Why are we so hard up to have a murderer back? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

aklim · #1 11-26-2010, 12:53 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101125/ap_on_re_us/honeymoon_death

Quote:

LOS ANGELES – An Alabama man who served prison time in Australia for his wife's drowning death during their honeymoon returned Thursday to the U.S., where he faces murder charges that could carry a much stiffer punishment.
Gabe Watson, 33, arrived in Los Angeles on Thursday morning after he was deported on a commercial flight from Melbourne, Australia. Immigration Minister Chris Bowen said [COLOR=#366388 ! important][COLOR=#366388 ! important]Watson[/COLOR][/COLOR] was accompanied by two Immigration Department staff and three Queensland state police officers. Watson cleared customs within an hour and was taken away in handcuffs.
He was booked at a local police substation after his arrival, said Los Angeles police Lt. Aaron McCraney. Watson will likely make a court appearance in Los Angeles before being sent back to Alabama.
Alabama hopes to arrange to bring Watson back to the state early next week, said Attorney General Troy King. King said Australian authorities showed too much leniency to Watson, who served an 18-month sentence in that country after pleading guilty last year to manslaughter. Tina Watson, 26, drowned in 2003 while scuba diving with her husband of 11 days.
Gabe Watson had been in immigration custody since completing a prison sentence earlier this month. Australia, a staunch opponent of capital punishment, delayed his deportation until it received a pledge that U.S. authorities would not seek the death penalty.
"The Australians extorted from the state and the victim's family to water down our justice, just like they watered down theirs," King said.
Gabe Watson will not fight extradition to Alabama because he wants to be home with friends and family, said his attorney, Brett Bloomston. Bloomston accused the prosecutor of grandstanding and trying to emotionally sway the grand jury by convening its session on the seven-year anniversary of Tina Watson's death.
"His goal has been to get to Birmingham to get home to his family, to answer these charges immediately upon release of his custodial sentence in Australia," Bloomston said.
Prosecutors said Watson was indicted by an Alabama grand jury on capital murder in the course of kidnapping, and capital murder for pecuniary gain. The charges were sealed until Watson reached the United States, and King refused to discuss the evidence in the case in detail.
But he said prosecutors believe Watson hatched a plan to kill his wife while they were in Alabama, which gives the state jurisdiction over her death.
"We're obviously anxious to get him back to Alabama," King said.
Bloomston said Watson acknowledged in his plea in Australia that he committed a negligent act, failing to do enough to save his wife. But Watson denies deliberately trying to kill her.
"It's as ludicrous as it sounds for the prosecutor to allege that he traveled halfway around the world, was married to her for 11 days and committed this offense for either financial gain or any other reason," Bloomston said.
Tommy Thomas, the 55-year-old father of Watson's late wife, said he views the upcoming court proceedings as a chance to resolve unanswered questions about his daughter's death. He believes she was murdered.
"Our focus and our goal throughout this entire ordeal has been to see justice done for Tina," Thomas said. "And the only way that we can see that happen is for him to actually for the very first time — because he's never done this — face the evidence before a jury and answer to that evidence."
Gabe Watson, an accomplished diver, was dubbed the "Honeymoon Killer" by the Australian media after his wife drowned during a scuba diving trip on the Great Barrier Reef.
In 2008, the Queensland state coroner found there was sufficient evidence to charge Watson with her death, and he was officially charged with murder a few months later.
In 2009, Gabe Watson — who had remarried — traveled to Australia to face trial.
Officials in Queensland state argued he killed his wife by turning off her [COLOR=#366388 ! important][COLOR=#366388 ! important]air [COLOR=#366388 ! important]supply[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] and holding her underwater.
Queensland Coroner David Glasgow said a possible motive for the killing was Tina Watson's modest life insurance policy. Bloomston said a $33,000 insurance payment was made to Tina Watson's father, not her husband.
Tina Watson's father said his daughter told him before she died that Gabe Watson wanted her to increase the value of her life insurance policy and name her husband as the beneficiary.
King has argued there are no international standards on double jeopardy that prevent Alabama from trying Watson again over the death.
[COLOR=#366388 ! important][COLOR=#366388 ! important]Bowen[/COLOR][/COLOR], the immigration minister, said whether there was a new prosecution was not Australia's concern.
"My role has been to ensure that we fulfill our treaty obligations. We've done that," Bowen told reporters in Canberra. "Double jeopardy is not covered by our treaty obligations."
Under Australia's Extradition Act, a person cannot be deported to face prosecution on a capital charge unless there is an assurance the death penalty will not be imposed.

