Though it seems to have changed, I interpret that as meaning that, under that law, if you found yourself in Cambodia on a business trip, and called your brother from
Phnom Penh and he told you, “When in Rome…” and you decided then and there that it wouldn’t be so bad to try sex with a child, then you wouldn’t have broken US law because the intent was formed after you had already left the US.
It is something that could be a minefield in terms of actual prosecution. I actually didn’t intend to try Poutine until I went to Canada and found a diner offering it. How could a prosecutor in the US ever hope to prove it one way or another? I didn’t email my parents and say, “Mom and dad, going to Canada to try poutine. Will send postcard.”
Of course, the “conspiracy” angle often applies. You can conspire offshore to break laws in the USA.
The US has used this sort of law, too, to extradite people - most recently from Britain (if it has happened yet) and Australia - for computer hacking. When things happen on the internet, where does it actually happen?
Just to be very clear, when I did buy a bottle of the so-called 222’s in Toronto, I used a few and left the rest in my Dopp kit and brought them home with me. Technically that was against the law. Did I leave USA to buy codeine? Naw, I was working and got myself into some terrific back pain due to my injury. It was the best item for the job up there. I wouldn’t lie to a Customs agent and plead ignorance, rather if one picked the bottle out of my Dopp kit I’d admit I bought it in Toronto. And they’d throw it in the garbage.
I’ve zero fear of being thrown in the pokey if I were to buy another bottle of those tablets and had some left when returning home. But, to the OP, can I be prosecuted for having purchased a controlled substance- a narcotic ( Codeine ) without a prescription? I would say no fucking way. I was in Canada. If I’d been videotaped buying them at the Shoppers Drug World, used them in Toronto and threw the rest of the pills away and crossed the border with nothing in hand, I really cannot believe the US Customs or DEA could prosecute me for having bought 222’s in Toronto and having used them but NOT having returned with them.
Am I correct here?
As a side note, those little suckers worked just fine to take the edge off of the severe pain.
SO applies to US citizens residing abroad. I’m pretty sure it applies to more than just board members of US publically owned corporations. At least, when I was working abroad up until 18 months ago, there were plenty of colleagues concerned about SO compliance. Finance/accounting types as well as sales managers.
On the other hand, is South Africa one of those countries that curtails residency rights or revoke citizenship outright if one lives outside the country a certain number of years? I remember a recent discussion on this board about countries have that policy.
(1) Physical border jurisdiction. Generally, no, US laws only apply within US borders. Most US laws.
(2) Nationality jurisdiction. These laws apply to US Citizens committing crimes or US citizens who a crime has been committed against wherever it happened in the world. (e.g. a US citizen who committed a sex crime in Thailand).
(3) Universal Jurisdiction. These laws apply to anyone, anywhere (e.g., France can prosecute anyone for torture committed by anyone, whether or not the person tortured, or doing the torturing was French.)
In the US, most are 1’s, a couple are 2’s. None are 3’s.
All the best songs are about Texas, Women, or Codeine.
No, that’s not correct. Maritime piracy is a universal jurisdiction offence under US law:
[QUOTE=TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 81 > § 1651]
§ 1651. PIRACY UNDER LAW OF NATIONS
Whoever, on the high seas, commits the crime of piracy as defined by the law of nations, and is afterwards brought into or found in the United States, shall be imprisoned for life.
[/QUOTE]
I’m sure that the last part is the rub, no? When you return to the US, you have acceded to its jurisdiction and can be prosecuted for toking on that Cohiba overseas.
Otherwise your last hypothetical couldn’t happen. “Sure, your honor, I plotted with Juan Garzo Santiago in Chile for the violent overthrow of our government, but I was not under the jurisdiction of the United States at the time. Now that I am home, and no longer plotting, I cannot be charged with a crime.”
I believe that U.S. Citizens are always “subject to U.S. jurisdiction” even though in the vast majority of circumstances the U.S. declines to regulate things that are legal in a foreign country.