EU rule of law serrves who?

[Elind]

Quote:
Britain formally requested on Wednesday that Italy extradite a suspect in the attempted July 21 transport bombings in London and expressed hope the process could be completed by the end of the year.

I can't quite figure out whether this comment is a sarcastic attempt at humor, or if there are many people in Europe who think this is how justice is best served.

What a hoot.

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Elind
Quote:
Britain formally requested on Wednesday that Italy extradite a suspect in the attempted July 21 transport bombings in London and expressed hope the process could be completed by the end of the year.

I can't quite figure out whether this comment is a sarcastic attempt at humor, or if there are many people in Europe who think this is how justice is best served.

What a hoot. What's the problem?

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally posted by Elind
Quote:
Britain formally requested on Wednesday that Italy extradite a suspect in the attempted July 21 transport bombings in London and expressed hope the process could be completed by the end of the year.

I can't quite figure out whether this comment is a sarcastic attempt at humor, or if there are many people in Europe who think this is how justice is best served.

What a hoot.

Yes what a pity we don't enjoy a special relationship with them like the one with the US.

Incidentally, exactly how many IRA terrorist suspects has the US extradited to Britain over the last 35 years?

"the total number of suspected IRA terrorists we have winkled out of the Americans is exactly nil."

http://www.boris-johnson.com/archives/2004/11/special_relatio.html

Still at least you finally decided the terrorists shouldn't be fundraising in the US. Of course it was a bank robbery rather than the fact they were blowing innocent people to bits that sparked the change in policy.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1524976,00.html

[Elind]

so far responses are a hoot too. Irrelevant and utterly unconcerned with the priorities.

[Bjorn]

From the same source (Reuters):

The 27-year-old Issac also faces separate accusations in Italy over alleged involvement in international terrorism and possession of false documents.

Italian magistrates are looking for a connection between the July 21 attacks and the July 7 blasts, in which four suicide bombers killed 52 people including an Italian woman.

.... Italian courts could give the domestic case priority over the extradition proceedings.

The [British] embassy said. "All requests made by the UK authorities have been acted on promptly by their Italian counterparts." What's the problem?

[LeFevre]

If the main problem is the time frame, I don't see what the major problem is.

[Elind]

Originally posted by LeFevre
If the main problem is the time frame, I don't see what the major problem is.

Oh well, I suppose I have to explain.
This is supposed to be a European "Union" and time sensitive terrorist investigation. The British police have by all accounts done an excellent job in record time of identifying the terrorists, in large part by rapid arrests and interrogations, and on top of that the British certainly have more serious charges than the documentation or association charges the Italians may come up with; yet it may take up to 5 months for the Italian bureaucrats to return this little turd to the UK!

None of the posters here think there is a problem with that?

Some European Union this is.

[Ryokan]

Originally posted by Elind
Oh well, I suppose I have to explain.
This is supposed to be a European "Union"

A union which, at it's core, is more an economic union than anything else. Each state is still a sovereign nation with its own laws, politics and foreign policy. It is NOT a 'United States of Europe'.

[Kerberos]

Originally posted by Elind
Oh well, I suppose I have to explain.
This is supposed to be a European "Union" and time sensitive terrorist investigation. The British police have by all accounts done an excellent job in record time of identifying the terrorists, in large part by rapid arrests and interrogations, and on top of that the British certainly have more serious charges than the documentation or association charges the Italians may come up with; yet it may take up to 5 months for the Italian bureaucrats to return this little turd to the UK!

None of the posters here think there is a problem with that?

Some European Union this is.
Any evidence that the problem is with the EU rather than with Italy, or did you just flip a coin to decide who to bash?

[Flo]

Originally posted by Elind
Oh well, I suppose I have to explain.
This is supposed to be a European "Union" ...

Even in Switzerland, a confederation, each canton retains some sovereignty in matters of justice, police, etc. The problem would therefore be the same (and maybe slower sometimes). Some confederation this is ! ;)

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally posted by Elind
Oh well, I suppose I have to explain.
This is supposed to be a European "Union" and time sensitive terrorist investigation. The British police have by all accounts done an excellent job in record time of identifying the terrorists, in large part by rapid arrests and interrogations, and on top of that the British certainly have more serious charges than the documentation or association charges the Italians may come up with; yet it may take up to 5 months for the Italian bureaucrats to return this little turd to the UK!

