US Woman drives wrong way down road killing teen in Northamptonshire and then claims Diplomatic Immunity. (pollution, mayor)

[James Austen]

The character of Colonel Tavington in The Patriot is based on a real British character by name of Banistre Tarelton.
.
The scene where women and children were burned alive in a church is pure Hollywood garbage and an idea taken from an actual occurence from WW2 when German soldiers in France did the same thing.


There are times when Hollywood really sucks

[Brave New World]

Originally Posted by James Austen

I'm curious. Do you have pull with 10 Downing Street or do you just like to talk like some villain from a James Bond movie.

You really do get carried away with yourself.

Oh and BTW making comments about alliances is going off topic. Please keep it on Harry Dunn. Thank You

The previous Court cases clearly show that Britain was reluctant to allow the US diplomatic immunity, and only did so after the US agreed that any off base incidents such as driving offences would result in an automatic waiver of immunity.

Britain reluctantly agreed, but did not have to do so.

Then as soon as there is an accident off base, the US reneges on what it had previously agrees, and refuses to waiver immunity, and even goes further in relation to loopholes in the law.

The British Government are furious, and tear up the agreement, whilst it is announced in the UK Parliament that planning permission in relation to the redevelopment of the base will be rejected, and the US is forced to sign a new agreement. It also should be noted that the planned move of more Americans from Molesworth to Croughton is now dropped.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) which is independent from Government, charges Sacoolas with dangerous driving, and states that she doesn't have immunity and the CPS spend years going after Sacoolas, and were considering Trial in absentia, however they are now trying her at the Old Bailey.

The Labour Party has continually called for a full Parliamentary Inquiry, and this would most include laws relating to US bases, as well as 'The Visiting Forces Act 1952', and many politicians were far from happy with the legislation in the first place, and I have quoted from previous parliamentary debates earlier in this thread, and it should be noted that the US has no automatic right to immunity at Croughton, and any future continued non compliance with the new agreement would most likely mean the agreement and immunity being withdrawn.

As for the Matthew Dunn case, the US has been told by the Courts, that it does not have jurisdiction on our roads or above our courts, and this is especially true in relation to the deaths of British civilians in road accidents whilst off base, and this had even been highlighted in previous Parliamentary debates on the issue.

In terms of US bases, they belong to the British Ministry of Defence, and are British property, whilst laws governing US personnel such as the Visiting Forces Act 1952 or Croughton Agreement, are subject to constant scrutiny, debate and oversight by Parliament, and can be reviewed, amended or withdrawn at any time, if it is felt the US is abusing such laws.

As for your childish comments, they just demonstrate our little you care about the likes of Harry Dunn and Matthew Day, and how arrogant some Americans are.

Originally Posted by James Austen

The character of Colonel Tavington in The Patriot is based on a real British character by name of Banistre Tarelton.
.
The scene where women and children were burned alive in a church is pure Hollywood garbage and an idea taken from an actual occurence from WW2 when German soldiers in France did the same thing.


There are times when Hollywood really sucks

As for being off topic, I would suggest you take a long look at your own recent posts.

[citizensadvocate]

Originally Posted by bigpaul

that comment shows you dont know what your talking about, the Dunn lad was on an ordinary bike and in all probability on his way to work.
dosent absolve the female driver who was driving on the wrong side of the road in contravention of the laws of the UK.

Interesting I heard a number of reports that he was on a sportsbike I even saw a picture of him riding a sportsbike I don't know if thats the bike he rode on that ill fated day though.But my point not what his riding that day but pointing out the likely cultural difference between US vs UK, it appears in the US even pedal bicyclists were often villified for being on the road and making their own rules on the road. Motorbikers in US of any type are often known as maniacs or organ donors who weave in and out of traffic at high rates of speed. Thus even if this incident happened in the US thus guy would still had an uphill battle due to public perception of young riders on bikes. Thus the reason for them to be classifed as high risk drivers/riders in the US. I heard in UK or EU the public would more likely to side with the biker.

Another disturbing thing that in US itself some states still hang on to the antiquted "get out of jail free" card for those associated with government agencies using the shield of Sovereign Immunity(which was nothing other than a judge made doctrine snuck in after George Washington died). Thus even if they are 200% at fault courts use this to deny compensation nor do they face criminal prosecution even if they really deserved it unless the government waived it leaving victims holding the bag. I remembered an incident in a state which a tractor who suddenly weaved to the wrong side of the road killing a bicyclist got shield by sovereign immunity the excuse was that the tractor(owned by the state) wasn't a motor vehicle nor registered/insured as such, the state does exclude motor vehicles from sovereign immunity. Which this concept ironically came from the UK back when the monarch had full power. I don't know how much it applies to the UK today though. But if Harry was caught in such an accident in the US justice might not be easier. for him. But this shouldn't had made it across the pond in the first place since US never had a monarch.

One thing I find interesting is people are likely instintively steer to the side of the road they learned to drive on if faced with something approaching them from the opposite side. it might be that at such a narrow UK road Anne made a fatal decision to swerve right instead of left when she saw something coming towards her past a hairpin at a high rate of speed while the biker tried to swerve left but too late and there was just no room. Those going to UK should remember they would have to adjust to very narrow yet fast 60mph speed limit roads thus it isnt a simple matter of just keeping left instead of right. Motorbike riders may be more comfortable traveling fast on those roads than cars.

I not to say it absolves of any laws of the UK to keep left but we never know the whole story of what happened there so its not wise to be quick to judge. Ie comparative negligance. I.e alcohol or drug use by either party, speed, racing, etc which the news seems pretty one sided and never release the whole story. It appears its mostly swept under a rug. While I am not pro American I am strongly convinced that there is politically strong anti Americanism the entire way this incident was handled and reported to the world in a biased manner. As in consistently to point fingers at and bash the US without ever looking into the whole story. Please note I am not in anyway excusing how Anne or the US trying to avoid accountability in the incident. As everyone deserves a fair trail and those accountable needs to pay up.

[Brave New World]

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

Interesting I heard a number of reports that he was on a sportsbike I even saw a picture of him riding a sportsbike I don't know if thats the bike he rode on that ill fated day though.But my point not what his riding that day but pointing out the likely cultural difference between US vs UK, it appears in the US even pedal bicyclists were often villified for being on the road and making their own rules on the road. Motorbikers in US of any type are often known as maniacs or organ donors who weave in and out of traffic at high rates of speed. Thus even if this incident happened in the US thus guy would still had an uphill battle due to public perception of young riders on bikes. Thus the reason for them to be classifed as high risk drivers/riders in the US. I heard in UK or EU the public would more likely to side with the biker.

Another disturbing thing that in US itself some states still hang on to the antiquted "get out of jail free" card for those associated with government agencies using the shield of Sovereign Immunity(which was nothing other than a judge made doctrine snuck in after George Washington died). Thus even if they are 200% at fault courts use this to deny compensation nor do they face criminal prosecution even if they really deserved it unless the government waived it leaving victims holding the bag. I remembered an incident in a state which a tractor who suddenly weaved to the wrong side of the road killing a bicyclist got shield by sovereign immunity the excuse was that the tractor(owned by the state) wasn't a motor vehicle nor registered/insured as such, the state does exclude motor vehicles from sovereign immunity. Which this concept ironically came from the UK back when the monarch had full power. I don't know how much it applies to the UK today though. But if Harry was caught in such an accident in the US justice might not be easier. for him. But this shouldn't had made it across the pond in the first place since US never had a monarch.

One thing I find interesting is people are likely instintively steer to the side of the road they learned to drive on if faced with something approaching them from the opposite side. it might be that at such a narrow UK road Anne made a fatal decision to swerve right instead of left when she saw something coming towards her past a hairpin at a high rate of speed while the biker tried to swerve left but too late and there was just no room. Those going to UK should remember they would have to adjust to very narrow yet fast 60mph speed limit roads thus it isnt a simple matter of just keeping left instead of right. Motorbike riders may be more comfortable traveling fast on those roads than cars.

I not to say it absolves of any laws of the UK to keep left but we never know the whole story of what happened there so its not wise to be quick to judge. Ie comparative negligance. I.e alcohol or drug use by either party, speed, racing, etc which the news seems pretty one sided and never release the whole story. It appears its mostly swept under a rug. While I am not pro American I am strongly convinced that there is politically strong anti Americanism the entire way this incident was handled and reported to the world in a biased manner. As in consistently to point fingers at and bash the US without ever looking into the whole story. Please note I am not in anyway excusing how Anne or the US trying to avoid accountability in the incident. As everyone deserves a fair trail and those accountable needs to pay up.

Harry Dunn was driving his bike in a perfectly legal manner, and it was Anne Sacoolas who was on the wrong side of the road.

In terms of the law, you adhere to national laws in the UK when it comes to our roads, and you should also adhere to agreements and waive immunity in such circumstances.

Harry Dunn's family didn't just let the US authorities walk away from this, they pursued the case through the US Civil Courts in Virginia, and received an out of Court Settlement, whilst the UK Government tore up the agreement with the US and replaced it with a different one making it crystal clear that in such circumstances there is no immunity for dependants.

British prosecutors in relation to the CPS, which are the equivalent of the District Attorney in the US, pursued Sacoolas, as they stated they did not believe she had immunity and that she should stand trial, and whilst Sacoolas is unlikely to return for sentencing, she will still be sentenced via video link this Thursday.

In terms of the Monarchy, it is has not been an absolute Monarchy since Magna Carta in 1215, and it's powers were further curtailed after the English Civil War (1642–1651) and the later restoration of 1660. The Parliamentarian (Roundheads) under Cromwell defeated the Royalist (Cavaliers) led by Charles I during the Civil War, and Charles I was executed outside Banqueting House in London.

