illegally.

    Incorrect. The immunity belongs to the State, not the diplomat (or dependents). Therefore, the State may waive it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    Zaph wrote: »
    Ridiculous that diplomatic immunity can cover families of diplomats as well. Presumably it exists as there may be things in a diplomat's line of work that flirt with the boundaries of legality, but their families wouldn't be involved in anything like that. It's like saying that parliamentary privilege extends to families of TDs, MPs, etc., so they can say whatever they like about whoever they like with no consequences.

    It exists to allow Diplomats represent the interests of their State, without fear of reprisal from the host nation. This is why it covers their families.

    It's not much use to the Diplomat if their Spouse or Children can be locked up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    The state department is behaving in the same manner as other government would deal with a request, regardless who the office holder is.
    Can you provide a link to any government which removed diplomatic immunity status from any of its citizens. I certainly can't. Similar incidents happened in 93 and 97 in Russia , US didn't remove immunity from there citizens then either and I'm positive Trump wasn't president then.

    http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/9701/12/georgia.diplomat/index.html


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Incorrect. The immunity belongs to the State, not the diplomat (or dependents). Therefore, the State may waive it.

    How can I be incorrect when I never said what you have stated?.
    The diplomats wife invoked immunity as under the treaty she is entitled to do. The US will not waive it, they haven't done so in the past in similar circumstances.


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    DI might cover accidents but probably not premeditated murder?

    Depending on the Diplomat and their position, it can cover everything.


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    How can I be incorrect when I never said what you have stated?.
    The diplomats wife invoked immunity as under the treaty she is entitled to do. The US will not waive it, they haven't done so in the past in similar circumstances.

    You said Trump had nothing to do with it. This is not true as it a State Department decision on whether to waive the immunity or not.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,552 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    Individuals have no authority to waive their own immunity, the country needs to allow it. There was a big case not too long ago where the person tried to waive it and their country refused.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    She should be at least identified along with her husband


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    You said Trump had nothing to do with it. This is not true as it a State Department decision on whether to waive the immunity or not.

    At least quote the comment you are disagreeing with in the interests of clarity. As an aside the person I made my comment to is suggesting it's only Trump that would allow this to happen. There was similar instances in the 90's and the sitting Presidents at the time did nothing either.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    Varik wrote: »
    Individuals have no authority to waive their own immunity, the country needs to allow it.

    To be pedantic, it's not their immunity in the first place...


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    At least quote the comment you are disagreeing with in the interests of clarity.
    Trump is nothing got to do with it. The woman in question invoked immunity in a cowardly act of avoiding the consequences of her actions. Diplomatic immunity as it stands needs to be re-examined it was not intended to allow those that invoke it to behave illegally.

    There ya go.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    There ya go.

    Easy , wasn't it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Zaph wrote: »
    Ridiculous that diplomatic immunity can cover families of diplomats as well. Presumably it exists as there may be things in a diplomat's line of work that flirt with the boundaries of legality, .

    Even for diplomats it should only be for very specific things and circumstances. ie, theres no sensitive parts of their work where a diplomat would need to be immune from killing someone while driving drunk (or with no drink for that matter)


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    Easy , wasn't it.

    I also quoted your incorrect comment in my first reply...:confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    Even for diplomats it should only be for very specific things and circumstances. ie, theres no sensitive parts of their work where a diplomat would need to be immune from killing someone while driving drunk (or with no drink for that matter)

    Well, if they weren't immune, what would stop a vindictive host country framing them?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Well, if they weren't immune, what would stop a vindictive host country framing them?

    Whats to stop a vindictive host country from murdering them?

    If they cant abide by the laws then they shouldn't be allowed all the freedoms. If you can just kill someone while driving and just wash your hands of it then no driving for you, you have to have a driver who is accountable.


  • Site Banned Posts: 106 ✭✭Enough is Enough!


    What an evil bitch. I hope karma gets her.


  • Registered Users Posts: 357 ✭✭LegallyAbroad


    Whats to stop a vindictive host country from murdering them?

    If they cant abide by the laws then they shouldn't be allowed all the freedoms. If you can just kill someone while driving and just wash your hands of it then no driving for you, you have to have a driver who is accountable.

    Well, it's a bit harder to explain a dead Diplomat.

    But just because we can't come up with rules to 100% protect diplomats, why would that mean we should weaken the protections they currently have?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,568 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    So Lethal Weapon was right, I thought it was a myth.

    IncompleteCreativeAegeancat-size_restricted.gif


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭NotToScale


    Typically, friendly countries actually tend to waive diplomatic immunity for minor diplomats / embassy staff etc, but usually not the ambassador or senior diplomats, where the crime / legal issue is not directly involved with their diplomatic duty.

    There's no particular reason why the US would inflexibly stick to diplomatic immunity to someone involved in a road traffic accident. It would just allow the police or coroner to conclude their inquiry and would not have created all this negative PR. It's certainly going to spin into a big tabloid mess in the UK.

    It's pretty unlikely that someone in a genuine motor accident would end up with a custodial sentence. It sounds like someone who was used to driving on the other side of the road. I'm not entirely sure what the setup at the base she was coming from was but, I think they tend to follow UK driving rules, but often US vehicles.

    I would also assume this could have implications for things like claims for compensation etc. Even insurance.

    There's been growing irritation in Brussels (The city. Not the metaphor for the EU), for example, with various countries that would tend to have somewhat oligarch-driven governments allowing diplomats to get away with all sorts of crazy stuff under diplomatic immunity conventions. A lot of it had to do with road traffic incidents and damage to property etc etc, refusal to pay vast amounts of parking fines and all of those kinds of things. Some of it was more serious but a lot of it was just seen as somewhat obnoxious behaviour by diplomats being excused by their governments.

    She was coming out of an unnamed airbase, which if it were a US one in the UK would tend to be like an American enclave inside. You typically have a lot of US cars, busses and everything else in use, although I think they do drive on the left i.e. the UK side, but you would often see a lot of left-hand-drive US vehicles in use.

    Even internally goods and prices of various things are at US levels often without any kind of sales tax i.e. very low compared to the UK, particularly for things like petrol, alcohol etc.

    I remember visiting the abandoned NATO base, which was largely US, in Iceland and the buildings were being converted to Icelandic use and literally everything had been done to US specs - the wiring, plumbing, appliances (all 120V not 230V), fire hydrants like a US city, all the street furniture and so on was entirely American.

    The Icelanders were in the process of reusing buildings for civilian purposes - so they were being completely rewired to present day European specs, replumbed, reinsulated etc etc.

    It was just bizarre to see all the US road markings, signage, abandoned trucks, cars and so on completely out of context.

    Even all the appliances in the buildings that hadn't been converted were all totally useless as they were kinda big old 70s/80s American stuff on wrong voltage.

    Some odd stuff in terms of international representation, bases and diplomacy.

    All that aside, though it does show a certain degree of arrogance and contempt for the UK's "local" law enforcement and due process and I would fully expect that to be how it's interpreted in the UK media circles.

    The nice and friendly approach would have been to agree to fully cooperate with the police investigation. Even if she were prosecuted, they could still invoke immunity and just accept that she be recalled to the US.

    All they've done by just sprinting her back to the US of A is both come across as rather arrogant and also feed a conspiracy theory about what is most likely just a tragic accident.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    And according to this report, she was totally at fault, killing a 19 year old motorcyclist. Such a scummy thing to do, but will the UK government stand up for justice here? I suspect not.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/05/us-diplomats-wife-claims-immunity-leaves-uk-afterfatal-road/

    It’s not a question of “standing up for justice”. Diplomatic immunity is what it is. You can cause real problems and just go home


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    NotToScale wrote: »
    It's the Trump Whitehouse so think about what a sensible government, with ethics and morals would do. Then just assume they'll do the complete opposite.

    RIP Harry Dunn and my sincere condolences to his family and friends. It's an awful thing to have happened and it looks like it was a tragic accident, but whatever the circumstances it's compounded by cowardly hiding behind diplomatic protocol.

    It just comes across as extreme arrogance by the US Government. It's not as if the UK is incapable of reasonably, fairly and proportionately investigating a fatal road accident and providing extremely high standards of due process.

    It took less then an hour for someone to blame Trump for the death of a motorcyclist in the UK.
    I presume you can link me to incidents when Obama or Clinton got involved in diplomatic issues and insisted that the immunity be waived? I’ll just wait here while you post links.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    NotToScale wrote: »
    "Police applied for a waiver of the immunity to pursue the case, but their request was rejected."

    That's a decision made by the Ambassador in London or the State Department. So effectively, the Trump administration.

    I mean can you imagine Ireland or even the UK insisting on that if a spouse of a diplomat were to have had a similar accident in NY or DC?

    Post links of incidents were Ireland or the UK waived diplomatic immunity. You’re so sure they would. You must have evidence?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    Incorrect. The immunity belongs to the State, not the diplomat (or dependents). Therefore, the State may waive it.

    So you can show examples of when they did waive it. I’d love to read about them.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭NotToScale


    splinter65 wrote: »
    It took less then an hour for someone to blame Trump for the death of a motorcyclist in the UK.
    I presume you can link me to incidents when Obama or Clinton got involved in diplomatic issues and insisted that the immunity be waived? I’ll just wait here while you post links.

    Nobody blamed Trump for the death of a motorcyclist. Please do not twist my words. That's doesn't even make sense. I pointed out it was very likely a motor accident.

    What I said was that this has unnecessarily created a PR and diplomatic tension and disrupted the possibility of concluding an investigation.

    It does completely fit with the current State Department and Trump administration attitude. You're talking about a government that sent a hostage negotiator TO SWEDEN because a rapper was arrested for assult.

    Of course they're not going to cooperate with anything like an investigation of a US diplomatic corps person. It doesn't fit the politics at all. They're above question.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭NotToScale


    splinter65 wrote: »
    Post links of incidents were Ireland or the UK waived diplomatic immunity. You’re so sure they would. You must have evidence?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/19/husband-british-un-diplomat-arrested-accusations-domestic-violence/

    I'm not aware of any incident involving Irish diplomats where a scenario like this has ever cropped up. It's actually not something you'd tend to encounter very much with most diplomatic corps.

    Even this incident sounds like a road traffic accident, not any kind of deliberate act. Fleeing the UK doesn't make any sense.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 52,222 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    “ She has since fled the country after she was told to leave the UK by US embassy officials.”

    Absolutely scandalous. So much for Justice.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,692 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    I would have guessed that there would be fairly clear lines on what would and would not be covered by diplomatic immunity, and this would fall outside that line.

    A bit of a chance for Boris to show some testicular fortitude on an issue that the whole country would support him in.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,304 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    splinter65 wrote: »
    So you can show examples of when they did waive it. I’d love to read about them.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Ventura
    Is this not an example?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,502 ✭✭✭q85dw7osi4lebg


    Takes a lot to p1ss me off but this is certainly one of those things


  • Registered Users Posts: 200 ✭✭w4ntedman


    While I would like to think I would stay and face the music if I were in the woman's shoes if I am being completely honest I think more likely than not my fear would get the better and me and I would do a runner too.

    To be clear I am not saying it would be the right thing to do (or that she is in any way the victim or wronged here) nor am I saying it is right that she be protected from the consequences of her actions just that I can see myself doing something similar if the option were available.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,104 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    w4ntedman wrote: »
    While I would like to think I would stay and face the music if I were in the woman's shoes if I am being completely honest I think more likely than not my fear would get the better and me and I would do a runner too.

    To be clear I am not saying it would be the right thing to do (or that she is in any way the victim or wronged here) nor am I saying it is right that she be protected from the consequences of her actions just that I can see myself doing something similar if the option were available.

    Your username is appropriate.

