US says it has right to kidnap British citizens

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 14, 2002
6,278
6,950
113
43
#1
Source

David Leppard

AMERICA has told Britain that it can “kidnap” British citizens if they are wanted for crimes in the United States.

A senior lawyer for the American government has told the Court of Appeal in London that kidnapping foreign citizens is permissible under American law because the US Supreme Court has sanctioned it.

The admission will alarm the British business community after the case of the so-called NatWest Three, bankers who were extradited to America on fraud charges. More than a dozen other British executives, including senior managers at British Airways and BAE Systems, are under investigation by the US authorities and could face criminal charges in America.

Until now it was commonly assumed that US law permitted kidnapping only in the “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects.

The American government has for the first time made it clear in a British court that the law applies to anyone, British or otherwise, suspected of a crime by Washington.

Legal experts confirmed this weekend that America viewed extradition as just one way of getting foreign suspects back to face trial. Rendition, or kidnapping, dates back to 19th-century bounty hunting and Washington believes it is still legitimate.

The US government’s view emerged during a hearing involving Stanley Tollman, a former director of Chelsea football club and a friend of Baroness Thatcher, and his wife Beatrice.

The Tollmans, who control the Red Carnation hotel group and are resident in London, are wanted in America for bank fraud and tax evasion. They have been fighting extradition through the British courts.

During a hearing last month Lord Justice Moses, one of the Court of Appeal judges, asked Alun Jones QC, representing the US government, about its treatment of Gavin, Tollman’s nephew. Gavin Tollman was the subject of an attempted abduction during a visit to Canada in 2005.

Jones replied that it was acceptable under American law to kidnap people if they were wanted for offences in America. “The United States does have a view about procuring people to its own shores which is not shared,” he said.

He said that if a person was kidnapped by the US authorities in another country and was brought back to face charges in America, no US court could rule that the abduction was illegal and free him: “If you kidnap a person outside the United States and you bring him there, the court has no jurisdiction to refuse — it goes back to bounty hunting days in the 1860s.”

Mr Justice Ouseley, a second judge, challenged Jones to be “honest about [his] position”.

Jones replied: “That is United States law.”

He cited the case of Humberto Alvarez Machain, a suspect who was abducted by the US government at his medical office in Guadalajara, Mexico, in 1990. He was flown by Drug Enforcement Administration agents to Texas for criminal prosecution.

Although there was an extradition treaty in place between America and Mexico at the time — as there currently is between the United States and Britain — the Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that the Mexican had no legal remedy because of his abduction.

In 2005, Gavin Tollman, the head of Trafalgar Tours, a holiday company, had arrived in Toronto by plane when he was arrested by Canadian immigration authorities.

An American prosecutor, who had tried and failed to extradite him from Britain, persuaded Canadian officials to detain him. He wanted the Canadians to drive Tollman to the border to be handed over. Tollman was escorted in handcuffs from the aircraft in Toronto, taken to prison and held for 10 days.

A Canadian judge ordered his release, ruling that the US Justice Department had set a “sinister trap” and wrongly bypassed extradition rules. Tollman returned to Britain.

Legal sources said that under traditional American justice, rendition meant capturing wanted people abroad and bringing them to the United States. The term “extraordinary rendition” was coined in the 1990s for the kidnapping of terror suspects from one foreign country to another for interrogation.

There was concern this weekend from Patrick Mercer, the Tory MP, who said: “The very idea of kidnapping is repugnant to us and we must handle these cases with extreme caution and a thorough understanding of the implications in American law.”

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights group Liberty, said: “This law may date back to bounty hunting days, but they should sort it out if they claim to be a civilised nation.”

The US Justice Department declined to comment.

Additional reporting: Anna Mikhailova
_________________________________
 
Sep 28, 2002
1,124
5
0
#2
It seems like the kidnapping would still be a crimainal offense in the nation in which it occured so then should they have the right to kidnap the kiddnappers and the cycle continues..............................................
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,001
86
48
#3
^Then someone would get nuked.