In 1660, Charles II was made King, in what was known as the Restoration, however his powers were limited, and the real power was now Parliaments, and it should be noted that even today, the Monarch is not allowed to enter the House of Commons.

There are the two big events that limited the power of the Monarchy, however there has also been other less well known legislation.

[Brave New World]

Anne Sacoolas's sentencing is at 10am tomorrow, however it seems unlikely that she will turn up in person, but we will wait and see.

[Brave New World]

Sentencing of Sacoolas has now been delayed until Thurday 8th December 2022, at the Old Bailey.

[Brave New World]

The case is being postponed in order than sentencing can be televised, something that has only been recently introduced in to the courts in July of this year, and this means the nation will be able to watch the sentencing. This has only happened on a handful of occasions before where sentencing has been televised for everyone to see.

Originally Posted by NorthantsLive

The sentencing of Anne Sacoolas, the US citizen who admitted to killing Northamptonshire teen Harry Dunn by careless driving, has been postponed by a week. A spokesperson for the Old Bailey said it followed an application to have the proceedings broadcast on television, which has been granted.

The sentencing of the 45-year-old US diplomat was due to take place this morning, Thursday, December 1, at the Central Criminal Court, known as the Old Bailey, in London. However, court records show it was postponed on Tuesday (November 29) to Thursday, December 8.

Responding to a question from NorthantsLive, a spokesperson for the Old Bailey said the date was moved "at the request of the defence" after a broadcaster requested the proceedings be televised. It is not known whether Sacoolas will attend the hearing in person or over video link from the US.

A spokesperson for the Old Bailey told NorthantsLive that Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb had approved the request to televise the proceedings, meaning her comments and sentence will be broadcast on TV across the UK. The court said the request had been made by a national broadcaster, but would not say which.

Laws over the televising of judge's sentences for certain high-profile cases in the UK was changed in July. Sky, BBC, ITN and the Press Association are now able to apply for permission to film and broadcast sentencing remarks, but the judge decides whether to grant the request.

A member of the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary explained that approved proceedings are recorded by a court camera operator on behalf of a consortium of the above broadcasters with a 10 second delay. It is then up to the broadcasters themselves whether they screen it live or use the footage later.

The judge said: "Ms Sacoolas is a convicted offender and a consideration of the interests of justice now must include the ability to enforce any sentence or any ancillary order I impose. Any sentence I impose is likely to be unenforceable while the defendant remains outside the UK.

“Attention has been rightly drawn to the remorse by Ms Sacoolas in co-operating with these proceedings at all. Despite her conviction today, there is no order I can make to compel her at the Central Criminal Court for sentence. I direct Ms Sacoolas attend court to be sentenced. If the sentence… is one that does not involve immediate custody there is to be no barrier to her returning home after the hearing.”

Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb told Sacoolas the offence of causing death by careless driving carried a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment with a range of options from a medium-level community order to three years in custody.

BBC, Sky, and ITN have been asked whether they will broadcast the proceedings.

US driver Anne Sacoolas's sentencing to be televised but is postponed by a week - NorthantsLive (1st December 2022)

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by Brave New World

The case is being postponed in order than sentencing can be televised, something that has only been recently introduced in to the courts in July of this year, and this means the nation will be able to watch the sentencing. This has only happened on a handful of occasions before where sentencing has been televised for everyone to see.

LOL, you British sure know how to put on a good show. I don't think I have ever seen a video from inside a courtroom in the UK ever in my life. I can't find any precedent for it, but your government is going to make an exception for this one case. Because apparently there is no sentencing hearing in the UK more deserving of being televised than this one. Murder trials, not important enough. Terrorism, not important enough. Causing death by careless driving, is important enough. If the defendant is an American anyway. Preempt all the programing on every channel, so everyone can watch it. I hope your government is planning to declare a national public holiday, so everyone can be home to watch it. It would be a shame if some have to miss out on this momentous moment in British history, because they have to work.

[easthome]

Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz

LOL, you British sure know how to put on a good show. I don't think I have ever seen a video from inside a courtroom in the UK ever in my life. I can't find any precedent for it, but your government is going to make an exception for this one case. Because apparently there is no sentencing hearing in the UK more deserving of being televised than this one. Murder trials, not important enough. Terrorism, not important enough. Causing death by careless driving, is important enough. If the defendant is an American anyway. Preempt all the programing on every channel, so everyone can watch it. I hope your government is planning to declare a national public holiday, so everyone can be home to watch it. It would be a shame if some have to miss out on this momentous moment in British history, because they have to work.

As was previously mentioned you haven't seen this because this is something that has only been recently introduced in to the courts over the last month or two.

I somehow doubt its going to be shown on terrestrial TV!

[James Austen]

Originally Posted by easthome

As was previously mentioned you haven't seen this because this is something that has only been recently introduced in to the courts over the last month or two.

I somehow doubt its going to be shown on terrestrial TV!

What they call a "show trial" of sorts. Britiny Griner just had one in Moscow