None of the posters here think there is a problem with that?

Some European Union this is.

Of course if he had made it to the US, he could have claimed it was a political act and avoided extradition all together. Or do you need to have an Irish accent for that one to work?

Some "special relationship" that is.

[brodski]

Originally posted by Elind
Oh well, I suppose I have to explain.
This is supposed to be a European "Union" and time sensitive terrorist investigation. The British police have by all accounts done an excellent job in record time of identifying the terrorists, in large part by rapid arrests and interrogations, and on top of that the British certainly have more serious charges than the documentation or association charges the Italians may come up with; yet it may take up to 5 months for the Italian bureaucrats to return this little turd to the UK!

None of the posters here think there is a problem with that?

Some European Union this is.

The Italian authorities have this man in custody; they are conducting their own investigations.
nothing suggests that they have not given British officials access to the suspect for questioning purposes, but a UK prosecution will be delayed until any Italian based charges have been settled.

Information gathering may be time sensitive, but actual prosecution is not (within reason).

If you want to bash the EU you may have to look elsewhere, I'm sure that you should be able to find something which will stand up to scrutiny.

[Hutch]

OK, Elind, somebody commits a murder in Texas, flees to Florida and robs/holds hostage a store in Florida before being captured by Florida police. Does Florida immediately turn him over to Texas before completing their own investigation? Most unlikely.

And those are states of the same country. Extradition between Soverign states is even more complex.

It is a paradox: if the EU moves closer to integration, it gets blasted--if it doesn't do something that would require closer integration it gets blasted. Somedays it's not worth getting out of bed in Brussels.......;) :D

[Kerberos]

Originally posted by Hutch
OK, Elind, somebody commits a murder in Texas, flees to Florida and robs/holds hostage a store in Florida before being captured by Florida police. Does Florida immediately turn him over to Texas before completing their own investigation? Most unlikely.

And those are states of the same country. Extradition between Soverign states is even more complex.

It is a paradox: if the EU moves closer to integration, it gets blasted--if it doesn't do something that would require closer integration it gets blasted. Somedays it's not worth getting out of bed in Brussels.......;) :D
Actually the EU is trying to get a common arrest order (and is of course being blaster for it), but Italy hasn't implemented it yet. Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Arrest_Warrant)

[Elind]

Originally posted by Kerberos
Any evidence that the problem is with the EU rather than with Italy, or did you just flip a coin to decide who to bash?

You are jumping to conclusions and not addressing the point at all. If you think a 5 month delay, or even a 5 day delay, is OK in this kind of situation (as if you don't trust the British to serve justice better than the Italians) within what is supposed to be a tightly integrated union, then say so. Don't waffle.

[LW]

Originally posted by Elind
within what is supposed to be a tightly integrated union

Who exactly supposes that? Not me and nobody I know, and I live within the said union.

[Elind]

Originally posted by LW
Who exactly supposes that? Not me and nobody I know, and I live within the said union.

:) A silly assumption of mine perhaps, but I am simply suggesting that this is a fairly basic principle of cooperation.

Help each other rapidly catch, and control, and punish criminals or terrorists who take advantage of the unions open borders in the first place. Do you disagree?

The question still stands. What purpose does this kind of bureaucratic delay serve?

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally posted by Elind
:) A silly assumption of mine perhaps, but I am simply suggesting that this is a fairly basic principle of cooperation.

Help each other rapidly catch, and control, and punish criminals or terrorists who take advantage of the unions open borders in the first place. Do you disagree?

The question still stands. What purpose does this kind of bureaucratic delay serve?

So why did the US refuse to cooperate with the UK in catching, controlling and punishing Irish terrorists?

Remember we are not talking about a delay of weeks or months in that case, but an outright refusal.

[Kerberos]

Originally posted by Elind
You are jumping to conclusions and not addressing the point at all. If you think a 5 month delay, or even a 5 day delay, is OK in this kind of situation (as if you don't trust the British to serve justice better than the Italians) within what is supposed to be a tightly integrated union, then say so. Don't waffle.
The "point" seemed to be to bash the EU. If the point was that the delay was to long then I agree, and as I pointed out the EU is working on a European arrest warrant, which presumably/hopefully would speed things up. Italy however haven't implemented that yet.

[Elind]

Originally posted by Kerberos
The "point" seemed to be to bash the EU. If the point was that the delay was to long then I agree, and as I pointed out the EU is working on a European arrest warrant, which presumably/hopefully would speed things up. Italy however haven't implemented that yet.

You can be sensitive and call it "bash". I call it being critical, to the point of funnily pompous. (otherwise known as a hoot). Lighten up.

[Elind]

Originally posted by Jaggy Bunnet
So why did the US refuse to cooperate with the UK in catching, controlling and punishing Irish terrorists?

Remember we are not talking about a delay of weeks or months in that case, but an outright refusal.

Changing the subject! Naughty naughty.

[Kerberos]

Originally posted by Elind
You can be sensitive and call it "bash". I call it being critical, to the point of funnily pompous. (otherwise known as a hoot). Lighten up.
You might call it being critical, but you're being "critical" of the EU for something that's not the EU's fault. As for the part about you being funnily poumpous I'm not sure you mean what you actually said, and I don't see who else is being pompous either.

[Elind]

Originally posted by Kerberos
You might call it being critical, but you're being "critical" of the EU for something that's not the EU's fault. As for the part about you being funnily poumpous I'm not sure you mean what you actually said, and I don't see who else is being pompous either.

Pompous is a general comment, IMHO, on what bureaucrats are when they push their paperwork around. They are being pompous and self serving. You may use other words or call me pompous. It's not important.

However you defend the EU as if it either doesn't exist and has no responsibility, or is not involved in it's own laws, between members, when it's members cannot agree on something as simple as giving custody where it is first due and not reasonably in dispute, in a prompt and timely manner.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to comment on directly?

I'll make it real simple. I think most people would have thought that this guy could have been put on a plane the day he was caught and returned to the rapidly evolving investigation that was going on in Britain. I think the Italians should by now be able to recognize the British legal system so as to trust it and to take any possible further requests from Italy into account in the future.

Terrorists now know that the first step after an attack, if they live, is to get to another EU country where, even if caught, they will have time rest and forget what they know and let others get away and avoid any uncomfortable interrogations.

[Hutch]

Originally posted by Bjorn
From the same source (Reuters):

The 27-year-old Issac also faces separate accusations in Italy over alleged involvement in international terrorism and possession of false documents.

Italian magistrates are looking for a connection between the July 21 attacks and the July 7 blasts, in which four suicide bombers killed 52 people including an Italian woman.

.... Italian courts could give the domestic case priority over the extradition proceedings.

The [British] embassy said. "All requests made by the UK authorities have been acted on promptly by their Italian counterparts."

What's the problem?

The guy is in custody. Italy is looking at violations of Italian law and may prosecute him first (same as happens in the United States on occasion). If not, they will review (and in all probability) act on the British request.

No evidence the guy is going free. No evidence the British have any problems with the system.

Like bjorn said--what is the problem.

Elind, you are huffing and puffing like mad, but this is the brick house, sorry.

[Elind]

Originally posted by Hutch
The guy is in custody. Italy is looking at violations of Italian law and may prosecute him first (same as happens in the United States on occasion). If not, they will review (and in all probability) act on the British request.

No evidence the guy is going free. No evidence the British have any problems with the system.

Like bjorn said--what is the problem.

Elind, you are huffing and puffing like mad, but this is the brick house, sorry.

A brick house it is (a colorful comment comes to mind :)). But you are also quite happy to leave it standing, without commenting on the question which, to paraphrase, is whether or not this tedious process serves anyone better than a more expedious one? All you do is list what we already know, except I suspect that those who tracked him and wanted to question him on their terms immediately, will have private words to say.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally posted by Elind
Terrorists now know that the first step after an attack, if they live, is to get to another EU country where, even if caught, they will have time rest and forget what they know and let others get away and avoid any uncomfortable interrogations.

Not quite accurate. They are far better getting to the US and claiming that their act was political. Then they are safe from EVER being extradited.

That's the best way to avoid uncomfortable interrogations.

[Manny]

Originally posted by Jaggy Bunnet
Not quite accurate. They are far better getting to the US and claiming that their act was political. Then they are safe from EVER being extradited. Um, our history of providing sanctuary for IRA terrorists is indeed less than stellar, but why does your description of our policy stop in 1986?

[Hutch]

Originally posted by Elind
A brick house it is (a colorful comment comes to mind :)). But you are also quite happy to leave it standing, without commenting on the question which, to paraphrase, is whether or not this tedious process serves anyone better than a more expedious one?

Sigh...last try, then I'll leave you to Bjorn, Kerberos and Jaggy Bunnet as long as they wish to expend electrons....

No state, if they have someone in custody for crimes THEY have charged him with, will IMMEDIATELY release the person to another state. Even in the United States, BETWEEN STATES IN THE SAME SOVERIGN NATION, this does not happen overnight (unless the person is not charged with a crime in the state he is apprehended in, and even then he usually can appeal extradition).

All you do is list what we already know, except I suspect that those who tracked him and wanted to question him on their terms immediately, will have private words to say.

I'm going to have to go CF Larsen all over you, son...EVIDENCE??

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Hutch
... go CF Larsen all over you, son...EVIDENCE?? :p ;) :p

[Luke T.]

Elind, you seem to be assuming much. Do you assume the Italians are gonna hold this guy for a while just out of spite or lack of interest?

Here's a couple things to digest:

"We've warned the British government and the British people time and again," the letter adds. "We've kept our promise and have carried out a blessed military operation."

"We continue to warn the governments of Denmark and Italy and all other crusader governments."

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,364134,00.html

That was the Al Qaeda statement to the world following the July 7 bombings in London. And now we have a suspect in the London bombings dashing off to Italy!

Hmmmm.

The BBC's Jacky Rowland said Italian police will want to establish whether the suspect travelled to Rome to simply seek refuge, or whether he could be linked to possible bomb plots within Italy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4730949.stm

So while you are getting all huffy over the delayed extradition of a suspect for a bombing which has already occurred, maybe the Italians are trying to prevent the next one in their country.

ETA: And you might think about linking to quotes you cite in your posts.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally posted by manny
Um, our history of providing sanctuary for IRA terrorists is indeed less than stellar, but why does your description of our policy stop in 1986?

If it is wrong (and given that one of my sources is Boris "I have no idea what is going on" Johnson's website this is entirely possible) then please provide a link demonstrating this. I am more than happy to learn something here.

I found it hard to believe that the US had never extradited an IRA suspect (as claimed in the website I linked to) but a cursory google didn't turn up much (apart from a lot of websites containing the same claim from Barmy Boris).

[Luke T.]

Here's an interesting thing. Looking for a source of the quote in the OP, I found this Reuters article. (http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-08-03T172722Z_01_MCC305064_RTRUKOC_0_SECURITY-BRITAIN.xml)

It has the OP quote as the starting paragraph.

Anyway, farther down in the article, it says this:

Hamdi Issac, also known as Osman Hussein, was seized in Rome last week. He has told Italian magistrates he took part in the July 21 attacks, but says they were not meant to kill anyone.

According to his lawyer Antonietta Sonnessa, Issac has said the bag he carried onto a London subway was full of flour fixed to a detonator.

"What he said is that is that there were harmless materials, that is, flour. And then there was (the detonator) to make it explode -- but only to create a bang. That's what my client said," Sonnessa told Reuters on Wednesday.

Harmless, right?

Flour. Think about it. What do you think they were trying to do?

Imagine an explosion on a rail car and a cloud of white powder explodes into the air. What are people going to think? What would be the reaction of the authorities?

Anthrax. Panic. Shut down the whole city. Mass evacuations.

Harmless, my ass.

[Elind]

Originally posted by Jaggy Bunnet
Not quite accurate. They are far better getting to the US and claiming that their act was political. Then they are safe from EVER being extradited.

That's the best way to avoid uncomfortable interrogations.

You sure you want to stand by that, or are you thinking of ages past?

[Manny]

Oh yeah, he's wrong. We extradited Billy Quinn (killing a cop) and James Smyth (one of the H-block 4 escapees) and others. Still others we've not "extradited" but rather "deported to the place where there happened to be pending charges against the guy." Joe Doherty was an example of this. When he saw the treaty revisions of 1986 coming, he gave up his asylum claim and asked to be deported to Ireland, where he believed he'd be safe from prosecution. The US turned him down and shipped him back to Britain.

Again, we've not been perfect on this score by any means and your point in opposition to the original post here is valid. The other three of the H-block 4 are still here, I think. But it's also not as one sided as Johnson makes it out to be.

