On Sat, 10 May 2008 16:31:03 +0100, Cynic
wrote:
>On Sat, 10 May 2008 08:39:29 GMT, Palindrome wrote:
>
>>I don't think that you will find many people that agree that foreigners
>>should be able to come here, break laws but escape punishment - simply
>>by returning home to a country which doesn't have such laws.
>
>But that is *exactly* how it works for almost everything. There is a
>huge practical problem involved in having a trial of a person who has
>not broken the law of the country he is being tried in.
>
>It would require finding barristers and a judge who knows the law of
>the country in question - what factors need to be proven, what
>standard of proof, and what constitutes a valid defence.
>
>Not to mention the method of trial itself, which may be significantly
>different in the other country.
>
>The alternative would be to extridite the accused back to the country
>of the alleged crime to stand trial. For entirely pragmatic reasons
>only *extremely* serious crimes are deemed to merit extradition, and
>only then if the country the person is being sent to is deemed to have
>a fair system of justice.
This whole debate is about something that IS NOT HAPPENING.
The law has NOT been changed in the way Cub Reporter suggests.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Windows: XT emulator for an AT.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom |