Harry Dunn killed by US diplomat's wife

Normally if a person subject to Diplomatic Privilege engages in paid employment inside the Receiving State (and outside the Sending State eg within the Embassy), privileges (such as paying local taxes) are automatically waived.
Not quite.
They do not have immunity (rather than it being waived) from civil/administrative action in the case of
"an action relating to any professional or commercial activity exercised by the diplomatic agent [which includes Admin/tech staff & dependants} in the receiving State outside his official functions."
Note that criminal immunity still applies, this just allows them to be taxed or sued

 
"The UK high court has found that Anne Sacoolas had diplomatic immunity while in the country under the Vienna convention on diplomatic relations”
The courts are not HMG.

On Thursday, the Prime Minister Boris Johnson's official spokesman told reporters: "We don't comment on intelligence matters." and "She was notified to the UK Government by the US as a spouse with no official role."
Both statements are true. The UK does not discuss sensitive intelligence relationships and does not want to draw any more attention to RAF Croughton/US Embassy Annex. It is also true that she was notified to the FCO that she was a spouse dependent and at this time, that is still the case.

The egg is well and truly on the face of the USG and US Embassy. If it is confirmed by either government that she was - at the time of the incident - working in UK as an US Government employee, USG has breached the agreement between UK and USA of 1995, and in technical breach of the Vienna Convention. Both of which are very serious matters in diplomatic and intelligence circles in that there were, and quite possibly still are, US government officials working 'undeclared' in the UK.

I've done a number of short term attachments to British Embassies in the past, so I am reasonably familiar of the process; I've also worked alongside (genuine) US State Department officials in two locations and know that they ordinarily follow the same procedures as the UK. But for the UK to find out and confirm, through the death of a young and innocent man, that a US intelligence officer was operating undeclared in the Shires, well, that's a very serious breach of protocol and trust.
 
Last edited:
Not quite.
They do not have immunity (rather than it being waived) from civil/administrative action in the case of
"an action relating to any professional or commercial activity exercised by the diplomatic agent [which includes Admin/tech staff & dependants} in the receiving State outside his official functions."
Note that criminal immunity still applies, this just allows them to be taxed or sued

I was referring to spouses/dependents; sorry that I didn't make that clear.
 

964ST

War Hero
There might be a rational explanation as to why Mrs Sacaloos “wasn’t/is“ now recognized as being working for the Americans??



Like she was found in the Mediterranean by local Fisherpeople unconscious with a couple of Bullet wounds, she suffered from “psychogenic amnesia”. After a few adventures along the way, she makes her way back to RAF Croughton where she meets the husband And her memory is restored (APART FROM THE MEMORY OF WHAT SIDE OF THE ROAD TO DRIVE ON!) and it seems she was part of a secret CIA “Sleeper Cell”?


If Jason Bourne can get away with that type of storyline then in the USofA it is plausible!
 
The courts are not HMG.


Both statements are true. The UK does not discuss sensitive intelligence relationships and does not want to draw any more attention to RAF Croughton/US Embassy Annex. It is also true that she was notified to the FCO that she was a spouse dependent and at this time, that is still the case.

The egg is well and truly on the face of the USG and US Embassy. If it is confirmed by either government that she was - at the time of the incident - working in UK as an US Government employee, USG has breached the agreement between UK and USA of 1995, and in technical breach of the Vienna Convention. Both of which are very serious matters in diplomatic and intelligence circles in that there were, and quite possibly still are, US government officials working 'undeclared' in the UK.

I've done a number of attachments to British Embassies in the past, so I am reasonably familiar of the process; I've also worked alongside (genuine) US State Department officials in two locations and know that they ordinarily follow the same procedures as the UK. But of the UK to find out and confirm, through the death of a young and innocent man, that a US intelligence officer was operating undeclared in the Shires, well, that's a very serious breach of protocol.

They are true but the case you put forward was that we have not heard weasel words but what their words that I quoted are weasel words. What of substance or conviction do you see in those statements? To me they look like they are telling the Dunn family (and everyone else for that matter) to go away and stop bothering HMG.

Phrases like those tell me these are the people you don't want on you side in a battle because they don't give a toss about you. They have let the situation get to how it is and now are just washing their hands of it while pretending to care. I seriously doubt if any fine words from them about pushing for justice etc. are really heartfelt, these are mindless platitudes that they know will never come to pass and they are not even trying. This is how it has been from the very start of this sad saga.
 
In the same manner Prince Andrew should answer to his alleged sexual crimes !

Lets do the old fashioned prisoner exchange in no mans land between North and South Korea.
Not wanting to cause thread deviation (there is a separate thread for Prince Andrew) so could you pop over there and list these alleged sexual crimes he committed please?
 

