The only germane point would have been if she was working at the time of the incident. CIA personnel NEVER say they are CIA, and even when working with very close allies, they are always described as Department of State employees. It is also a Federal Offence to name CIA staff.
Interestingly, if she had been 'an employee or staff at LAC' her immunity from prosecution would have been waived under the Exchange of Notes 1995, but her person would have been 'inviolable' meaning that she could not be arrested or detained (or, indeed, imprisoned).
A sad incident for the family who will not see justice (in their eyes) done, and disappointing that the US chose not to exercise decency in waiving immunity and inviolability ('diplomatic privilege') allowing this matter to be resolved before the courts.
As discussed much earlier in the thread, there would have been no public interest in her being imprisoned (if found guilty). A large fine would have been appropriate in the circumstances. Once her immunity had been waived, the only COA, whatever the outcome, was for her, her serving partner and her family, to return to CONUS at the earliest opportunity, iaw VCDR 1961 and the Exchange of Notes.