Are you under the impression that the UK is incapable of the same sort of thing?
Clearly yes.
Because…?
To be clear, the UK has its own methods of addressing jury bias. I’m surprised that you don’t already know this.
Sorry, that is not good enough. That is a trick used by many defendents and cannot be allowed.
Of course it is possible to have a fair trial.
Reverse the situation: Brit kills US teenager in Florida, but the UK refuse to extradite, then see who believes you cannot have a fair trial.
Lose all biases and be fair.
Well if the DP was on the table the UK would refuse to extradite. If the adult (and remember, the victim here was an adult man, not a child) was killed in a accident by a OK diplomat they would also refuse.
Here in the US, heavy publicity will get a change of venue. The Defense will argue that a fair trial is impossible, and often a judge will agree to move the case to another county , etc.
So, not only is it not a “trick” (“The ability to change venue is related to the constitutional right to a fair trial,…” and yes, it can and often is allowed.
What is the point of this comment? The poster you are reply to said teenager which is correct.
Yes, and English courts have had exactly that same power since 1856. I think they’re used to the concept of a change of venue to avoid prejudice.
DrDeth, you are completely off the deep end here. “There’s no proof of anything! This is a political prosecution.” “There’s proof, but the defendant won’t face trial.” “Because she has diplomatic immunity! Therefore, the crime never occurred.” (Not actual quotes, but pretty damn close.)
- In America, and in the UK, you are innocent until proven guilty.
-
It is now.
-
She does. Even the UK says so.
I never said anything even vaguely like that.
There certainly seems to have been a tragic accident. A man died, while riding a bike, in a traffic accident,. The driver of the car had diplomatic immunity, and was ordered out of the UK by the USA.
The parents, in their quest for revenge, have made this into a political issue, even after getting a civil settlement.
Bump again.
As predicted, it’ll go to the Old Bailey (thats the Central Criminal Court).
But how it will be conducted is still to be decided.
And she has pleaded guilty
That’s it:
Not Guilty to Causing Death by Dangerous Driving
Guilty to Causing Death by Careless Driving.
A typical British legal compromise, which would no doubt have been followed if she were a British citizen.
So not a ‘political’ trial after all.
Will she attend for sentencing? Probably not.
Sentencing due next Thursday:
By-the-minute reporting (livestream cameras will only be running for the judge’s sentencing remarks):
8 months suspended for 12, and a 12-month ban from driving.
As in, driving in the UK? I doubt that will be an issue for her…
The total effect, pretty much, is that she should stay out of the UK for 12 months.
I haven’t seen any news describing how the legal case could even proceed at all. Has the current administration quietly withdraw the assertion of diplomatic immunity? A negotiated position that avoids the question of privilege at all? The comvicted choosing to cooperate with the process without the U. S. government’s permission?
The US authorities told her not to appear in person, but since she was pleading guilty anyway the court agreed to her appearing by video link where needed.