View Single Post
Old 10-07-2019, 11:09 AM
Novelty Bobble is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 9,442
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
Can I ask where you get the idea that the woman can simply travel back on a tourist visa and face legal consequences for an act that is quite clearly covered by immunity? Is this something you have read about, or is this conjecture, or what?
Is the crime or the person covered by immunity? How indeed can crime be covered by immunity without the implicit admission that a certain person of diplomatic association is guilty?

If it is the person then I absolutely do think it should be permissible for that person to state their revocation of immunity and travel as a private citizen. If that was voluntary I don't see how that would present a problem for existing diplomatic relationships. The concept didn't spring out of nothing and isn't immune to critical assessment.

I'm certainly not attributing that view to you, but yes, the idea of "American arrogance" has quite literally been raised, even on this message board: Cite.
but not in this thread, not in relation to this issue, so not sure why it was brought up.
I'm saving this space for the first good insult hurled my way