et's daddy Posted March 9, 2006 #1 Share Posted March 9, 2006 If you commit a crime you shouldnt be able to hide anywhere I know some countries wont extradite due to death penalty that's crap no country should try and supercede anothers laws or help a criminal get away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pax Unum Posted March 9, 2006 #2 Share Posted March 9, 2006 If you commit a crime you shouldnt be able to hide anywhere I know some countries wont extradite due to death penalty that's crap no country should try and supercede anothers laws or help a criminal get away sounds logical.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelekiah Posted March 9, 2006 #3 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I'm trying to think of when it was "permissible" but nothing comes to mind. I know Roman Polanski has a liaison with this 13 year old, which was illegal. He fled to France, and couldn't be extradited to the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welsh Shaun Posted March 9, 2006 #4 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Unfortunately its all about politics, if police forces from different countries were allowed to communicate freely then extradition between countries would be free flowing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bella-Angelique Posted March 9, 2006 #5 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I picked depends on the crime. I do not think people want to be sent to nations under sharia for things they have said in print. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nativechick1989 Posted March 10, 2006 #6 Share Posted March 10, 2006 For . . . There should be no place for a criminal to hide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__Kratos__ Posted March 10, 2006 #7 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Really depends on the crime to me. Say someone flees from China for promting democracy and free speech to the US. In my opinion the US should not give him back to China. Now if someone kills someone in China and flees to the US, the US should give him up to China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
et's daddy Posted March 10, 2006 Author #8 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Really depends on the crime to me. Say someone flees from China for promting democracy and free speech to the US. In my opinion the US should not give him back to China. Now if someone kills someone in China and flees to the US, the US should give him up to China. i agree with you 100% and i never thought of it that way i suppose it would be like handing over Salmon Rushdie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeRadio Posted October 27, 2006 #9 Share Posted October 27, 2006 But what if Upper Boldavia charges YOU with a crime you didn't commit and under laws you never heard of? What if the crime with which you are charged gets you five days (suspended) over here and 50 years at hard labor over there? Should the country in which you live simply ship you over there, no questions asked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagleeye Posted January 14, 2008 #10 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Law and order only goes as far as your military can cover. I'm not surprised that most government's don't respect foreign law. There's no logical reason that they should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swtp Posted January 14, 2008 #11 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I put depends on the crime. If you murder someone or are a pedophile, have done some extreme and violent crime, then there should never be a place to hide or get a free pass! But if you have only said something based on a personal oppinion or some small no no, and your facing years in an inhumane prison or the death penalty for that, then no way should you be sent back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainkiss Posted January 18, 2008 #12 Share Posted January 18, 2008 The problem with saying "depends on the crime" is that you'll never get every country to agree to the list of crimes for which extradition is allowed. Mexico will not return anyone to the US if they are facing the death penalty. Period. The Marine who's suspected of killing the woman who was accusing him of rape and was 8 1/2 months pregnant with, presumably, his child is now thought to be in Mexico. If he made it across the border had has to be extradited to face the charges, the US will not be able to consider the death penalty for him. No, I'm thinking more along the lines of creating extraction teams, licensed by the UN. You want to fetch someone from another country to face trial? Then, you submit a request to the US, and, based on the presented evidence, proof of an actual crime, and a REASONABLE penalty for the severity of that crime, they send Duane Chapman to go haul him wherever he needs to be to face trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustNormal Posted January 19, 2008 #13 Share Posted January 19, 2008 I think if we say it depends on the crime, is wrong. Lets take the case of the 20 year old female Marine in NC who charged a superior with rape, and was pregnant due to the rape. The Marines didnt seem to protect her and she was about to testify in December when all the sudden she went missing. The rapist had said if he got into trouble he would flee to Mexico. Since then, her body has been found in a shallow grave, burned with her unborn baby in his back yard. Now they believe he is fleeing to Mexico. Mexico will not extradite for anything that is deemed a death penalty crime here in the US..So if he is indeed there, we have to promise not to make it a death penalty trial..I believe if you commit a crime beside silly ones, then the other country should send them back..Do the crime, do the time..JMO..JN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savvygirl Posted January 21, 2008 #14 Share Posted January 21, 2008 (edited) Unfortunately its all about politics, if police forces from different countries were allowed to communicate freely then extradition between countries would be free flowing. I agree shaun.The introduction of interpol has made communication between different country's a lot easier,and criminal's easier again to trace and find. Christopher Skase and his involvement with the qintex group is one of the worst cases i have seen.When he fled Australia and went to majorca,and the year's of the australian government trying in vein to extradite him was truly unbelievable.He died a very slow and painful death before anything could be done.I tried to link a article on him but it didn't work.I will try again http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Skase Edited January 21, 2008 by savvygirl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASOP Posted January 22, 2008 #15 Share Posted January 22, 2008 For thats what I ment to vote for I put against yea im awake today. FOR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger Posted January 24, 2008 #16 Share Posted January 24, 2008 If you commit a crime you shouldnt be able to hide anywhere I know some countries wont extradite due to death penalty that's crap no country should try and supercede anothers laws or help a criminal get away i seem to remember a certain country keeping a certain person in jail for a number of years, with out a trial or charge.. and they werent doing anything to fix the matter either, other than torture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now