American Driver Sentenced in UK Crash But Mystery Deepens: Tinker, Taylor, Soldier, Interpreter?

Finally, our International Man of Mystery has been sentenced in that year-ago UK car crash to which he's plead guilty at every court appearance he's ever had.  

A typical news article is here:

An American who fled Britain after a car crash that left a mental health nurse seriously injured drove like an “arrogant young boy racer” the night of the collision, a judge told him.

Issac Calderon was sentenced to 32 months in jail after losing control of his Honda Accord following a high-speed overtaking manoeuvre and crashing head-on into a Mercedes being driven by Elizabeth Donowho in July 2023. 

Sentencing Calderon on Thursday, Judge Martin Jackson said: “Seven days before this accident you had bought a car and had not taken the trouble to make sure that it carried insurance.

- snip -

The judge was told Calderon worked for an American company in Peterborough as an interpreter and that he said to police after his arrest that he “played follow the leader” when he was driving.

Calderon’s lawyer told the court that he was not in the UK “as an American army official of any sort” and was driving along the A4103 between Worcester and Hereford to meet a friend he had met through online gaming.

Other UK news accounts added a little more on that lawyer's statement: ‘He was here working as an interpreter for an American company in Peterborough,’ [Patel] told the court. ‘He wasn’t going to see anyone from the SAS or anything of that sort.’

We further learned that "Calderon had been married for a couple of years, Mr Patel said, and was earning money in the UK to send back to his wife and his parents ... It was also said that his injuries meant he had to get a taxi to his workplace, costing £100 per day, before he was ‘let go’ when the firm found out about his involvement in the accident, and then left homeless ... He was then faced with a ‘stark choice’ and took up a contractual entitlement to a flight back to the United States paid for by the unnamed firm."

The Crown Prosecution Service's public statement is brief and dull, but here it is FYI.

This info fills in some of the picture of our Agent Double O Aspergers. Married man, devoted son, car owner, gamer, and employed by an unnamed American company as an interpreter. 

With him being a good Tejano from Humble, Texas, I'll accept that he can speak Spanish. But, well enough to be a certified interpreter? Maybe not.  

I see there are some distribution centers in the region in which the crash occurred. Perhaps he worked on import-export to customers in Spain? 

The mystery continues. 

  

Harry Dunn Sequel Review: Slow Pacing, Terrible PR, Doom Production

He may look dumb but that's just a disguise 

He's a mastermind in the ways of espionage 

Ballad of the Uneasy Rider - Charlie Daniels (1973) 

Well, what do you know? The extradition came off at long last, so our International Man of Mystery may actually appear in a UK court someday. 

Yet, the UK tabloid reaction to this stunning advance of Justice has so far been oddly subdued, it seems to me. No national celebration either, such as attended every bit of the original Harry Dunn production. 

  

The Daily Mirror had as much detail as any, here, and at least one quote I haven't seen elsewhere. 

Both public and press seem fundamentally bored with our Agent Double O Aspergers, despite how the tabloid build-up of this case featured endless repetition of the terms 'intelligence soldier,' secret services, Official Secrets Act, SAS, and much more of an equally lurid appeal.  

Have the West Mercia Police lost all appreciation of the desperado they have taken in? I hope they're keeping him under constant observation in their most Mission Impossible type escape-proof cell, because I shudder to think what capabilities an 'intelligence solider' from the Texas National Guard could bring to bear on a rinky-dink police lock-up. (Check out the original movie in the Rambo franchise if you want details.)  

By the way, how unusual is it for the U.S. to agree to the extradition of a citizen to the UK for criminal prosecution? Not unusual in the least, it turns out. In fact, with the sole exception of the immune diplomat in the Harry Dunn case, the U.S. has approved every single extradition request from the UK. 

You can find this statement in the record of a question period in Parliament from 2020: 

"Since the [current extradition] treaty came into force [in 2007], the United States has never refused to extradite somebody sought by the U.K." 

That sounds definitive. So then, you might wonder, why does the Dunn family's spokesman and brain trust keep saying the opposite? From the Daily Mirror's story:

He said: “We all know America is highly reluctant to extradite nationals and we have had to move heaven and Earth to make that happen. It is a minor miracle to see the defendant back in our jurisdiction.” 

That's easy. Because telling self-aggrandizing lies is what he does. Expect plenty more.

Another quote from the Daily Mirror, this one from a prosecutor in the case, is just as self-aggrandizing if not exactly a lie.    

Prosecutor Kate Leonard said: “We worked closely with the US to ensure our extradition request was expedited.”

Really? Lets look at the timeline of key events. The crash occurred in July, 2023. The American driver skipped a UK court appearance and became a fugitive in December 2023. He was taken into custody in the U.S. on an extradition warrant in July 2024, and a leisurely ten weeks after that, in October 2024, he was picked up by West Mercia Police and returned to the U.K. His next court appearance is scheduled for November 2024. 

She calls that "expedited?" Hey, I work for a government too, but that is some slow-rolled process.

 

Frankly it's getting to be a struggle to maintain my interest in this one. Here's hoping our Texas National Guardsman will break bad and shake things up in that lazy low drive land.

 

Isaac Calderon Extradition Update is Rumor-Only For the Moment

“Now, the US Department of Justice has said officers from West Mercia Police can come and collect Mr Calderon.” But no one from the West Mercia Police or the DOJ is named or quoted, so that news is based on nothing but a shady lawyer’s mind reading. https://t.co/K3C8K3106k

— TSB (@TweetingTSB) September 12, 2024

The story is so far being carried only by BBC Hereford and Worcester, which sounds a bit provincial, and the bigger media are all standing back. 

 

Good for them, since BBC H&W is going out on a limb by trusting the Harry Dunn family's spokesman / advisor / PR hack and all-around hustler. Evidently, he professes to know the hopes of the West Mercia Police and also the mind of the U.S. Justice Department, which is rather more than a prudent journalist should take his word for. Until sources that have names and speak for the record say that extradition has been approved, don't believe it.    

Moreover, when it comes to extradition the U.S. Secretary of State, and not the Justice Department, has the sole authority to approve the removal of a U.S. citizen to a requesting country. The family's spokesman - so far - seems to lack insight into the SecState's mind. 