[Elind]

Originally posted by Luke T.
Elind, you seem to be assuming much. Do you assume the Italians are gonna hold this guy for a while just out of spite or lack of interest?

Here's a couple things to digest:



http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,364134,00.html

That was the Al Qaeda statement to the world following the July 7 bombings in London. And now we have a suspect in the London bombings dashing off to Italy!

Hmmmm.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4730949.stm

So while you are getting all huffy over the delayed extradition of a suspect for a bombing which has already occurred, maybe the Italians are trying to prevent the next one in their country.

ETA: And you might think about linking to quotes you cite in your posts.

No I don't think it's spite or lack of interest, just lack of will to act quickly and expeditiously.

You suggest the Italians are cowed and willing to "protect" this guy in order to curry favor with the Islamists? Even I haven't gone that far.

Re Links. I usually try to include the byline, but slipped here. Sorry. It was via Google News, and had many articles on the same. I'm sure you wouldn't find it hard to check, if you are really interested.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Elind
No I don't think it's spite or lack of interest, just lack of will to act quickly and expeditiously.

You suggest the Italians are cowed and willing to "protect" this guy in order to curry favor with the Islamists? Even I haven't gone that far.

I think you have completely misunderstood me. Read the quote from my second link again.

The BBC's Jacky Rowland said Italian police will want to establish whether the suspect travelled to Rome to simply seek refuge, or whether he could be linked to possible bomb plots within Italy.

I am suggesting the Italians may be holding onto this guy because he may have information about planned attacks on Italy as were threatened in the Al Queda letter of July 7, and they are holding and interrogating him to find out what he knows about those plans. And that's why the delay on shipping him back to England.

[Kerberos]

Originally posted by Elind
Pompous is a general comment, IMHO, on what bureaucrats are when they push their paperwork around. They are being pompous and self serving. You may use other words or call me pompous. It's not important.
I didn’t actually call you pompous but reading your comments literally you did. As I said I assumed you didn’t mean it like that.

Originally posted by Elind
However you defend the EU as if it either doesn't exist and has no responsibility, or is not involved in it's own laws, between members, when it's members cannot agree on something as simple as giving custody where it is first due and not reasonably in dispute, in a prompt and timely manner.
Of course the EU is involved in it’s own laws. I just don’t see which EU laws are involved in these proceedings. Now I don’t know every directive the EU passes so there might be EU legislation involved, so please enlighten me with your obviously superior knowledge of the Eu’s involvement.

Originally posted by Elind
I'll make it real simple. I think most people would have thought that this guy could have been put on a plane the day he was caught and returned to the rapidly evolving investigation that was going on in Britain. I think the Italians should by now be able to recognize the British legal system so as to trust it and to take any possible further requests from Italy into account in the future.
I'll make it even simpler:

What
is
your
beef?

Is it:
A) That the Italians are to slow to extradite (but how is that the EU’s fault).
B) That the EU hasn’t created a European arrest warrant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_arrest_warrant) (which they have).
C) That the EAW isn't good enough (what's wrong?)
D) That the Italians haven’t implemented it (again how is this the EU’s fault).
E) That the EU doesn’t have the power to force the member states to comply with it’s legislation (I suspect you would have no trouble convincing the Commission and other EU bodies that this is a good idea, but the member states might be a bit more skeptical)
F)….?

[Elind]

Originally posted by Luke T.
I think you have completely misunderstood me. Read the quote from my second link again.



I am suggesting the Italians may be holding onto this guy because he may have information about planned attacks on Italy as were threatened in the Al Queda letter of July 7, and they are holding and interrogating him to find out what he knows about those plans. And that's why the delay on shipping him back to England.

Apology for the misunderstanding. Speedreading again.

I don't think the latter excuse is the reason. I just think it's an example of paper pushers doing their thing. The best people to interrogate, including about possible Italian schemes are, (were, it's a bit late now) the Bristish.

[Elind]

Originally posted by Kerberos


Is it:
A) That the Italians are to slow to extradite (but how is that the EU’s fault).
B) That the EU hasn’t created a European arrest warrant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_arrest_warrant) (which they have).
C) That the EAW isn't good enough (what's wrong?)
D) That the Italians haven’t implemented it (again how is this the EU’s fault).
E) That the EU doesn’t have the power to force the member states to comply with it’s legislation (I suspect you would have no trouble convincing the Commission and other EU bodies that this is a good idea, but the member states might be a bit more skeptical)
F)….?

A) Yes, it's a beef, or hoot. The EU appear to have agreed procedures which hamper good cooperative police work, at least when it involves terrorism, IMHO.
B) I'm saying it seems to be excessively cumbersome in these cases.
C) Ditto
D) OK. It's all the Italians fault. Sorry EU.
E) No, but the member states could agree to do that without being forced, if they set cooperation above paper pushing.

[Bjorn]

A few cases from amateur googling:

California and Texas are in a legal tug of war -- and we left coasters ought to lose resoundingly in spite of having a seemingly sound position.

Debra Schmidt is in Texas with her two pre-teen daughters. She refuses to return to California to surrender her children to her ex-husband, to whom courts here have granted custody.

California has sought extradition, but two successive Texas governors -- George Bush and current Gov. Rick Perry -- have not honored the request. A Texas judge also has refused to order the extradition.Schmidt arrived in California in September from Austin, Texas to face charges after the state of California filed a federal lawsuit forcing her extradition. The Texas governor had initially refused to extradite Schmidt to California, but eventually did so under court order. he was employed to represent Charles Watson, the member of the Manson family who was charged with the Sharon Tate murders. He represented Charles in his extradition fight from Texas to California and took the case to the Supreme Court of the United States. Bill is accustomed to handling high-pressure matters in which there is a great deal of public interest. Sheriff’s officials have an arrest warrant for Starks in connection with Sanders’ murder. Starks is in a Texas jail and is awaiting extradition to California, Beavers said. Hm. Extradition isn't a piece of cake even within the US ....

[Elind]

Originally posted by Bjorn
A few cases from amateur googling:

Hm. Extradition isn't a piece of cake even within the US ....

Yes I take your point, up to a point. However the distinction that I probably naively assumed is that when there are reasons to assume crimes are in progress, particularly random terrorist ones, that the absolute priority would be to take every possible step to help one's neighbors and friends to prevent them, not stand on bureaucratic principles designed for other situations so as to impede an immediate need. I also, probably naively, believed that such friends would have enough respect for a neighbors legal system to believe that whatever fundamental rights were at stake, would not be violated.

Obviously that prevents everyone who consider terrorists as just another form of common criminality from sending anyone to the US, like the Germans; but from Italy to Britain??

Oh well. I still have a lot to learn.

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Elind
Yes I take your point, up to a point. However the distinction that I probably naively assumed is that when there are reasons to assume crimes are in progress, particularly random terrorist ones, that the absolute priority would be to take every possible step to help one's neighbors and friends to prevent them, not stand on bureaucratic principles designed for other situations so as to impede an immediate need. I also, probably naively, believed that such friends would have enough respect for a neighbors legal system to believe that whatever fundamental rights were at stake, would not be violated."All requests made by the UK authorities have been acted on promptly by their Italian counterparts."

Now that we know that even within the US some states (like Texas) much prefer to make their own decicions about who to extradite to another state (like California) - and in some cases flatly deny to do so - could we at least assume that this is not a EU thingy?

[Elind]

Originally posted by Bjorn
"All requests made by the UK authorities have been acted on promptly by their Italian counterparts."

Now that we know that even within the US some states (like Texas) much prefer to make their own decicions about who to extradite to another state (like California) - and in some cases flatly deny to do so - could we at least assume that this is not a EU thingy?

You ignore my point. I very much suspect that no US state would refuse to act in a way that delayed a terrorist investigation, even by hours, if they knew that this was the situation, and you ignore the distinctions between common criminal acts and terrorism.

Perhaps the Italians put the same pressure on him that the Brits would have, but nothing I read in the news sounded as if they did. On the contrary, we have heard more of his "defense" than of any of those in custody in the UK.

I think is pitiful that the Italians could suggest that it might take 5 more months to get him back to the UK, while simultaneously suggesting that this is what will eventually happen. I repeat, again and again, what does this serve?

As to the EU, they claim to have a union of substance. What is more substantial than issues like this?

[claimee]

Originally posted by Bjorn
A few cases from amateur googling:'
...
Hm. Extradition isn't a piece of cake even within the US .... Originally posted by Elind
Yes I take your point, up to a point. However the distinction that I probably naively assumed...Originally posted by Elind
You ignore my point. I very much suspect...


Originally posted by Elind
You are jumping to conclusions and not addressing the point at all. If you think a 5 month delay, or even a 5 day delay, is OK in this kind of situation ... within what is supposed to be a tightly integrated union, then say so. Don't waffle.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally posted by Elind
You ignore my point. I very much suspect that no US state would refuse to act in a way that delayed a terrorist investigation, even by hours, if they knew that this was the situation, and you ignore the distinctions between common criminal acts and terrorism.


Really - how long, on average, did it take from the application to the US to extradite an IRA terrorist to them being handed over?

You might find it easier to express your answer in years as opposed to hours.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally posted by manny
Oh yeah, he's wrong. We extradited Billy Quinn (killing a cop) and James Smyth (one of the H-block 4 escapees) and others. Still others we've not "extradited" but rather "deported to the place where there happened to be pending charges against the guy." Joe Doherty was an example of this. When he saw the treaty revisions of 1986 coming, he gave up his asylum claim and asked to be deported to Ireland, where he believed he'd be safe from prosecution. The US turned him down and shipped him back to Britain.

Again, we've not been perfect on this score by any means and your point in opposition to the original post here is valid. The other three of the H-block 4 are still here, I think. But it's also not as one sided as Johnson makes it out to be.

Thanks for the info.

It's not terribly surprising that Boris is less than accurate. I suspect his argument for Billy Quinn would be that he was not extradited on terrorism charges, but a "normal" murder charge.

[claimee]

Governor Jennifer M. Granholm today issued an extradition order for the surrender of one of Michigan’s most-wanted fugitives. Gary Gene Garlinghouse, who has eluded arrest for more than 25 years and is currently being held in the state of Texas, is wanted in Michigan on a 28-count felony warrant that includes charges of first degree criminal sexual conduct, kidnapping, possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and conspiracy to murder.http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0,1607,7-168-23442-115797--,00.html
Originally posted by Elind
If you think a 5 month delay, or even a 5 day delay, is OK in this kind of situation ... within what is supposed to be a tightly integrated union, then say so. Don't waffle.

[Manny]

An Italian court approved Britain's extradition request for Hamdi Issac, with a 35-day delay to let the Italian prosecuters finish up with the guy. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,165963,00.html) There's an appeals process which apparently can't take more than 25 days. I think that runs concurrently with the investigative delay, so it looks like Mr. Hamdi will be back in Britain in a little over a month. All in all, not too bad a job.

[brodski]

Originally posted by manny
An Italian court approved Britain's extradition request for Hamdi Issac, with a 35-day delay to let the Italian prosecuters finish up with the guy. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,165963,00.html) There's an appeals process which apparently can't take more than 25 days. I think that runs concurrently with the investigative delay, so it looks like Mr. Hamdi will be back in Britain in a little over a month. All in all, not too bad a job.

Actually I think it was a bloody good job, seeing how tortuous extradition procedures can be.

The Italians got to investigate this guy first 9they had him!), and we now get to pursue a prosecution against him, all in all a great example of European cooperation for mutual benefit..

[Elind]

Originally posted by claimee
quote:Governor Jennifer M. Granholm today issued an extradition order for the surrender of one of Michigan’s most-wanted fugitives. Gary Gene Garlinghouse, who has eluded arrest for more than 25 years and is currently being held in the state of Texas, is wanted in Michigan on a 28-count felony warrant that includes charges of first degree criminal sexual conduct, kidnapping, possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and conspiracy to murder.

http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0,1607,...15797--,00.html



This is relevant to what? Certainly not to the case at hand.

[Elind]

Originally posted by brodski
Actually I think it was a bloody good job, seeing how tortuous extradition procedures can be.

The Italians got to investigate this guy first 9they had him!), and we now get to pursue a prosecution against him, all in all a great example of European cooperation for mutual benefit..

Are you a spin writer for the status quo, or would you care to explain how anyone benefits from what you call a "torturous" process?

A great example of cooperation for mutual benefit would have been, for example, to have given full access to him by the British on day one. The Italians could always have asked for him back if they found they had a case afterwards. As it is, any immediate intelligence value was lost by those who laud the necessity of "torturous" processes.