|
Post by gar on Feb 17, 2021 13:39:58 GMT
Resurrecting your thread anniebygaslight because it's being reported that the civil case against Anne Sacoulas (sp?) has been cleared to go ahead in the USA. Not before time.
|
|
Jili
Pearl Clutcher
SLPea
Posts: 4,363
Jun 26, 2014 1:26:48 GMT
|
Post by Jili on Feb 17, 2021 15:27:48 GMT
I think this is great news, but I consider it cautiously. I wonder how the latest revelation that she was working for the CIA will play into any of this, or perhaps stall the case.
|
|
|
Post by gar on Feb 17, 2021 15:49:11 GMT
I think this is great news, but I consider it cautiously. I wonder how the latest revelation that she was working for the CIA will play into any of this, or perhaps stall the case. Indeed...they can't take anything for granted yet but for his parents' sake I hope they can achieve some sort of justice and closure.
|
|
Jili
Pearl Clutcher
SLPea
Posts: 4,363
Jun 26, 2014 1:26:48 GMT
|
Post by Jili on Feb 17, 2021 15:54:10 GMT
I think this is great news, but I consider it cautiously. I wonder how the latest revelation that she was working for the CIA will play into any of this, or perhaps stall the case. Indeed...they can't take anything for granted yet but for his parents' sake I hope they can achieve some sort of justice and closure. Agreed. This case is infuriating.
|
|
anniebygaslight
Drama Llama
I'd love a cup of tea. #1966
Posts: 7,394
Location: Third Rock from the sun.
Jun 28, 2014 14:08:19 GMT
|
Post by anniebygaslight on Feb 17, 2021 22:18:15 GMT
I think this is great news, but I consider it cautiously. I wonder how the latest revelation that she was working for the CIA will play into any of this, or perhaps stall the case. Indeed...they can't take anything for granted yet but for his parents' sake I hope they can achieve some sort of justice and closure. This.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 28, 2024 7:51:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2021 0:47:00 GMT
I think this is great news, but I consider it cautiously. I wonder how the latest revelation that she was working for the CIA will play into any of this, or perhaps stall the case. It's a civil case that is being brought against her for damages. Whatever she was doing here it still doesn't give her a pass to kill someone without facing any consequences at all for her action. She's tried every trick in the book to avoid facing up to what she's done. She would not agree to face trial here due to a "concern" she would not "receive fair treatment". We don't have some third world justice here, of course she would have had a fair trial. It's a bit strange that it's only now come out that she was supposedly working for the CIA . Yet there is no record of her doing so in this country. Someone is lying IMO. When she fled, the State Department said she was claiming diplomatic immunity as the wife of a diplomat which later proved not to be correct as her husband wasn't registered as a diplomat. Then the State department refused to extradite her again with no mention that she worked for them. Now her lawyer is saying she did. Who is telling the truth? Makes you wonder what she was doing here if she was working for the CIA in an allied country under such secrecy.
|
|
Jili
Pearl Clutcher
SLPea
Posts: 4,363
Jun 26, 2014 1:26:48 GMT
|
Post by Jili on Feb 18, 2021 1:27:34 GMT
I think this is great news, but I consider it cautiously. I wonder how the latest revelation that she was working for the CIA will play into any of this, or perhaps stall the case. It's a civil case that is being brought against her for damages. Whatever she was doing here it still doesn't give her a pass to kill someone without facing any consequences at all for her action. She's tried every trick in the book to avoid facing up to what she's done. She would not agree to face trial here due to a "concern" she would not "receive fair treatment". We don't have some third world justice here, of course she would have had a fair trial. It's a bit strange that it's only now come out that she was supposedly working for the CIA . Yet there is no record of her doing so in this country. Someone is lying IMO. When she fled, the State Department said she was claiming diplomatic immunity as the wife of a diplomat which later proved not to be correct as her husband wasn't registered as a diplomat. Then the State department refused to extradite her again with no mention that she worked for them. Now her lawyer is saying she did. Who is telling the truth? Makes you wonder what she was doing here if she was working for the CIA in an allied country under such secrecy. I agree with everything you posted here. The whole situation is a mess and something stinks to high heaven.
|
|
|
Post by katlaw on Feb 18, 2021 5:28:35 GMT
Oh that is generous of her. She committed a crime. She, or someone close to her lied about her diplomatic immunity. She fled the country where she committed the crime. And now she is going to offer mediation so the family can get some closure! What a crock. For that family to get some closue the U.S. needs to extradite her immediately and she needs to stand trial for the crime of killing their son. Nothing less is acceptable. There is no valid reason for the U.S. to deny extradition. If this was my son I would only accept her admitting her guilt and facing proper, legal consequences for her actions. CNN article about offering mediation
|
|
|
Post by gar on Dec 13, 2021 18:48:59 GMT
She's going to face charges in January. At last. BBC
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 13, 2021 19:55:10 GMT
Hope all goes well, but thinking she will likely miss punishment. Although if she is found guilty ... She will have to be extremely careful where she travels forever.
|
|
|
Post by chances on Dec 14, 2021 1:29:01 GMT
I hadn’t heard of this case before I just read through the thread. How sad. So they are holding a trial without her being present? What happened to the civil trial in the U.S.?
|
|
|
Post by gar on Dec 14, 2021 8:54:14 GMT
I hadn’t heard of this case before I just read through the thread. How sad. So they are holding a trial without her being present? What happened to the civil trial in the U.S.? She's appearing by video link I believe. I can't remember about the civil trial except there were many obstacles to everything the UK team tried to do.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 28, 2024 7:51:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2021 9:33:49 GMT
I felt relief on behalf of the Dunn family that this is at last going somewhere towards some justice for the death of their son. It's been a long two years for them.
I'm guessing that the court case in January will be one of the formality steps in the justice system her in the UK as it's being held at a magistrate court. Generally they don't deal with such a serious crime as " Causing death by dangerous driving". They are usually passed on to a Crown Court after the initial formal charge at a magistrate court. I'm surprised that her lawyer says he doesn't know anything about appearing by video link though. Not sure if it's the media that has assumed she will be or whether it has been confirmed by the CPS that she will. She could very well be formally charged in her absence though, video link or not.
|
|
|
Post by gillyp on Dec 14, 2021 9:42:31 GMT
I have the news on just now, in the background, and glanced at the screen to see along the bottom that Anne Sacoolas is saying she did not agree to face a UK Court.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 28, 2024 7:51:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2021 10:08:38 GMT
I have the news on just now, in the background, and glanced at the screen to see along the bottom that Anne Sacoolas is saying she did not agree to face a UK Court. Saw that too. Don't think its up to her to "agree" to anything though. Our justice system doesn't include an "agreement" to be charged or whether they appear in court or not. They can be charged and prosecuted in their absence.
|
|
|
Post by gar on Dec 14, 2021 10:48:03 GMT
I have the news on just now, in the background, and glanced at the screen to see along the bottom that Anne Sacoolas is saying she did not agree to face a UK Court. Saw that too. Don't think its up to her to "agree" to anything though. Our justice system doesn't include an "agreement" to be charged or whether they appear in court or not. They can be charged and prosecuted in their absence. Yes but she won’t necessarily be on a video link though - that’s disappointing.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 28, 2024 7:51:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2021 10:59:38 GMT
Saw that too. Don't think its up to her to "agree" to anything though. Our justice system doesn't include an "agreement" to be charged or whether they appear in court or not. They can be charged and prosecuted in their absence. Yes but she won’t necessarily be on a video link though - that’s disappointing. It is. I guess she has no defence to what she's done. I think its the media that has assumed she will be.
|
|