Extradition will probably be approved eventually, but nothing in the BBC H&W's story is credible. 

   

Harry Dunn Sequel Finally Gets Close to Show Time

That goofy kid cracks me up, but - seriously - don't lend him your car.

Well, a judge in Texas has now certified that Agent Double O Aspergers can be extradited to the UK. That sends the matter to the executive phase of extradition, and to the final decision of the SecState. 

Assuming Blinken agrees to extradite, there will be a trial date set in the UK, and if we have learned anything from following this story, it is that the UK takes a very long time to process this stuff. 

I'll skip ahead a bit and just assume that our hapless driver will be convicted. Upon that, I expect attention to shift to the international prisoner transfer program which creates the possibility that our International Man of Mystery could be sent back here to serve his UK-imposed sentence in a U.S. prison. 

I'll further predict that Team Harry Dunn will work with the few crumbs of speculation and misreporting that it has to insist that this sad sack is actually a master spy, and that he was at the center of some monstrous U.S. plot to do something unimaginably sinister when he caused a car crash last year. 

They'll have fun with that although, frankly, it will be a big, big, step down from their glory days of White House visits and media attention from years past. 

It's a sequel, after all, and those usually disappoint the audience.

      

Some Progress On the Harry Dunn Sequel, As Houston Court Hears Extradition Case

Isaac Calderon, international man of mystery

Many months ago we heard that the UK has requested extradition of a U.S. citizen who caused a traffic accident in which a British women was injured, an event that raised misguided comparisons with the Harry Dunn case. 

Finally, this week there was evidence that an actual extradition proceeding is really happening. Specifically, there was an initial hearing in a Houston court in which the defendant appeared and the court heard evidence provided by the UK police force that investigated the accident.

Here's the Sky News story about the court appearance: US soldier admits vaping before crash that left UK nurse unable to walk, extradition documents reveal. 

The nonsense starts with the term "soldier." The defendant is reportedly a member of the Texas Army National Guard, which is a one-weekend-a-month-and-two-weeks-a-year kind of thing. (Someone should explain to the UK press that the NG is our equivalent to their Territorial Army.) But the UK press and social media will cling to anything that makes this simple traffic accident by a private U.S. citizen into a machination of the U.S. government, and especially of its covert intelligence world.    

Agent Double O Aspergers might seem a very unlikely candidate to be a mastermind of espionage, but for fans of Team Harry Dunn, he'll do. 

The nonsense escalates from there, with the terms "Official Secrets Act," "intelligence solider," and "Secret Service" freely sprinkled all over news stories about the case. Ominously, they speculate he might even have been visiting the SAS base in Herefordshire, which suggests he was up to bilateral skullduggery.  

As for the real 23 year-old Texan behind all the media nonsense, we learned at the court hearing that he told the UK police he was vaping while driving too fast (70 MPH in a 50), struggled to use an unfamiliar stick shift, and was passing cars despite being perpetually confused by those foreign markings on British roads. He also said he was driving on personal business, and did not have insurance. 

I'm still curious about who owned the car. I'm assuming it wasn't a rental, given the lack of insurance.  

Well, it doesn't look good for our Texas Guardsman. However, there is still a long legal road to travel before he can be sent back to face UK justice. 

 

Courtesy of the U.S. Justice Department, here's a summary of the process that must be followed before a U.S. to UK extradition can take place:

“During the judicial phase, a court will determine whether the extradition request meets the requirements of the applicable extradition treaty and the law of the requested country. If so, the judicial authority will rule on whether the person may be extradited. If the judicial authority rules that the person may be extradited, the case enters the executive phase, in which an executive authority of the government of the requested country, usually a Prime Minister, Minister of Justice or Minister of Foreign Affairs (for the United States, the appropriate executive authority is the Secretary of State), will determine whether the requested country will surrender the wanted person in extradition.”

Both the judicial and the executive phases may be appealed.

All that process might just take us beyond the inauguration of the next POTUS, and hence, the next Secretary of State. 

 

The mystery grows.  

Back to Harry Dunn, Inquest Wrap-Up: Empty Threats, and When's the Movie?

Finally, the official verdict on the Harry Dunn fatal road traffic accident of five years ago is in. 

Northamptonshire coroner Anne Pember has determined that he died of “injuries sustained during a head-on collision” with a car on the wrong side of the road. 

Yes. Surprising, I know. She really got down to the bottom of that mystery. Evidently the wheels of official inquiry grind exceedingly slow over there, but they grind exceedingly fine. Or something like that. 

The UK government's somewhat lame response is here.

 

Coroner Pember's bottom line was two recommendations ("prevention of future deaths notices") for the local ambulance service - who, if you ask me, got away extremely lightly - and one for the visiting forces at RAF Croughton that they provide some driver training. If I recall correctly from years-ago news stories, that training has already been instituted. 

Of course, all of that was just a backdrop for the latest news media hit by the Mum and her unscrupulous mouthpiece. Their act has gotten stale and predictable, but it still had a little more news value than I found in that skimpy coroner's report. 

Here's a good account of the coroner's conclusions and an even better account of the family's objections, in its entirety: Dunn family accuse US government of obstructing inquest after coroner criticism. 

The family of teenage motorcyclist Harry Dunn have said they are looking forward to working with “the next government to establish this public inquiry” after accusing the US government of “obstructing” their son’s inquest.  

Both representatives of the US embassy and driver Anne Sacoolas were absent from the four-day inquest – prompting spokesman Radd Seiger to say the US government’s position is that “lives of UK citizens like Harry ultimately do not matter”. 

Mr Seiger told the PA news agency that Labour had promised the family a public inquiry into how Sacoolas was able to cause Harry’s death and leave the country after diplomatic immunity was asserted on her behalf.  [TSB note: notice that we are not told exactly who in Labour promised him that. Don't believe it until someone with a name says so in public.]   

Northamptonshire coroner Anne Pember criticised the US government over a lack of training for diplomatic personnel at RAF Croughton before Mr Dunn’s death.

She recorded his death as being as a result of “injuries sustained during a head-on collision” with a car on the wrong side of the road. 

Ms Pember also issued three prevention of future death notices: two to the Health Secretary regarding drugs carried by paramedics and overstretched ambulance services, and one to the Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence addressing the US’s training of drivers in the UK.

Speaking outside the court, Mr Dunn’s mother, Charlotte Charles, reiterated her “disgust” at Sacoolas’s and the US Embassy’s decision not to attend the inquest – labelling it “disrespectful” to her son.

She told reporters: “It further bolsters my opinion that they have no regard for myself or my family, our wider family – they just don’t care.”

Sacoolas appeared before a High Court judge at the Old Bailey via video-link in December 2022, where she pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving.

She was advised against attending her sentencing hearing by her employer, which prompted the family to say they were “horrified” that the US government was “actively interfering in our criminal justice system”. [TSB note: the remote court appearance was coordinated with the court in advance and done with the agreement of the Crown Prosecution Service. It interfered with nothing but the family's revenge fantasies.]

Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb handed her an eight-month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months.

Addressing the US government’s role prior to Harry’s death, Mr Seiger told PA: “It was not enough for them to kill Harry. It wasn’t enough for them to then kick Harry’s family in their darkest hour and seek to deny and delay the justice that they were entitled to.

“As we have all seen this week their attitude and approach to keeping their British hosts safe has been laid to bare and they have positively obstructed the Coroner’s inquiry and deprived the family of the answers they were entitled to as to why no-one has ever addressed the issue of safety of UK citizens.

“The next question is why have the UK governments over the years been happy to sit on the sidelines watching this scandal unfold.

“This Tory government have refused to get involved. Labour have promised us a public inquiry into the way we were treated and the failure on the part of both governments over the decades to address the issue of safety which has led to thousands of people being killed and seriously injured.”

He continued: “The UK government have also now seen how the US government treats our courts and judges.

“The question for the next British government is are they just going to stand by and let the Americans continue to treat us all and our lives with such contempt.

“The US ambassador at the time of Harry’s death was Woody Johnson. He told the UK government after he died that there were far more important things than Harry’s life.

“That is the American government’s position. The lives of UK citizens like Harry ultimately do not matter. 

“We won’t let them get away with it and we look forward to working with the next government to establish this public inquiry.

“We were all horrified as a nation to see how the US government treated Harry’s family. This must never happen again.

“The American national anthem ends land of the free home of the brave. They haven’t demonstrated an ounce of bravery at all preferring to run, hide and obstruct.”

Obstructing? By the American driver providing her testimony without the spectacle the family wanted? That's not obstructing, but more like not playing the other side's game. 

I like how Seiger played his pitchman role and rattled off that long string of complaints and empty threats. It’s the same tune he’s been playing for five years now, so he ought to have it down pat. 

Which makes we wonder, yet again, why he and the Mum don’t go large by writing an as-told-to book, or better yet, a movie deal? They must have more than enough friendly journalists who could help with that by writing a book or movie treatment. 

And then, yet again, I wonder whether the family's Rasputin might be such a loose cannon that he's spoiling the deal for any publisher or studio that's interested in doing business with the family. 

Recall that the first legal firm they engaged in their U.S. civil suit left the case after expressing mysterious concerns about ethical conflicts. The most likely suspect for those ethical conflicts was the pitchman himself, or so I suspected. 

Serious money could be involved in a book and/or movie deal, and that brings serious oversight by serious lawyers. It could just be that they've decided to keep away from this deal so long as the family remains inseparable from their spokesman. 

Back to Harry Dunn, Inquest Day Two: Expressions of Remorse, Performative Outrage Toward USG

"I'm so sorry, I'm going to get you help," said the US government official.https://t.co/1Cdtr1YrpR

— Ravneet Nandra (@RavNandraITV) June 12, 2024

The report at the link above is the best of the inquest reporting that I've seen today. None of them go beyond the few facts presented by the American driver plus her expressions of regret and remorse. 

It was a fatal road traffic accident caused when a recent arrival to the UK instinctively drove on the wrong side of the road for about 20 seconds. That's it. There is nothing more to see here, and nothing more to learn about the accident that the driver could provide. 

But there is still more emotional-political grief that can be wrung out of the tragedy, and it will be so long as the Dunn family remains in thrall to their 'advisor.' 

Although none of his promises to them have ever panned out - not his assurance that the driver did not have diplomatic immunity, not his promise of McDonalds-coffee-spill-lawsuit-$millions, not his rock-solid guarantee that the driver will be extradited for trial, and so on - the family still seems to prefer his next soothing vision to the reality of grieving for its loss. 

As for his latest false promise that the driver would return to the UK for the inquest either in person or by live link, that was obviously a non-starter. The only reason for a live appearance would be for the family to badger the driver to its heart's content. Rather like a lite version of that very popular Olde English sport of bearbaiting. 

The driver declined the invitation to be the bear.

Back To Harry Dunn, Inquest Kicks Off Five Years Later

It's an odd practice, I think, but in the UK they wait until a death has happened and all the criminal and civil consequences have been settled - possibly years later - before holding a coroner's inquest. What more can there be to learn about the death at that point? 

At yesterday's opening day of the long-awaited albeit futile proceeding, the main thing we learned was that the mother of the victim hasn't moved on with her life yet, and probably never will. She and her horrendous 'advisor' spent most of their time hating on the American driver for the fact that she will not attend the inquest in person, just as they have done for the past five years. 

Of course she will not be present at that or any other event in the UK, not after five years of hate, slander, and political attacks on her, mostly directed or assisted by the Mum. Instead, the driver will submit some testimony via her local counsel on the inquest's second day. 

Here's a summary of what happened yesterday, Harry Dunn inquest begins with killer's absence 'bitterly disappointing' to family:

An inquest into the circumstances of a motorcyclist’s death is beginning in Northampton without the teenagers convicted killer present.

Harry Dunn was killed on August 27 2019 when the motorcycle he was riding was struck near RAF Croughton by a vehicle driving on the wrong side of the road.

His killer, Anne Sacoolas, then fled back to the United States claiming diplomatic immunity, but later pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving in October 2022.

Sacoolas absence has been described as "bitterly disappointing" by Harry’s mother, Charlotte Charles.

She said it is "incomprehensible" as a mother that Sacoolas would "hide", stating it is “disrespectful to Harry."

