[MartynSinclair]

The connection I make is the ease with which it takes to extradite a British business person verses the “minefield” it takes to deport a terrorist!

The Assange situation worries me also, its like a new game of chess. The white pieces verses the black pieces with the stars and stripes deciding how each side moves!

[VintageKrug]

Looks like we might hear some good news on the McKinnon case today, and news of the beefing up of the UK’s extradition processes in future to protect those who need our protection, and to stop messing about with more nefarious individuals:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19957138

Being able to be tried in this country would ensure justice is dispensed, but reduces the invasion of Sovereignty which many of us feel has occurred in the past.

Christopher Tappin was extradited to Texas in February 2012, and his trial begins on 5 November.

[MartynSinclair]

It is not just the case to “ensure justice is dispensed”.

The position remains that the USA are requesting extradition for offences that have not been proven or charges not been made. It would be far easier if the Americans were given permission to question “their victims” where they currently reside.

Where McKinnon is concenred, this has been going on for 10 years and is probably now more about the great power of the USA winning through than whether the chap is guilty or not.

[VintageKrug]

I think we’ll hear an encouraging statement on McKinnon and some good news about charges having to be substantiated before extradition is permitted.

Let’s all spare a thought for Christopher Tappin this morning.

[MartynSinclair]

“Let’s all spare a thought for Christopher Tappin this morning”

total agreement on this………….

[MartynSinclair]

to clarify the position

…………

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16041824

[BigDog.]

Good to see Gary McKinnon is NOT going to be deported – saved on medical grounds.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9611784/Gary-McKinnon-saved-from-extradition-to-US-on-hacking-charges.html

Mrs May described the case as “difficult and exceptional” and there was applause in the chamber as she announced that Mr McKinnon would be spared the ordeal of trial overseas.

But she added it would now be up to the Director of Public Prosecutions to decide if Mr McKinnon – accused of carrying out the biggest military computer hack of all time – should be prosecuted in Britain.

Meanwhile Theresa May is reviewing the process.

[MartynSinclair]

I started this thread out of concern for the business traveller and my concern remains.

This decision implies that we can only be protected on medical grounds and does not go anywhere near protecting the business traveller against the strong arm of US justice.

Obvioulsy Mr McKinnon will be overjoyed with this ruling, but from my perspective, I am still concerned that the home secretary was only able to offer protection on medical grounds.

[VintageKrug]

That’s what the legislation says, at present so it is the only avenue open to the Home Secretary.

I’d imagine there will be a more robust challenge to the legislation once this review is complete.

It’s a good start.

[LuganoPirate]

I’m delighted Gary will not be extradited. Mind you after 10 years (i it really that long?) it may be very hard to mount a fair and proper trial. No doubt some deal will be agreed on for a quick guilty plea.

I do wonder though when those US scientists who hacked into the European Satellites, supposedly to show up weaknesses in the systems, will be bought to justice in Europe? 🙁

[MartynSinclair]

Out of interest why will the DPP only consider whether there is a case to answer now – 10 years after the event? It may have saved a lot of time and expense if this had been considered prior.

Does a Statute of Limitations apply??

[LuganoPirate]

I also wondered about a statute of limitations Martyn, but I think that is 5 years from when investigations and / or legal processes have stopped, so that would only be in five years time from now that he can finally breathe easy!

[VintageKrug]

He has entered a guilty plea, as part of a plea-bargain arrangement.

[MartynSinclair]

Which means we are unlikely to hear the other side. It is all a game of poker – plead guilty and get 3 – 4 years or plead not guilty and be found guilty and you will never go home.

This is the USA using its might against a British businessman.

There are 2 sides to every story – I hope the Americans will show their side if only to reassure the British travellers they really did have a case and not just muscle flex.

EDIT

“No details of any plea deal with Tappin have been released but other extradited Britons say they had no chance of being cleared once sent to the US as the plea bargaining system empowers prosecutors as “judge, jury and executioner”. – Sky News website

[MartynSinclair]

After all the muscles flexed by the USA, they have their guilty plea and appear to be allowing Mr Tappin to serve his “sentence” in a UK prison.

Why on earth extradite the guy to the States in the first place, if all the Americans are going to do, is squeeze the guilty plea and send him back to serve his sentence in the UK.

Better to have had the case heard in the UK, if indeed there was a case to answer, other than a high stakes game of poker, either

50 years in prison if found guilty after a non guilty plea

33 months in prison if you do a deal with the prosecutor.

http://news.sky.com/story/1005807/tappin-may-serve-arms-deal-sentence-in-uk

Was he guilty – who knows……………………….

[Author]

Posts