Zhopa

War Hero
"Working in US intelligence" my arrse. In the same way that working in the post room at Hereford doesn't make you special forces, the fact that this bint may have had some tenuous link with their J2 folks is a scandalous cop-out. If she was a genuine spook, she'd hardly be co-located with her husband at Croughton. Typical yank double standards.

While I agree with the sentiment, surely you'd agree that "working in US intelligence" covers a vast range, of which being a "genuine spook" is only a tiny subset. There is no shortage of overseas co-located US spouses where one or both has an intel job, if they can bludgeon the system into being competent enough to generate roughly coterminous postings to the same country.

However the key point is what @Filthy_contract has pointed out - if true, very naughty from the point of view of what was declared to the UK.
 

Zhopa

War Hero
The Dunn Family's claim is based on their belief that she was an officer with A&T accreditation at the time, that is, she was working at RAF Croughton. When the 'Defence Communications Staffs' moved to Croughton in the mid 1990s, the FCO was concerned about incidents such as this happening, being so far out of London. The FCO got the USG to agree to 'pre-waive' immunity for staff working there with 'Administrative and Technical' accreditation so that they could be subject to 'municipal law' ie the domestic law of the Receiving state, to wit, the UK. Thus, in the High Court findings published before Christmas, it was pointed out that if Mr Sacoolas had been the driver in the accident, his right to immunity from prosecution had already been waived (and would have hid day in court), but this waiver did not apply to dependents.

However, Mrs Sacoolas was never accredited to the US Embassy Annex (ie never declared to the FCO as staff), she was not meant to be working at Croughton, and there is no evidence presented to the High Court that she did. And Harry's family will struggle to find evidence (that is admissible) that she was.

Of, and for @Steamboat, Ms Sacoolas was apparently concerned about her safety and the fairness of the legal system in the UK. If she had STFU and the Ambassador and US Department of State had accepted this was nothing more than a dreadfully sad accident, the case would have been heard in Northampton, and in all probability a large fine would have been rendered and she would have left the country, as it was unlikely to have been in the public interest for her to have been imprisoned. No more of her, and this sad case, would have been heard. In stead, the clumsy approach by USG has exposed the base and its staff - and the ambiguous relationship to the UK - to unwelcome limelight.

@Filthy_contract, have an Excellent for apparently unruffled patience in repeatedly bringing the conversation back to known facts. I am as enraged by this as everybody else but it's helpful to be grounded in what we know for certain when considering all the other input that's driven by speculation and emotion or (see BBC) not having a full grip on all the detail.
 
@Filthy_contract, have an Excellent for apparently unruffled patience in repeatedly bringing the conversation back to known facts. I am as enraged by this as everybody else but it's helpful to be grounded in what we know for certain when considering all the other input that's driven by speculation and emotion or (see BBC) not having a full grip on all the detail.
Thank you for your kind words!
 
We have another runner. Will she claim that her job was really some sort of spook job but because of the nature of it she can't reveal exactly what or prove it, the court should just accept that and deny extradition as it would put her in danger.

Will this in future become the much used Sacaloos defence I wonder?

Ms Sacoolas will have held a Diplomatic Passport; the woman in the court case above does not
 

StormsInAfrica

War Hero
I thought diplomatic immunity was there to prevent vexatious action against diplomats by host governments, not to actively avoid prosecution of legitimate cases which this is.

Sickening.
 
Road to hell is paved with good intentions?
Diplomatic privilege works on the principal of reciprocity; it can't be enforced, per se. It is observed by almost all countries almost all of the time. Putin just chucked out three European diplomats who were observing an opposition rally. The Russian Foreign Ministry will now expect a real of their Ambassadors called in across Europe and given the good news that a number of their trade attachés are PNGd.
 
Diplomatic privilege works on the principal of reciprocity; it can't be enforced, per se. It is observed by almost all countries almost all of the time. Putin just chucked out three European diplomats who were observing an opposition rally. The Russian Foreign Ministry will now expect a real of their Ambassadors called in across Europe and given the good news that a number of their trade attachés are PNGd.
I guess my point is that we "civilised" "decent" Western citizens assume (dangerous word, whenever it surfaces) that the gunmints of our fellow "civilised" "decent" Western nations will behave in a civilised and decent manner, under all circumstances, leaving perfidy, deceit and all manner of other villainous behavior to Putin and his ilk.

Apparently, life ain't that simple.
 
I guess my point is that we "civilised" "decent" Western citizens assume (dangerous word, whenever it surfaces) that the gunmints of our fellow "civilised" "decent" Western nations will behave in a civilised and decent manner, under all circumstances, leaving perfidy, deceit and all manner of other villainous behavior to Putin and his ilk.

Apparently, life ain't that simple.
You'd hope that nobody really trusted the Yanks though, it's pretty much the unspoken codicile of their doctrine of "American Exceptionalism" that the rules don't really apply to them.
 
Top