She said the inquest is "incredibly painful" but that she is "hopeful" of getting answers.

The family hope to learn why more wasn’t being done to improve safety around American airbases in the UK and that they are "deeply concerned" the issue is being neglected.

The mother said her son’s death "feels like yesterday," and that he is "desperately missed."

HM Coroner for Northamptonshire, Anne Pember, issued a request to US government employee Anne Sacoolas last year in which she invited her to attend the inquest remotely.

But it was confirmed in court that Sacoolas would not be appearing in person or via video link.

Sacoolas’s lawyer, Ben Cooper KC, told a pre-inquest review hearing in November that the US citizen was "keen to assist the inquest."

According to the proposed witness list, Sacoolas’s evidence is set to include a "significant statement" from her, sections of her police interview in October 2019 and her witness statement penned in December last year.

Alongside family members, emergency service crews that treated Harry Dunn are due to give evidence before the coroner.

Harry’s father, Tim Dunn, who arrived in the area shortly after the crash in 2019 said it "looked like a hospital scene” and that the night felt like a "nightmare."

Harry’s twin brother Niall said his brother had helped him with social anxiety, stating “I wouldn’t be where I am now" without Harry. "Everyday we feel the effect of him not being here" he said, and that he "smiles less, feels less joy."

The US State Department asserted diplomatic immunity on behalf of Sacoolas and she was able to leave the UK 19 days after the fatal collision.

The 45-year-old appeared before a High Court judge at the Old Bailey via video-link in December 2022, where she pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving.

Sacoolas was advised against attending her sentencing hearing by her employer, which prompted the family to say they were "horrified" that the US Government was "actively interfering in our criminal justice system."

Justice Cheema-Grubb handed Sacoolas an eight-month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months. The inquest is due to last four days with Sacoolas’ evidence read on the second day.

It'll be Groundhog's Day for Team Harry again tomorrow, and every other day, for so long as social media exists.  

The Harry Dunn Case Sequel Gets Off To a Slow Start But Shows Promise

It isn't the biggest international extradition case, but it's the only one we have right now, and it might yet offer a few tricky plot twists. 

Today a little bit of news came out on the matter of that American driver who left the UK before he could be charged in a traffic accident, all of it attributed to an interview with the driver's father.

Firstly, no one should ever talk to a hostile news media, any more than he should (voluntarily) talk to the authorities. I hope the father in the case will get that message. But, from what he said today we can confirm a few facts that were only hinted at weeks ago when this first became news.

The driver, Issac Calderon, is a private citizen who was working on a contract job in the UK - not further identified - which he obtained due to the security clearance he had been granted as a member of the Texas National Guard. He was released from that job after the traffic accident, leaving him unemployed in the UK. 

His former employer provided him a ticket home, possibly in accordance with whatever terms of employment he had with them. That employer is potentially a major party of interest in this case, if the accident occurred while Calderon was driving on company business, and especially if the employer owned the vehicle he was driving. If that is so, then there must be a UK insurance company involved, you might assume. 

Moreover, the driver was left indigent in the UK, having been released from his job by the time he got out of medical treatment for a concussion and other injuries. That puts a new spin on his decision to leave for home on 25 November rather than wait for a court appearance on 1 December. With no job and no money, was he supposed to live on the street while going through the UK's legal process? 

Here's the gist of the story:

The father of a US citizen who left the UK after being charged with causing a mental health nurse serious injury by dangerous driving has pleaded for donations after the FBI contacted the family about “extraditing him”.

Issac Calderon, 22, is accused of being responsible for a car crash in July which left 56-year-old Elizabeth Donowho unable to walk for six weeks.

Calderon was due to appear at Kidderminster Magistrates’ Court on December 1 following the incident on the A4103 near Shucknall in Herefordshire.

He was labelled a potential “flight risk” by police, but was able to leave the UK on a commercial flight to Texas on November 25.

A fundraiser has since been set up on the crowdfunding site GoFundMe by the suspect’s father, Manuel Calderon, in which the family are asking for 15,000 US dollars (£11,760) to help with legal fees.

Calderon’s father said the suspect was able to return to the US because “the company that contracted him purchased him a ticket”.

Manuel Calderon said his son, whom he called “Isac”, had been offered a contract job in the UK “due to his security clearance with the Texas National Guard”.

-- snip --

Calderon’s father said his son still has problems with concussion and a fractured humerus following the collision.

In his plea for donations on the crowdfunding page, he said: “My son was released from the contract job shortly after and could no longer support himself in the UK.

“He reported this to the court but they were not concerned with his financial problems. “My son was able to return home because the company that contracted him purchased him a ticket.”

-- snip --

Mr Calderon continued: “My concern for my son was for his wellbeing since at that time he had no funds and still needed his injuries to be looked at.”

Here are some FAQs regarding extradition courtesy of the U.S. Justice Department. It sounds like the process can get very prolonged, what with separate judicial and executive phases to be completed before the final decision is made by the SecState. 

And that SecState has quite a bit of latitude since, according to this publicly available source of information, he "may consider issues properly raised before the extradition court or a habeas court as well as any humanitarian or other considerations for or against surrender ... [and] also will consider any written materials submitted by the fugitive, his or her counsel, or other interested parties." 

Hum. Assume for a moment that all the UK tabloid gossip about 'activities coming under the Official Secrets Act' isn't complete nonsense after all. Were the SecState to find that some U.S. national security interest would be implicated by a trial of Calderon, he would then have to weight that in the balance against the non-fatal injuries done to the British motorist, which hardly rise to the level of serious international crime, after all. 

Throw in some humanitarian concern for our unemployed and convalescing Texas National Guardsman, plus practical consideration of the UK insurance settlement that we may presume to have been made to the victim, and who knows if he might not decline extradition?

Anyway, there would be enough of an argument there to fuel a good old rousing social media circus. 

The Remake Is Never As Good As The Original (Disappointing Review For Harry Dunn Case Sequel)

You may have seen the news about another car crash in England in which an American driver injured a local citizen. Despite the UK news media's best efforts to make some drama out of it - as in, the driver is 'associated with secret services,' was on his way to visit the SAS base at Hereford, and doing work that might be covered by the Official Secrets Act - all of that is complete bollocks. There's nothing to see here, folks. It's a bland traffic accident.

