Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Christopher Tappin extradited to US on missile charges

  1. #16

    Default

    So you can't ship goods to whomever you wish? I never understood the "You get to be free, but if you interact with someone who could be our enemy, you are in trouble" deal.

  2. #17
    Senior Member Lov3ll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    2,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tluassa View Post
    Britain extradites its own citizens to the US ?
    We have a retarded system which allows Brits to be deported to America if they did something while living in the UK which is illegal in the US and legal in the UK.

  3. #18
    Senior Member CMNot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    UK/RSA
    Posts
    6,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MotoH View Post
    So you can't ship goods to whomever you wish? I never understood the "You get to be free, but if you interact with someone who could be our enemy, you are in trouble" deal.
    Do you live in a cave?

    Have a read of UNSCR 1747, or google 'Iran + sanctions', and then see who you think will come through your door after you ship anything to do with weaponry to Iran. UNSCR 1747 has been in place for going on 5 years now, it is not enough for Mr. Tappin to claim his rights are being violated, or that as the handling company he bears no responsibility to vet what he ships. In particular to hostile states. If he has nothing to hide, as I don't think he has yet stated (which would be telling), he has nothing to worry about and will be able to lodge a nice compensation claim to kick off his retirement when he returns.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lov3ll View Post
    We have a retarded system which allows Brits to be deported to America if they did something while living in the UK which is illegal in the US and legal in the UK.
    Actually the system is retarded because of the nuances of extradition. There is no requirement for US authorities to divulge the evidence they have against a UK citizen during the extradition process, whereas the UK needs to show it's evidence against a US citizen in court to achieve the same result in reverse.

  4. #19
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lov3ll View Post
    We have a retarded system which allows Brits to be deported to America if they did something while living in the UK which is illegal in the US and legal in the UK.
    This is retarded indeed.

  5. #20
    Senior Member NovocastrianUK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the Western Spiral arm of the Galaxy
    Age
    25
    Posts
    2,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lov3ll View Post
    We have a retarded system which allows Brits to be deported to America if they did something while living in the UK which is illegal in the US and legal in the UK.
    If he sold secerts to a potential enemy then he should be punished. However I agree there is double standards with the extraction agreement which I believe the government is looking into. I'm all for mutual co-operation but the co-operation must go both ways.

  6. #21
    Member Monty1985's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hollis View Post
    The only fish that you can fry is the one that you have caught. Ever thought there is more to this story? Also ATF, does most of the illegal firearm sells. Also can you post a link where the FBI ever let someone off who sold a truck load of Illegal firearms? BTW, you do know we do have representatives from the various law enforcement agencies on this forum? So before you get your knickers in a twist, confirm your facts.

    Common sense about this $500 sells, tells use there is more to this story. I doubt the person or his defense attorney would tell us. The media who knows what they leave out. The FBI, as with most agency will do their talking in court.
    I don't have my knickers in a twist nor did I mean to cause any offence Hollis. Merely expressing an opinion questioning if the whole affair is worth it or not. I never implied the FBI or ATF for that matter had let anyone off I was just trying put things into perspective. Sorry for the confusion.

  7. #22
    Μολὼν λαβέ Hollis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Stuck in the rain and mud again.
    Posts
    23,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Monty1985 View Post
    I don't have my knickers in a twist nor did I mean to cause any offence Hollis. Merely expressing an opinion questioning if the whole affair is worth it or not. I never implied the FBI or ATF for that matter had let anyone off I was just trying put things into perspective. Sorry for the confusion.
    No problem, After going through 3 pages of google on this. Basically it is Mr. Tappin and friends statements. Something to note, is the Magistrate and the High Court OKed the extradition. I don't know much about the UK court system. I would think that Mr. Tappin would have won his appeal if there was obvious errors in it. Or, under the treaty that is what they where suppose to do.

    In the past we have had a lot of the trial by the internet and media where it looks like it is one thing completely different than the finding of fact in the actual court case.

    If he is innocent, I would hope for a speedy trial and a finding of innocent.

  8. #23
    Senior Member Lov3ll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    2,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NovocastrianUK View Post
    If he sold secerts to a potential enemy then he should be punished. However I agree there is double standards with the extraction agreement which I believe the government is looking into. I'm all for mutual co-operation but the co-operation must go both ways.
    The Tory review found there was nothing wrong with it, while the JCHR conclusion was British citizens need the same protection as US citizens.

  9. #24
    Amiable Scoundrel Corrupt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    In a suit, with a pipe, pondering how to retort
    Age
    24
    Posts
    14,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hollis View Post
    No problem, After going through 3 pages of google on this. Basically it is Mr. Tappin and friends statements. Something to note, is the Magistrate and the High Court OKed the extradition. I don't know much about the UK court system. I would think that Mr. Tappin would have won his appeal if there was obvious errors in it. Or, under the treaty that is what they where suppose to do.
    CMNot summed it up nicely. The treaty is somewhat lopsided (it was renegotiated post 9/11 I believe, to expedite extradition of terror suspects to the US), in that the US is not required to provide a great deal of evidence when asking for someone to be extradited.

    Quote Originally Posted by CMNot View Post
    Actually the system is retarded because of the nuances of extradition. There is no requirement for US authorities to divulge the evidence they have against a UK citizen during the extradition process, whereas the UK needs to show it's evidence against a US citizen in court to achieve the same result in reverse.

  10. #25
    Μολὼν λαβέ Hollis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Stuck in the rain and mud again.
    Posts
    23,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Corrupt View Post
    CMNot summed it up nicely. The treaty is somewhat lopsided (it was renegotiated post 9/11 I believe, to expedite extradition of terror suspects to the US), in that the US is not required to provide a great deal of evidence when asking for someone to be extradited.
    That needs to be fixed. Same requirements for both parties.

  11. #26
    Banned user
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Baden-Baden, Ger
    Posts
    1,566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by happyslapper View Post
    As does Germany, and a majority of other countries.
    No, no German may be extradited to another country. It is forbidden by our Constitution (Art. 16 Basic Law), it has been watered down for the European arrest warrant and International Courts though.

  12. #27
    Senior Member tea drinker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Getting ripped in mp.net's insanity thread!
    Age
    44
    Posts
    8,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by happyslapper View Post
    As does Germany, and a majority of other countries.
    Is it the same conditions or is theirs based on evidence? That's what they were *****in about on BBC, the Americans only have to request someone, not provide evidence. Of course it doesn't work in reverse, that would mean "you are not with us but against us"

    Quote Originally Posted by Hollis View Post
    Something to note, is the Magistrate and the High Court OKed the extradition. I don't know much about the UK court system. I would think that Mr. Tappin would have won his appeal if there was obvious errors in it. Or, under the treaty that is what they where suppose to do.
    Wouldn't the cort only have granted that there was a request and stamped it basically? There is no evidence or trial or jury.

  13. #28
    Senior Member tluassa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Germany, Nrw
    Posts
    5,840

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dexx View Post
    No, no German may be extradited to another country. It is forbidden by our Constitution (Art. 16 Basic Law), it has been watered down for the European arrest warrant and International Courts though.
    x2, that was what I was thinking too.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •