An American, in the USA, pulls the trigger of a firearm (of his choice) in the USA. Unfortunately for some Canuck the gun is aimed across the international border and Mr. Hockey fan is dead, Dead, DEAD!
What happens?
How difficult is it for Canadian authorities to get the perp to be turned over to them?
This question is also vise-versa.
Interesting question. It’s possible no extradition would be necessary. The act of murder (pulling the trigger) took place on American soil, even though the body fell dead on Canadian soil. Perhaps the shooter would face charges in America because of this.
The other was round? Many countries, including Canada I believe, will not extradite one of their citizens who would be facing a possible death penalty in the country that wants them. So I suppose this question relies not only on the nature of the crime, but on what state the victim was in. Wisconsin doesn’t have a death penalty, but New York does if Law & Order can be believed.
In reality this is never an issue, or at least not that I have heard of. There have been numerous cases of Extradition from Europe, Australia etc. where the accused faced a possible death penalty. All that happens is that the detaining country demands that the death penalty removed from the possible outcomes, and the US prosecutors agree.
I doubt very much if Canada would be any different in that regard.
Canada will (and routinely does) extradite someone if the state makes assurances they won’t seek the death penalty. Also, New York does have the death penalty on the books, but hasn’t executed anyone since 1976 and the state supreme court has ruled it unconstitutional.
Nitpick: this has nothing to do with citizenship. Generally, the countries concerned won’t extradite anybody who would face the death penalty.
Sometimes the case is bad enough that someone can go from Canada to an American death row, i.e. Charles Ng.
The Canadian position dates only from 2001. Ng was extradited some years earlier.
I don’t know what position you’re referring to, but there was a fair amount of resistance at the time to the idea of extraditing Ng to a likely death sentence in California. I recall a Fifth Estate episode discussing the case and one person commenting that the Americans were prepared to play a game of chicken - namely dropping the extradition request entirely and seeing if the Canadians were willing to have Charles Ng free in Canada after serving a sentence for assaulting a Calgary security guard. Personally, I’m 100% okay with deporting Ng under any conditions, including the possibility of being fed into a giant wood-chipper the instant he steps over the U.S. border, rather than have him loose in Canada.
I don’t know what the government was worried about, though. It’s California. Ng stands a very good chance of old age killing him long before the state ever gets around to it.
As I understand it (from a detailed reading of Cracked.com), if Canada decided that they wanted the killer in custody, they’d just send the Mounties to go get him and haul his ass to Canada.
Canada actually regularly refuses to deport people if the death sentence may be used, particularly to china and many african nations. It is illegal for Canada to deport people who may receive the death penalty in other country’s. But I thought the death penalty usually only applied to first degree murder charges, not second or manslaughter. Or does it depend on the state?
Yeah… frankly, as an indigent criminal/illegal alien with no family support or job opportunities, Ng could easily have died in Calgary long ago, instead of still sitting in a California cell.
I’m not so sure this is still true. The Conservative government would probably extradite in cases of first degree murder now, with or without death penalty consideration.
There’s no extradition angle in the Smith case, though, or at least there’s no indication on the wiki page that he returned to Canada at any point after committing his capital crime (though his criminal record does show a 1983 escape, after his death sentence, yikes). Had he returned to Canada then, during the last Trudeau administration, I can well imagine an extradition fight. Now, not so much.
That would be one hell of a shot from WI!
Step 1) Acquire large cannon
Step 2) Aim North
Step 3) Load Canadian
Step 4) FIRE!
I dunno, does the 2nd Amendment cover artillery pieces?
Right. Presumably Canadian police would collaborate in the initial investigation, but it seems to me that the prosecution should be entirely an American affair.
Does the murder occur where the shot is fired or where the death occurs?
At common law, jurisdiction is proper in the place where the fatal force impinges on the body (i.e. where the bullet strikes), even if the actual death occurs in another jurisdiction. However, many jurisdictions (probably most) have abrogated the common law rule by statute so that jurisdiction may be exercised where any element of the act occurred, so if a victim gets shot from one jurisdiction while standing in another and then dies in a third, it’s possible for all three to prosecute, depending on how their statutes are written.