The only interesting thing about the case is that the driver returned to the U.S. after he was released from hospital, resulting in an arrest warrant being issued for him when he failed to show up at his court date.  

This isn't a case of Harry Dunn redux, with all sorts of interesting matters involving diplomatic immunity, international politics, Britain's Small Man Syndrome, and the ability of social media to make people lose their minds. No, this one is just about a 22-year old private citizen in the UK on a work visa for a job of some kind (TBD) on a U.S. base of some kind (also TBD), who will in due course be rendered back to England to face criminal and civil penalties for injuring, seriously but non-fatally, a fellow motorist. 

Here's as good a news article as any with the few details that are known with any reliability, plus all the baseless speculation and heavy-breathing insinuations of deep, dark, U.S. government skullduggery that the tabloid media, aided by the Dunn family's buffoon of a spokesman, can invent. 

The latest twist in this unremarkable tale is that the UK media have tracked the driver down to the wonderfully named town of Humble, Texas. 

By the way, the original cast of the Harry Dunn Story will get together one more time for the curiously late inquest into his death, which seems to be lightly penciled in for next June. See more on that here. I'll be there with bells on.

Harry Dunn Case Redux: Cosplay Justice Was Good Enough

 

In the end, all it took to reconcile the Dunn family's demands for justice with the UK government's political embarrassment over the reality of diplomatic immunity was a pretense of a criminal trial. 

Pretend that the defendant is present in a UK court room, and listen to someone in a powdered wig pronounce a stern suspended sentence (while acknowledging she is powerless to impose any actual sentence in reality) and all the players will go away more or less satisfied. 

Since we're learning lessons, here are two important lessons that I think my own government is missing. 

First, we should take a big cue from how the UK handled immunity when one of its diplomats killed a cyclist in a road traffic accident, which was by the offending diplomatic leaving the host country and neither he nor the UK ever mentioning it again. What, no lawsuit? No request to waive immunity? No extradition request? No moralizing? No public vendetta against the diplomat involved? No, there was none of that. 

Second, we should adopt the UK's practice of denying the public any information about incidents in which it claimed immunity on behalf of its diplomatic staff. Take a look at the quick brush-off the Foreign Office gave to a 2014 request in FOI release: diplomatic immunity claimed by British diplomatic staff:

FOI ref: 0995-14 explains that diplomatic immunity has been claimed on a small number of occasions and if the details were to be released it could lead to the individuals concerned being identified. It has therefore been withheld under section 40 (personal information) of the Freedom of Information Act

"Personal information," right. You wouldn't want any personal information, or even identities, getting out or else the UK press might stalk and harass your people. 

If we're in a lesson-learning mood, I hope those two lessons will get absorbed over here. Next time - and of course there will be a next time - just stonewall. 

Did Harry Dunn Case Save the Chinese Consul General in Manchester From Arrest?

The violence at China’s consulate in Manchester was unacceptable.

6 Chinese consulate officials, including the Consul General, are being removed from the UK following the disgraceful incident in October. pic.twitter.com/nxyqtJ1627

— James Cleverly🇬🇧 (@JamesCleverly) December 14, 2022

So after two months of thinking it over, the UK has finally decided to expel the Chinese consular officials who roughed up a British National (Hong Kong) protester outside the consulate. Am I completely crazy for thinking it might not be a coincidence that the decision came one week after the sentencing in the Harry Dunn case? 

Call me crazy, but I notice that consular officers are not accorded diplomatic immunity. They have their own consular immunity under international law, but that is more limited than the diplomatic kind, especially in that it does not include immunity to the criminal jurisdiction of the host country except in cases directly relating to consular functions. 

In other words, those consular officers in Manchester could have been arrested and prosecuted. That is not just a theoretical option. A few years we arrested the Indian CG in New York, and Italy convicted in absentia and extradited a U.S. consular officer who had served in Milan. 

Well, well, well. What's all this then? Rt Hon Cleverly is missing a good one here because he certainly could have arrested those Chinese offenders, just as surely as he could not have arrested the American driver in the Dunn case, since she enjoyed the diplomatic kind of immunity. 

That example of the U.S. Vice Consul in Milan is especially pertinent since her case turned on exactly this point that a consular officer - vice a diplomat or an Admin and Technical staffer - does not enjoy immunity from criminal jurisdiction except for acts related to their consular function. The lawsuit she filed against Hillary Clinton (here) confirms that she was serving in Milan as a consular officer, having previously served as a Political Officer (a diplomatic agent) in Rome. 

Of course, as a consular officer, her status under international law did create this interesting argument in her defense:

"De Sousa categorically denies having any involvement in the alleged kidnapping of Abu Omar. She also rejects the allegation that she was a principal planner of the alleged operation. Even if the allegations were true, though, her actions clearly fell within the scope of her official duties and thereby entitle her to diplomatic/consular immunity."

I believe lawyers call that kind of thing 'arguing in the alternative,' as in, “my client the Consular Officer didn’t do it, but, even if she did do it, that crime would have been part of her job and therefore covered by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.” The Chinese CG might have tried that defense. 

Getting back to the UK Foreign Office and Rt Hon Cleverly, I just wonder whether his long delay in booting those Chinese officials from the UK had something to do with the timing of last week’s judicial empty gesture in the Harry Dunn case.     

Did the UK decide not to arrest and charge those Chinese gentlemen due, at least in part, to the complete impossibility of ever explaining to the public that the American driver in the Dunn case had immunity and the Chinese Consul General in Manchester did not? 

That could have turned into quite the public opinion disaster, and just as they had gotten the Dunn case settled. Don’t tell me there aren’t any FO or PM staffers who would have thought along just those lines.

Stranger things have happened in government.

After the Sentencing, Some Lessons Yet to Learn

Foreign Secretary James Cleverly posted a press release yesterday on the sentencing of Anne Sacoolas:

Anne Sacoolas has finally been sentenced in a British court.

Since Harry’s death in August 2019 we have been clear that Ms Sacoolas should return to the UK to face British justice.

Since she chose not to, virtual hearings were arranged as the most viable way to bring the case to Court and give justice to Harry’s family.

I want to pay tribute to the incredible resolve of Harry’s family and I hope that the judgment provides some closure.

We have learnt important lessons from this tragic incident, including improvements to the process around exemptions from diplomatic immunity and ensuring the US takes steps to improve road safety around RAF Croughton.

Oh, Foreign Secretary James Cleverly has some more lessons yet to learn, if we are to take that press release at face value. 

First, diplomatic immunity is exercised by the sending state and not by the individual concerned. She did not choose to not return for the sentencing, she followed the USG's instruction that she not return. The choice was not for her to make, and neither the sending state (us) nor the host state (them) is free to choose whether or not to abide by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and international law.

 

No one but the Dunn family actually thought she would ever return. 

Foreign Secretary Cleverly knows all this, so that press release of his is really constituent service, at best, or more cynically, a pandering to the outrage mob hoping that it will chase the bait he’s thrown it and not come after him. 

And that's the next lesson he has to learn, because the family's manic 'advisor' is a grandiose narcissist who lives for the validation he gets from whipping up a mob.

He has lots of material to work with in the next couple years, and much of it he'll fling right at the Foreign Secretary. 

Try to dodge the torches and pitchforks, Rt Hon Cleverly.

Harry Dunn Case Ends in Suspended Sentence, Plus Declaration of War on "the Real Enemy"

Right from the start, which was three years and three months ago, the tragic death of Harry Dunn presented a political problem for the UK authorities. It's bad optics when a person with diplomatic immunity causes a road traffic fatality, because every government knows the protected party will be allowed to depart the host country and not be prosecuted. Persons with such status are immune to the criminal jurisdiction of the host country under international law. 

In President Obama's words - when referring to an incident in Pakistan several years ago - diplomatic immunity is a principle that all nations of the world have adopted in their mutual interest. Yes, it is. We do it, the British do it, and everybody else does it, too.  

In the Dunn case we have the rare situation of a host government which got so much internal political pressure that it transgressed that principle by charging an immune person with a crime and requesting that the sending state extradite its protected citizen back to the host country for prosecution. Social media was probably the critical factor in bringing that much pressure via a riled-up public.

Skipping ahead two years, the UK prosecutors (Crown Prosecution Service) evidently entered into extended negotiations with the defendant's lawyers and, most likely, U.S. government parties, to come to a compromise in which the CPS would go through the motions of a trial while the immune party would stay out of the UK's jurisdiction, making any sentence a judge might impose an empty gesture. In fact, "empty gesture" were exactly the words used by the judge at today's sentencing hearing to describe any arrest warrant she might issue. 

But, a sufficiently stern empty gesture maybe would placate the victim's family, or so I imagine they thought.

After seeing today's sentencing hearing and the statements made by the family afterward, it's clear that strategy was a big mistake. It would have been far better for the USG to simply refuse to waive immunity and otherwise stand silent. At most, we should have repeated Obama's statement and then said nothing more. 

If you have any interest in the case you probably watched the judge's presentation in court today and know the bottom line: a suspended sentence of eight months incarceration and disqualification from driving for one year. The judge arrived there by finding, first of all, that the defendant's offense of careless (vice dangerous) driving was "not far short" of dangerous, thereby justifying incarceration for a period of 15 months. Then, she acknowledged some mitigating circumstances which reduced the sentence to only eight months. All just hypothetical, really, since the judge several times made it clear that she would have no practical way to enforce either a custodial or non-custodial sentence on someone not in her jurisdiction. 

The most interesting of the mitigations was a statement the USG provided the court to the effect that it advised the defendant not to return to the UK for the sentencing hearing, despite the judge's order that she return, since doing so would place significant U.S. interests at risk. 

And that was that. If the family had been in the least placated by those results, then maybe it wouldn't have been a massively bad idea to strike a compromise between immunity and punishment. But, once the hearing was over, the family and its 'spokesman' took to the Sky News cameras outside the courthouse and made it clear that, far from being satisfied, they are only getting started on public incitement and verbal abuse of the defendant. 

Naturally the first to speak was the blowhard spokesman who said, among other things, that "our real enemy here is the U.S. government." The UK government is in his sights, too, since he promised an extensive coroner's inquest "hopefully sometime next year" plus a parliamentary inquiry and "extensive discussions with the Foreign Office." He ended by repeating his declaration of war on the USG: "if they want a war, they've got a war."

Next up was not the Dunn family but instead the spokesman's son, whose name I didn't quite catch but I think it was "Fredo." He joined in his old man's feckless declaration of war against the dastardly Americans, and even added "me and my team will focus on exposing them." He has a team? How cute. 

Finally the mother got a word in, calling the sentence "pretty much what we expected" and making some bitter remarks about the defendant, the saddest and most revealing of which was that it's "unfair how she's getting on with her life."      

The mother also replayed her emotional victim statement for Sky News, since it was not streamed on the court video. 

The interview ended with the added attraction of some live Sky News video from Washington DC in which an obnoxious reporter ambushed the defendant leaving her lawyer's office. The Mum and her spokesman did some color commentary on the attempted ambush interview, and made some more insulting remarks about the defendant.

All in all, it ought to be clear that there is no middle ground when a government maintains diplomatic immunity. Insist on it, point to Obama's excellent statement about it, and then say no more.

The Curtain Rises Tomorrow on the Last Act of the Harry Dunn Trial

Harry Dunn: Anne Sacoolas to attend sentencing hearing by video link https://t.co/TT7MeFds6G

— BBC Look East (@BBCLookEast) December 6, 2022

After three years and many a twist and turn, tomorrow the American driver in the case will be sentenced in a UK court for the offense of careless driving. Her appearance will be remote via video and she will not be present within the jurisdiction of that court. That obviously restricts any practical sentence the judge could impose, which probably comes down to a suspended sentence, fine, and some form of community service (to be served over here). 

This should be the climax of the legal, diplomatic, political, and personal dramas that have surrounded what would otherewise be an ordinary albeit fatal road traffic accident. Usually, the climax of a drama is followed by a denouement in which the characters get on with their lives. But in this case? No way will the family be satisfied by whatever takes place tomorrow. 

They - meaning, of course, their advisor - have already signaled their outrage by a broadside of tweets and press releases that followed yesterday's announcement by the court that the judge supervising the trial has accepted a joint application by both the defendant and the prosecutor to allow the defendant to remain out of the court's jurisdiction during the sentencing hearing. 

That decision was hardly a surprise, since that's what the defendant did in her two previous court hearings, not to mention that the USG has absolutely and repeatedly refused to waive her diplomatic immunity. The judge could hardly have foreshadowed that decision any more than she had done at the last court hearing, in which she accepted the guilty plea while noting that she is powerless to impose any sentence the defendant doesn't voluntarily accept. 

Surely the family knew all along that they will have to deliver their impassioned victim statements to a video screen and not to their nemisis in the flesh. The outrage they're expressing today must be largely performative, although no one can doubt they are suffering. 

As usual, the family's awful advisor is doing all the talking for them, so take that into account. 

In addition to outrage and phony surprise, he's been displaying his trademark legal incompetence by screaming that "the United States government is now actively interfering in our criminal justice system" when it advised the defendant to appear via video link. Interesting take, since the judge accepted a joint application by both the defendant and the prosecutor to allow a remote appearance. I tell you, a carnival somewhere lost its pitchman when that guy went to law school.

Tomorrow will not be the end of this story, you can be sure. There's the coroner's inquest, the book, the movie, and who knows what else still to come. 

For one thing, there is a whole separate trial still to come of a different fatal traffic accident involving a female USAF service member who, it seems as of now, will be tried in UK civil jurisdiction rather than by U.S. military justice as per our Status of Forces Agreement with the UK. That one has the elements of a second Harry Dunn trial. Brace yourselves. 

 

Sentence in Harry Dunn Case to Depend Upon Display of Remorse

Here's the best of today's news reports on the Harry Dunn trial, US citizen Anne Sacoolas urged to prove ‘genuine remorse’ over Harry Dunn death, in which the judge urged the defendant to return to the UK for sentencing about one month from now as a display of remorse, with the implication that she will calibrate the sentence in accordance with the requisite remorse.

Adjourning sentencing until next month, Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb told Sacoolas that although she could not compel her to face justice in person, it would provide “weighty evidence” of “genuine remorse”. 

Speaking outside court, Mr Dunn’s mother Charlotte Charles said that “of course” she wants Sacoolas to return to the UK to be sentenced. 

Mrs Charles told the PA news agency: “I do very much hope that she listens to the judge’s words and makes the effort to come back because that will truly show us all how remorseful she is.

Of course, the judge also acknowledged that she has no power to compel a return, or anything else, frankly, since the U.S. will not extradite someone with diplomatic immunity. 

What will the judge do, you may wonder, if the defendant remains outside the UK on sentencing day? Impose a longer suspended sentence? Because that's just the kind of futile gesture she has available to her. 

As for the prosecutor, he'd made peace with his surrender on the Crown Prosecution Service's preferred charge of dangerous driving, and noted that the defendant's plea to a lesser offense had been negotiated with both the family and his higher-ups.

“The plea that has been entered was one indicated at magistrates’ court and indicated indeed before that as being offered by the defendant. 

“It has been considered at the very highest level and with the very greatest care and with close consultation with Harry’s family.”

We'll see if that close consultation survives when the defendant does not return.  

 

Plea Accepted in Harry Dunn Trial, Sentencing to Follow, Judge Concedes Powerless to Compel Return to UK

BREAKING: Former US spy Anne Sacoolas pleads guilty to causing the death of #HarryDunn by careless driving. She appeared at the Old Bailey via video link from Washington.

— Lisa Dowd Sky News (@LisaSkyNews) October 20, 2022

That's one more step to a conclusion of this long drawn-out affair. Not the last step, though, since we've still got to get a sentence that can be served in the U.S. and presumably consisting of nothing more than a fine and community service, just as the defendant has offered to do all along. 

The big deal today was that the Dunn family has evidently lowered its expectations to accept a conviction on the lesser charge of careless driving. That's a climb-down from what they've apparently been insisting on until now, and thus tying the hands of the Crown Prosecution Service.  

So, first we'll have the sentencing, then the public humiliation of the defendant - at least, we will if the UK tabloids have anything to say about it - as she does whatever that community service consists of. Followed by the coroner's inquest that the family has been calling for, which in the UK must come after any criminal proceeding despite the evident pointlessness of that sequencing. 

And after that, what happens? At best, the UK public loses interest in the matter, with a consequent loss of its political utility. At worst, the family takes offense at a piddling sentence and spends the rest of their lives the same way they're spent the last three years. 

Since I'm an optimist, I hold onto the crazy hope that the mum will finally see through her charlatan 'advisor' and denounce him for the three years of wrong information, alienating bombast, and malignant narcissism that he's subjected her to. (Most unlikely, but I can hope.) 

          

Harry Dunn Case Finally Has a Criminal Court Hearing, But Defendant Stays Out of the Jurisdiction

It was all of six minutes long and entirely administrative, with the only result being that the American defendant was ordered to appear at another court on October 27 where she will be charged. Exactly with what remains to be determined. The prosecutors want to charge her with dangerous driving - which carries a 14 year maximum - and the defendant's side wants to plead guilty to a lesser charge of careless driving.

Of course, the basic reality is that the defendant is agreeing to participate in this trial purely out of concern for the overall diplomatic relationship between our two countries, I assume. The UK High Court has already affirmed that she had immunity to the criminal jurisdiction of the UK, and that is an ironclad defense against even so much as having to give testimony, much less to ever returning to the UK.   

Far and away the best reporting on today's hearing was in this Daily Mail UK article. With all that dialog it seems like a practically verbatim transcript. 

Her lawyers indicated she would plead guilty to the lesser charge of death by careless driving, which carries the maximum of five years imprisonment, the court heard.

Sacoolas had diplomatic immunity asserted on her behalf by the US government following the collision outside RAF Croughton, and was able to leave the UK 19 days after the incident.

Wearing a blue suit jacket and a spotted scarf, she appeared next to her lawyer Amy Jeffress via video-link from the United States for the six-minute hearing.

Harry's parents Charlotte Charles and Tim Dunn, alongside Harry's twin brother Niall, arrived wearing either a green tie or a green scarf in memory of the teenager.

Sacoolas looked straight ahead throughout the hearing.

Asked to confirm her name she said: 'Hi, I'm Anne Elizabeth Sacoolas.'

She went on to confirm her date of birth as August 28, 1977.

Her barrister, Ben Cooper, KC, said: 'I just wish to confirm for the record there is no indication of plea in relation to the charge of death by dangerous driving.

'There will in due course be a guilty plea to the charge of death by careless driving.'

Prosecutors will have to decide whether that plea is acceptable to them or not, the court heard.

Prosecutor Duncan Atkinson, KC, said: 'She is charged with causing death by dangerous driving which is an indictable only offence and we therefore invite her case to be sent to the Crown Court.'

The offence of causing death by dangerous driving carries the maximum of 14 years.

Sending the case to the Old Bailey, chief magistrate Paul Goldspring told the defendant: 'I hope you followed most of that.

'The first thing I have to do is send your case to the crown court.

'I'm going to grant you unconditional bail in this case - that means there are no restrictions from the court on you.'

The chief magistrate told Sacoolas she would be required to appear in person at the Old Bailey.

He said: 'That may change because there will be a joint application to allow you to attend by video-link as you have today.

'Do you understand?'

Sacoolas replied: 'Yes.'

The Dunn family told the PA news agency they would not be commenting on the case until the conclusion of criminal proceedings.

Sacoolas, whose address was not provided to the court as the chief magistrate was content with her lawyer's address being provided instead, was granted unconditional bail to appear at the Old Bailey on October 27.

Note that the defendant has local British representation, and from a "formidable defence advocate" no less.

A "formidable defence advocate" who "is tireless in representing defendants." He is particularly experienced at handling US extradition requests and also highly capable of conducting extradition cases relating to complex human rights issues." One of the best senior juniors in extradition. He completely immerses himself in the case." "His dedication to the cause is impressive. He is very well known for high-profile American cases, which he does very well due to his extensive experience." - Chambers and Partners 2019

That phrase he's “one of the best senior juniors” has a little Monty Python-ish feel, doesn't it? Well, senior / junior or what have you, the Barrister will get even more well known for handling high-profile American cases after this one.

Lastly, there are the parents and family of the victim. They have shown an impressive message discipline the last several months, avoiding public events and media opportunities. They didn't even show up for the lame motorcycle protest at U.S. Embassy London on the third anniversary of their son's death. Their horrendous advisor has done all the media work lately, and that has amounted to little more than a few re-tweets. 

I can only read between the lines, but it seems that the family's demands for maximum criminal punishment have tied the hands of the Crown Prosecution Service until now, just as they seem to have screwed the pooch by rejecting an initial settlement offer and driving their first set of U.S. lawyers away in the civil suit that was finally settled one year ago this month. 

Now that the defendant has offered a guilty plea to the lesser offense of careless driving probably followed by some court-ordered community service in the USA, will the prosecutors allow the family's demand for emotional satisfaction to override their judgment as to what's achievable when you have a defendant who has diplomatic immunity and doesn't actually have to play along with any Crown court?

I give it only 50-50 odds that the CPS will accept that offer. 

    

On Third Anniversary, Harry Dunn Supporters Continue to Search For Unspecified Justice

Statement from the Foreign Secretary on the third anniversary of Harry Dunn's death pic.twitter.com/lsQSFWNVGj

— Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (@FCDOGovUK) August 27, 2022

The GB News story was typical of UK media this weekend, that is, lots of calls for "justice" but no details about what that would mean, exactly. 

Oddly, the family did not show up in any news media interview or public event. Their spokesman was reduced to retweeting news articles on the anniversary observance and inviting supporters to light cyber candles. 

The only concrete action was taken by a small group of bikers - hardly more than a dozen, judging from photos - who parked their bikes in a pedestrian garden in the vicinity of U.S. Embassy London and ran their engines and horns for one minute.

   

 

So, take that, Uncle Sam! (Assuming, of course, that whoever was present in the embassy on a Saturday morning could hear anything through the blast-resistant windows of the building.) Know that those protestors promise to be back for another minute next year, and every year, and be properly chastised.

"It is Understood" (by whom is unclear) the UK May Resubmit Extradition Request in Harry Dunn Case Next Month

A couple UK news outlets today are running this odd not-quite-a-news story that promises, but fails to deliver, anything actually new about the Harry Dunn case. 

Read it here: Harry Dunn family to seek extradition of alleged killer if criminal case fails. 

The confusion starts with the headline. The Dunn family will seek extradition of the American driver "if the criminal case fails?" How's that again? An extradition is necessary to prosecute a criminal case; if the criminal case fails to materialize, then what would be the point of an extradition request? 

Things get even more vague as the story go on.

"Dunn family supporters will call for her extradition if plans for a criminal trial by video link in the UK have not been agreed by the third anniversary of Harry’s death on August 27 2019."

-- snip --

“If there is still no agreement by the third anniversary, everyone is primed to resubmit the extradition request,” said a political source. “This cannot go on indefinitely. We cannot do the inquest until the conclusion of the criminal case.”

There are no real sources in the story, just insinuations. Let's see: we have "a political source" saying that "everyone" wants to submit a new extradition request. Only the UK Home Office can do that, but no one in this story speaks for them. Anyway, they already requested extradition and were refused, so how likely is it that they will step on that same rake again? 

"It is understood," the article says, that the Crown Prosecution Service has done such-and-such. But then, no one is quoting the CPS saying anything at all. 

"A government source" is said to refer to the CPS' last public statement on the case, which followed its embarrassing back-down from a court appearance that it had scheduled and then had to vacate, but that's as close as it gets. 

The only one this article quotes by name is the activist lawyer Mark Stephens, who has no apparent connection of any kind to the case, but nevertheless purports to tell us the inside story of what the U.S. and UK authorities are negotiating. Who told him? Maybe it came to him in a dream, since I don't think the authorities in either the U.S. or the UK are on secrets-spilling terms with him. 

The third anniversary of the fatal road traffic accident is no doubt going to be a difficult time for the Dunn family. By talking up more false hopes, their advisors and well-wishers are again showing their instinct for making things worse.