So what if we had told Bowen: "Go Fawk yourself. He comes back here, he faces murder charges. When convicted, we will hang him high." Where would our friend go? He could stay in Australia and be an illegal there or they could grant him asylum. Or, if they didn't want his ass there, they could turn him back here on our terms. Hopefully the former and not the latter. Why do we want him back, have the expense of the trial, lock him up or keep him alive till we hang him, appeals, etc, etc?

I doubt he would come back willingly so it would be a de facto exile. Or he could go run to Somalia or some other hell hole that might put up with him. Or the Ozzies could keep him and they would have a murder on their hands and they could do what they wish with him but his sentence there is up. Why didn't we learn from the English who exiled their convicts to Australia?

Unfortunately, I have to apologize in advance for this not being a Rep Vs Dem thread but I am curious as to why we want him back.

SwampYankee · #2 11-26-2010, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Unfortunately, I have to apologize in advance for this not being a Rep Vs Dem thread but I am curious as to why we want him back.

Don't fret too much, aklim. I'm pretty sure it'll end up there.

I agree, we should have made no concessions and let the Aussies pay for his incarceration.

aklim · #3 11-26-2010, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SwampYankee

Don't fret too much, aklim. I'm pretty sure it'll end up there.

I agree, we should have made no concessions and let the Aussies pay for his incarceration.

Somehow, I think it might be an indication on how soft Obama is on criminals.
WTF!! He had nothing to do with it.
Oh yes he did. He is Prez and can talk to the AG
But he didn't
And so on and so forth.

Now that it is out of our system, we can go on.

Thing is they cannot lock him up. They tried him, found him guilty and locked him up. At this time, he'd have to be set free, I would think. His Visa has probably expired and they probably won't give him another one. Back here, if he is found guilty, either way, it costs us big bucks. Why not let the Ozzies deal with him? They might give him asylum but now they have a problem on their hands. If he re-offends, people will want blood. If not, who will hire him? He'd be a ward of the state.

Jim B. · #4 11-26-2010, 01:11 PM

Tina Watson, 26,
drowned in 2003 while scuba diving with her husband of 11 days.

"The Australians extorted from the state and the victim's family to water down our justice, just like they watered down theirs," King said.

Shurely shome mishtake !!!????

Jim B. · #5 11-26-2010, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Thing is they cannot lock him up. They tried him, found him guilty and locked him up. At this time, he'd have to be set free, I would think. His Visa has probably expired and they probably won't give him another one. Back here, if he is found guilty, either way, it costs us big bucks. Why not let the Ozzies deal with him? They might give him asylum but now they have a problem on their hands. If he re-offends, people will want blood. If not, who will hire him? He'd be a ward of the state.

The answer to all this probably is found within the annals of the more esoteric parts of the law, such as "Conflicts of Law", "International Law", reciprocity statutes, treaties, good will, and things like that.

"Double Jeopardy" would not apply because he has never been tried in this country.

And:

What about those three students (one of whom is now out on bail and is in Berkeley) who were stupidly hiking in Iraq that wandered over the border into Iran and got caught and arrested and jailed and now are about to go on trial there as US "spies" for doing it?

What about THEM?

And the one who is out of there on bail, if she misses her court date back in Iran, what do youi think the US immigration will do when some Iranian policemen fly back to California to serve the valid arrest warrant from Iran on her for non apearance in the Iranian court for her "spy" trial?

Especially after the Iranians seized the US Embassy there in Teheran and took all those US diplomats and citizens hostages there?

aklim · #6 11-26-2010, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim B.

The answer to all this probably is found within the annals of the more esoteric parts of the law, such as "Conflicts of Law", "International Law", reciprocity statutes, treaties, good will, and things like that.

"Double Jeopardy" would not apply because he has never been tried in this country.

And:

What about those three students (one of whom is now out on bail and is in Berkeley) who were stupidly hiking in Iraq that wandered over the border into Iran and got caught and arrested and jailed and now are about to go on trial there as US "spies" for doing it?

What about THEM?

And the one who is out of there on bail, if she misses her court date back in Iran, what do youi think the US immigration will do when some Iranian policemen fly back to California to serve the valid arrest warrant from Iran on her for non apearance in the Iranian court for her "spy" trial?

Especially after the Iranians seized the US Embassy there in Teheran and took all those US diplomats and citizens hostages there?

That is why I am asking. What if we stood our ground so they would be forced to either release him to the Australian public or send him back on our terms. I am not a lawyer so I am not clear on that but it does seem to me that they would not have grounds to hold him in prison since he has served his time and they cannot release him to the Australian public and they cannot deport him because we threatened to hang him. Besides, are we not better off without him? I think we have caved in to the European countries too on that. I am wondering what would happen if we called their bluff.

As to the students, I doubt we have any treaties with Iran but we should of course send them back. But knowing how the state department does work, I would say they would have lived their natural life out before the warrant comes to bear.