Why Is Stating The Facts So Wrong Here?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-51117457
The PM is bang on the US are unlikely to extradite and there is little we can do beyond tit for tat refusal to comply with their requests.

[Ken4155]

Teacake @ 12.30; "You can't kid me that every morning she wakes up, this is not nagging her every day, all day."
@ 12.44. "I don't think any knows what she's really doing or thinking day by day."
Can't be both.

[ladybirder]

I don't know how she can live with herself and I hope it haunts her every day. She should do the decent thing which would surely help Mr Dunn's parents in their grief as she is only compounding it at the moment. Perhaps BoJo was trying to gently nudge them into accepting extradition is unlikely to happen. Was he really expected to know it was the dead boy's brother's birthday and if he did should that have stopped it from saying it?
I do feel very much for the boy's parents, what Ms Sacoolas has done and is doing is cruel.

[bednobs]

"Does anyone know the circumstances under which the BBC were communicating with BoJo? Did he call them and tell them or did they ask him in an interview?"
they asked him in an interview

[emmie]

it won't happen, it was never going to succeed, i feel terribly sorry for Harry Dunn's family though.

[ToraToraTora]

2Pee; "1)and actually your fact is wrong - no one the UK has asked to be extradited from the US has so far failed " - where have I said that it has?

[ToraToraTora]

2pee: "excuse me - werent you the one who had my comment on diplomatic immunity and the our man in Tehran who arrested, removed the other day? " - not me guv, I rarely report things.

[ToraToraTora]

in reality if she did come back and face trial, she'd almost certainly get a suspended sentence anyway. The problem is that if she came back she'd be on remand for months while the wheels of justice turn.

[emmie]

won't happen.. she isn't going to come back

[jim360]

Part of the reason that Sacoolas is unlikely to come back is because the US puts a high premium on the rights of its own citizens over those of other countries. This is not necessarily meant as a criticism -- in this case it's shameful, as it means that Sacoolas will not face justice; my point is that the same should presumably apply to our own PM. It is in the interests of Dunn's family that the case be pursued as rigorously as possible, even in the face of American intransigence. In that sense, Johnson should have simply stuck to the UK's position, namely that they will make every effort to persuade the US to allow extradition.

Of course, Johnson is right that there is little chance* that the USA will agree to this, but it's not his position or his job to say so.


*Or, arguably, wrong: there's no chance.

[Ellipsis]

> "Boris Johnson told the BBC that he believed the chances of Mrs Sacoolas being extradited were "very low"." Which they are. So?

So the family had agreed with government officials not to comment on the extradition process while proceedings were ongoing ... but Johnson himself thought it appropriate to say that the the process had little chance of success.

Or as New Judge almost put it, he should not have commented on what is essentially an ongoing legal decision.

> Does anyone know the circumstances under which the BBC were communicating with BoJo? Did he call them and tell them or did they ask him in an interview?

It was an interview on breakfast TV, but he wasn't asked what he thought the chances of success were. He added that bit himself, going off piste as he is wont to do. Otherwise the interview was perfectly good, he was saying that it was a difficult situation and the UK Government were supportive and doing all they could for the Dunns.

[Arrods]

At least they should keep trying to extradite her so that the issue is not forgotten.

PP has a point in that I thought the US had a better record of extraditing their citizens to UK than vice versa.

[Peter Pedant]

.and actually your fact is wrong - no one the UK has asked to be extradited from the US has so far failed " - where have I [dear sweet logical free tee] said that it has?

Here:

The PM is bang on the US are unlikely to extradite.....

written by one Free tee innit?

[ToraToraTora]

what are you on about 2pee? I never mentioned previous extradition requests.

[Peter Pedant]

// unlikely to come back is because the US puts a high premium on the rights of its own citizens over those of other countries.//

christ that is a bit nineteenth century innit?

and anyway american citizens have no greater rights to a fair trial than anyone else do they - so that in effect we have Trump saying american citizens have to face the consequences of their actions except when I say they neednt = and that is not the american way is it?

[Peter Pedant]

and here is a quote by free tee on extradition

The PM is bang on the US are unlikely to extradite

oh dear normal day on AB I conclude

[ToraToraTora]

do you know any different 2pee? Are the US unlikely to extradite or not?

[Ellipsis]

I think the P-P-point is that they've always extradited in the past, when asked, as we'd only ask if there was a good reason. That's the nature of our relationship.

If a horse has run 100 times before and won, it's likely to do the same the 101st time out - unless it's now a dead horse, of course. Is our relationship with the USA a dead horse?

[Peter Pedant]

well done ellipsis
best answer to the little fella
he reads and understands

and if it is in a legal sphere, it is called precedent ( OK OK I know this is AB)

and if you dont like the idea that one can judge what will happen from what has happened in the past - you just as well invest in Flybe - ter daaah !