Terror suspect facing extradition

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by blessed baby cakes, May 17, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4554829.stm

    Be interesting if it ever gets to trial to see how the legal system would have differed from a trial in a British court, and the sentence if found guilty.

    Beebs
     
  2. edited because I posted it twice :oops: can only plead massive hangover
     
  3. Two more stages to go through here before any trial in USA - he has two weeks to lodge an appeal for habeus corpus in the Div Court - then could go to the House of lords

    :(
     
  4. Without that agreement it'd never have got this far, as we don’t extradite to countries that impose the death penalty without an assurance it'd be waived in the case.

    What's the ruling under which a prisoner can apply to serve his sentence in his home country? Would it apply here? Why not just have the whole trial here if so.

    Beebs
     
  5. Trial (if and when he is extradited) will be in USA because they have requested his extradition. Under the treaty we are under an obligation to act for USA in court as long as the request is lawful.

    Sentence is another matter entirely - don't know much about that side of it.
     
  6. Which leads quite nicely to this case..



    Terrorist to be extradited to Cuba?

    I am sure the fact hat it was only Godless Commies that were killed, and Florida is a key state that has a large and vociferous anti-Castro Cuban vote will in no way effect proceedings.. :roll:
     
  7. Let's hope he never sees the light of day again. Monstrous crime. I didn't even know you could buy shell-suits anymore, let alone in green and yellow. He deserves to die. Immediately.
     
  8. First of all many there (including me) think that this Babar Ahmad is son of ... mm ... his mother. But justice is justice.

    1. If he violated British laws then the trial should be namely in the UK.
    2. If he hasn't violated British laws then what is a ground for his extradiction?

    No doubt that many Britons violate N.Korean laws but I doubt that anybody would be extradicted.
     
  9. Interesting bit in the BBC item about how we aim to expedite extraditions without a prima facie case against the suspect from the merkins. However, it doesn't work the other way. If we want a merkin we must have a prima facie case against them.
    I have no sympathy with this toerag but it's just typical of the sh1t that b-liar and his gang have been doing to us in the name of terror since 9/11. We should not give up our citizens to other countries on lesser terms than they give up theirs to us.
     
  10. I believe that he was indicted to the US so that means that he would face trial in the US because that's where the crime was committed from.

    Normally if there is a chance in venue, it's dependent upon such factors like how much stronger in the case in the US vs in the UK depending upon the different laws, what the conviction rate and what the sentencing would be on the prosecution side.

    Obviously for the defendent, he would want the lower conviction rates and lower sentencing place.

    I don't believe that the US would allow him to serve his sentence in the UK although there can be exceptions but if you're convicted in the US, you serve your time there.

    We don't have anything like St Helena like you did with Napoleon. :wink:
     
  11. http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/publications/Prisoner_transfer.pdf

    Which State is he set to stand trial in?

    Beebs
     
  12. Connecticut
     
  13. Bingo! Jobs a good'in! He could be getting shafted State side for the first half then home grown for the remainder! .......

    IF convicted of course :roll:

    Beebs
     
  14. He had ISPs in Connecticut and Nevada and was setting up a terrorist camp in Arizona but I think that the US attorney wants to try him in Connecticut although he might not want to go back to the UK because according his lawyers, he got abused there.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128242,00.html

    Anyways he still would have to approved to be transferred.

    http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/oeo/progrm.htm

    Considering his abuseclaim, I don't know which might be the lesser of two evils for him.