This is ridiculous. The people running our nation are fucking idiots and I hope that 99% of them (mostly repubs and dem's) die.

Kidnapping is okay? Mexico should kidnap that faggot Dog. Then see how America likes the shit. Countries should start kidnapping Americans just to prove a point (just don't kill them, lol)...
 
Nov 20, 2005
16,870
21
0
43
#4
Kidnapping is okay? Mexico should kidnap that faggot Dog. Then see how America likes the shit. Countries should start kidnapping Americans just to prove a point (just don't kill them, lol)...
damn i agree with you here.

~k.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,001
86
48
#5
Well it's true. Dude went to Mexico and brought back someone illegally. The Mexican authorities wanted him, the US said fuck you. Britain should say, "fuck you," too.

This is a very bad position for the US to be taking with the way our country looks already. We've got some dumb ass Public Relations people working for the country. And dumb ass people in general making decisions as to what is right and wrong in America.

I'd really like to see what the US would do though, if another country tried to do that. I bet they would say the country invaded the US and then the US would bomb them or some shit, or raise prices for whatever they sell to that country, or just tell em to fuck off.

This country is a fucking joke. It makes me sad to live here, knowing that this country is fucking everyone else around the world (fuck china tho, and russia). But then again, Europe isn't that much better. The EU keeps making attempts to unite Europe even further with ONE constitution for all the countries. Good thing that got voted down...but it won't in the future. This whole planet, at some point, will probably be governed by one massive governmental body, under one set of rules, and one set of values, and religious beliefs. I hope that I am dead by then, and if I have kids, I hope they start a revolution/resistance/movement.
 
Nov 20, 2005
16,870
21
0
43
#6
Well it's true. Dude went to Mexico and brought back someone illegally. The Mexican authorities wanted him, the US said fuck you. Britain should say, "fuck you," too.
i don't think that will happen..?

~k.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,001
86
48
#7
Britain probably would let the US take their citizens. But that's cause England is pretty bitch made in my opinion. It's like America, only a washed out, watered down English version (TV, music, all that).

The Brits don't want to fuck with the US. Tony Snow bounced and said he felt like a "battered wife" or "beaten wife" or some shit like that. They're nuts in their gov't. When I was in London last month I watched the news every morning and they always had some wild, retarded shit going on. Even more retarded than shit in the US...only England isn't taking away most civil rights of their citizens yet.
 
May 14, 2002
6,278
6,950
113
43
#9
This country is a fucking joke. It makes me sad to live here, knowing that this country is fucking everyone else around the world (fuck china tho, and russia). But then again, Europe isn't that much better. The EU keeps making attempts to unite Europe even further with ONE constitution for all the countries. Good thing that got voted down...but it won't in the future. This whole planet, at some point, will probably be governed by one massive governmental body, under one set of rules, and one set of values, and religious beliefs. I hope that I am dead by then, and if I have kids, I hope they start a revolution/resistance/movement.
If some other country did this to any American citizen America would declare that country to be "terrorist" and probably start giving them loads of shit and pull out some of them old propagenda tricks out of the closet which they are very experienced in already. And then start raising arms at that country
We would say they have a big plate infront of their heads... Fuck being so double standard.

About the EU.. I (and a lot of other people) were so happy the "European constitution got voted down by us and France. The FUCKED UP thing is now our politicions say "We talked alot with other European countries in Brussles and now we have a watered down version of the constitution so now we do not need to hold the refferendum (sp?) anymore because all of the people will vote yes anyway. FUCK NO, were the hell did democracy go?!?!!?!?! I haven't seen it in a while in the modern western world... I did see a mighty good example of democracy when the socialist leader whom some will refer to as a dictator of Venezuala Chavez accepted his loss in his last refferendum.
So we voted no on the European constitution but we end up getting it anyway?!!? WHAT THE FUCK!?!?!

Maybe I should go to the US and just kiddnap someone and bring back with me. See how they like their laws then. I should kidnap Bush, he must be wanted in a lot of countries for commiting war crimes anyway.