    On the face of it this is Dangerous Driving causing Death. I'd imagine that would result in a custodial sentence,, I don't know to what extent they'd take into account her unfamiliarity with the UK roads.

    Shades of the Matthew Broderick case in the North in 1987, he got off with a fine.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    osarusan wrote: »
    I would have guessed that there would be fairly clear lines on what would and would not be covered by diplomatic immunity, and this would fall outside that line.

    A bit of a chance for Boris to show some testicular fortitude on an issue that the whole country would support him in.

    He needs to keep his new masters sweet to get a trade deal.


  • Registered Users Posts: 200 ✭✭w4ntedman


    loyatemu wrote: »
    Your username is appropriate.

    On the face of it this is Dangerous Driving causing Death. I'd imagine that would result in a custodial sentence,, I don't know to what extent they'd take into account her unfamiliarity with the UK roads.

    Shades of the Matthew Broderick case in the North in 1987, he got off with a fine.

    I suppose it's the fear of the custodial sentence I am referring to.
    I read about the Matthew Broderick case tonight , on the face of it sounds like it might be similar although I can't imagine a plea for leniency on the grounds of being used to driving on the opposite side of the road would go down too well if I found myself in a similar boat in the US.

    Again I wouldn't claim any justification just an admission that I would take the cowards way out if it was open to me.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,211 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Zaph wrote: »
    Ridiculous that diplomatic immunity can cover families of diplomats as well. Presumably it exists as there may be things in a diplomat's line of work that flirt with the boundaries of legality, but their families wouldn't be involved in anything like that. It's like saying that parliamentary privilege extends to families of TDs, MPs, etc., so they can say whatever they like about whoever they like with no consequences.


    No. It makes perfect sense. Your analogy is flawed.
    A country can always declare a "diplomat" persona non grata to get them out if they are acting the bollix.
    They can also put pressure on the other country to either waive the immunity or else have the person face charges in their own country in the case of having broken a local law.

    The alternate to diplomatic immunity would be to have been able to arrest and lock that lady up and within minutes have the wife a UK diplomat to the US dragged out of her bed in DC and thrown into a cell while they investigate her for spying or some other Trumped up charge.

    That's how the system has to work.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,380 ✭✭✭STB.


    splinter65 wrote: »
    Post links of incidents were Ireland or the UK waived diplomatic immunity. You’re so sure they would. You must have evidence?


    Don't be so sure that there have not been instances splinter.


    There have and at least one was a drink driving instance involving one of our own in the US.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,280 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    NotToScale wrote: »
    It's the Trump Whitehouse so think about what a sensible government, with ethics and morals would do. Then just assume they'll do the complete opposite.

    RIP Harry Dunn and my sincere condolences to his family and friends. It's an awful thing to have happened and it looks like it was a tragic accident, but whatever the circumstances it's compounded by cowardly hiding behind diplomatic protocol.

    It just comes across as extreme arrogance by the US Government. It's not as if the UK is incapable of reasonably, fairly and proportionately investigating a fatal road accident and providing extremely high standards of due process.

    I love how people can just turn anything into a great anti donald rant.

    Giving the real estate mogul free real estate in your mind, no need to worry, only 4 more years kid.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭NotToScale


    Yup! Because Trump era diplomats have behaved totally normally at all times and are above any kind of criticism. We all know that.

    I get a bit fed up with the tribalism in the US and UK political sphere. No administration is exempt from critical comment. At least not in the free world anyway.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭NotToScale


    To be fair, comparing an English investigation of a road traffic incident with Egyptian mass trials of alleged political dissidents is a bit like comparing not just apples and oranges, but maybe apples and the planet mars. They're both fairly round but that's about where the similarities end.

    All I'm saying about the current US administration is that their international relations with friendly countries that have legal systems and due process rights that are as good, and in many cases a lot better than the US itself have been abysmal.

    I'd be equally critical of any administration doing similar.

    I'm not making a comment for the sake of politics. I'm critiquing the state or US international relations under Trump and I think that's completely reasonable to do.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement