Mr Tappin’s departure from Heathrow

Back to Forum

This topic contains 107 replies, has 28 voices, and was last updated by  MartynSinclair 14 Jan 2020
at 09:57
.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 108 total)

  • Bullfrog
    Participant

    Fair comment guys.


    Bucksnet
    Participant

    Also, don’t forget the US recently passed a law that allows the military to detain anyone indefinitely without trial, plus try them in a military court.


    RichHI1
    Participant

    But Miltiary courtsfrom either nation do not come under the auspices of this agreement.


    Bucksnet
    Participant

    Just a warning for business travellers in the US, Rich.

    The video ‘America from freedom to fascism’ is worth watching, also ‘the Obama deception’ and ‘fall of the republic.’


    RichHI1
    Participant

    Bucksnet, you are right to warn business travellers who intend to try and engage in illegal activites such as selling prohibited parts for anti aircraft missiles to restricted countries. Such activity would be harshly dealt with. I would suggest that any such attempt that came within the Jurisdiction of the United Kingdom would be similarly treated.


    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    Rich, please stop playing with words.

    I don’t think there is one person who has contributed so far to this discussion, that would disagree with your 18.13 post and that includes me.

    The issue here is that Mr Tappin has been returned to the States without any evidence having been produced to even suggest his guilt.

    On arrival he is taken to a harsh Federal facility, bail denied (deemed a flight risk) and then he sits and waits and is likely to plea bargain to get home in an unspecified number of years.

    Remember he “checked in” on his own accord at the Heathrow police station.

    You may feel this is justice, I don’t.


    RichHI1
    Participant

    Martyn no intention to play with words sorry if ti comes across like this.

    I think this string has probably run its course so to try and draw uncontentious conclusion:

    1) Agreed everyone on this forum is greatly indebted to the security forces for keeping the skies safe.

    2) Evidence is produced in the US but under the extradition treaty the specific evidence per se is not disclosed to the English Court. There is no requirement for witnesses to come to the UK and give testimony for eaxmple. Without evidence then no request for extradition would be issued from the USA.

    3) I think it is likely that as he has ahd to be extradited to the US and did not return to answer inquiries without being extradited (and having fought it on several grounds) he could well be deemed a flight risk. If he and his lawayer had engaged in a different way with the authorities then his current situation might well be different.You observe he checked in of his own accord, when in fact he complied with an English Court Order. Had he not done so he would have been in contempt of an English Court and been subject to imprisonment in the UK as well.

    4) As regards Plea Bargaining, this is a part of the US legal system and I would suggest only Mr Tappin and his legal team are in a proper position to comment on that. Until Mr Tappin is dealt with by legal system, he remains presumed innocent.

    I remember a long debate when I was studying law (in England) about the distinction between justice and fairness. To answer your question thouhg, yes I do believe this to be judicial process. Though it is arguable that different legal advice could have brought about different circumstances.

    I do not think the case is helped by blaming David Cameron for not shielding him from Justice.


    Bucksnet
    Participant

    Rich, how do you justify the US military having the legal right to detain anyone indefinitely without trial?


    RichHI1
    Participant

    Bucksnet this is not an area I have experience of. States have traditionally imposed harsh restrictions in war time. In the UK people were imprisoned without charge during the second world war as well as the US and many other states. The legislation that was passed in the United States is seen as part of the war on terror.

    By and large I am personally uncomfortable at the diminution of legal rights such as no imprisonment without charge the right not self incriminate, double jeopardy, habeas corpus and others. I guess it all comes down to ROusseau and the Social Contract, what are citizens prepared to sacrifice as their part of the social contract in order to benefot from the safety and security of society. Difficult one.


    LuganoPirate
    Participant

    I find the extradition of Chris Tappin totally deplorable and feel the Government has let not only him down, but others such as Gary McKinnon as well.

    The report is a whitewash as it is very unlikely the US would extradite a US citizen without some pretty strong evidence being presented. France and Germany amongst other nations never extradite their citizens.

    The items were dual use. That is they cold be used for both civil and military purposes. This covers a wide spectrum of things including laptops, ipads etc.

    He was set up as part of a sting operation by US Customs hoping to trap foreigners engaged in busting US sanctions, and led to believe the shipment was going to Holland.

    His supposed crime was committed in the UK. He could have been tried here. But the US knew he would be found not guilty.

    His witness in the US was forced to withdraw after pressure put on her threatening her with being charged.

    The US pick on people in this way hoping to frighten and deter others and for this reason Martyn is right to highlight this case as it could affect any one of us.


    Bucksnet
    Participant

    Rich, the so called war on terror is mainly bulls**t; the DVD set up both al-Qaeda and the CIA. It’s used to justify a creeping fascism, which we all need to wake up to before it’s too late.

    Just heard on the news that the alleged crime would have resulted in a US$500 profit for Mr. Tappin, and as LP says the parts had many uses.

    A totally absurd situation.


    RichHI1
    Participant

    We are never going to agree. I can respect Martyn’s, LP’s and your opinions but I disagree.

    As I have said I believe it would have been a better course of action to engage rather than wait for extradition.

    LP I do not wish to prejudge this issue, so I would prefer “alleged offence”. If Mr Tappin is innocent then he will be acquitted.

    One message that has always been true for travellers when dealing with other parts of the world that they may well not think and reason the same way and there are times when naivety or carelessness can be confused with intent.


    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    Rich, I really think you have little grasp of what is being discussed:

    The US extradition treaty effectively means that every business now needs an extra layer of corporate governance to ensure that they are not being “stung, set up, fixed up” or likely to be at the wrath of the Americans.

    Mr Cameron was NOT being asked to shield Mr Tappin from Justice, rather protect him from the baying wolves with tunnel vision.

    Exactly what has Mr Tappin done wrong and what evidence is there to support the accusation?

    It is a very sad day for UK business when the home secretary signs & the Government supports an extradition warrant for a UK businessman, where no evidence has been presented (and please also consider the other case where human rights are being protected from someone under a 22 hour house arrest).

    My hope is that this thread is being read by someone that knows Mrs Tappin and can tell her that fellow UK business people are concerned at the deplorable way he has been treated and the possible consequences to businesses who trade with the USA.

    [Addition – are you suggesting that Mr Tappin should have got on the first aeroplane to the USA at the invitiation of the proescutors in order to discuss this case over a cup of coffee??]


    RichHI1
    Participant

    Martyn I feel this thread is not going anywhere.

    I also fear we are discussing from very different perspectives.

    I have tried to set out the legal process realities.

    I understand you may have strong emotions but I do not agree.

    Corporations do not need a paranoia governance as you suggest but they do need to protect themselves from falling foul of export restrictions in a way they have always done.

    Not taking this one any further as I think the various views have been restated sufficiently.


    spudseamus
    Participant

    Bucksnet – 24/02/2012 19:02 GMT

    Rich, how do you justify the US military having the legal right to detain anyone indefinitely without trial?

    Just as the British Government interned(jailed ) innocent people in the North of Ireland!!! without trial and indefinitely! At her Majesty’s pleasure !! stones and glass houses and all that !

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 108 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller December 2019 / January 2020 edition
Business Traveller December 2019 / January 2020 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls