It appears that the professional hunter and the landowner conspired to take the dentist’s money under false pretenses. It appears that the professional hunter and the landowner did not obtain the usual state-required documents for the average lion hunt. It’s possible that the professional hunter and the landowner produced fake documents to fool anyone who challenged the legality of the lion hunt. It’s possible that the dentist was not aware of the actions of the professional hunter or the land owner.
There is no outstanding warrant for the dentist in either country. There may be a warrant in the future. The U.S. has no reason to detain the dentist. No warrant. No extradition request.
That doesn’t stop the bloodthirsty, animal-rights zealots from demanding the dentist’s death, injury, maiming, hanging, dismemberment, illegal detention, and illegal extradition because facts simply do not matter. Hunters and dentists are guilty until proven innocent. :rolleyes:
According to the link I provided earlier, there is an extradition request from Zimbabwe and our own Fish and Wildlife Service would like to speak with him.
What do you mean, “it appears”? How about producing a cite for the fact that they took his money under false pretenses, aside from the self-serving claims of the dentist himself? Do you know that he ever asked to see any permits? It’s very unlikely that Palmer was so absurdly naive as you make him out to be or unaware of the actions of the hunters. He had been hunting in Africa several times before, and was a member of the Zimbabwe Professional Hunters and Guides Association (a membership that has now been suspended due to his being in violation of the ethics of the Association). He had to know he was close to a national park, and that the lion had been baited in.
I am not impressed with Palmer’s 'leet hunting skillz as described these last few days on the interwebz, but what jurisdiction does the U.S. F & W Service have in this case?
Fish and Wildlife want to talk to the dentist. That’s not a warrant for his arrest or detention.
The dentist is in hiding because the blood-thirsty, animal-rights zealots are repeatedly threatening to murder him.
Any extradition request issued by Zimbabwe would have to be submitted to the U.S. State Dept for consideration. And the U.S. State Dept isn’t talking. Has an official of the Zimbabwe national government stated that they have officially requested extradition or are rumors reported by CNN-type “reporters” sufficient evidence?
You haven’t produced any evidence that the dentist was actually aware of any irregularities with the hunt, prior to the hunt. The dentist claims that he wasn’t aware the hunt might be illegal until he discovered the tracking device. It’s up to you, and Newt Gingrich, to prove him wrong.
This isn’t a court of law, it’s the internet. And as I said, the fact that the dentist was a very experienced hunter of big game in Africa makes it exceedingly unlikely that he was completely unaware of anything amiss with the hunt.
Y’know, doorhinge, just because you’re conservative doesn’t mean you’re required to make excuses for assholes.
“Legal” in Zimbabwe means you’ve bribed the right people. This is the country complaining about the (rich) foreigner coming and - shock and horror - violating their laws.
A country with widespread disregard for its own laws is entitled to less sympathy when others disregard the same laws.
Zimbabwe going all Captain Renault by being shocked - Shocked! - that there is illegality going on in their country, is less a subject of sympathy and more a figure of fun.
I had wondered that myself when I read the article. Thanks for fielding that one Colibri.
No warrant yet. If he continues to not respond, I seriously doubt they’re going to say “Oh well, on to the next file.” Government agencies are persistent that way.
Without a doubt. And I in no way support any illegal actions against him or his properties. They can protest, picket, and boycott to their little hearts content, but any acts of violence or vandalism make them no better than him.
CNN reporting that there has been a request is a lot more credible than you saying Nuh-uh. So until my people in the State Department call me to say otherwise, I’m going to go with CNN and presume there has been a request.
That got me curious so I had to check. The U.S. does have an extradition treaty with Zimbabwe (PDF) and it does seem to be an extraditable offense if that the potential penalty is longer than a year. The most obvious counter argument will be that the request is politically motivated. I’ll leave it to the lawyer types to wade through the whole document if they want to.
