UK - US Diplomat's wife leaves UK after killing Harry Dunn, age 19, Northampton, Sept 2019 *suspended sentence*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Ironically, we did make a similar request in the past when a Georgian diplomat DUI’ed and killed a teenager. The request to waive immunity was honored by Georgia and the man was returned here for trial- well, returned with certain pre agreed conditions.

The former diplomat from Tiblisi , not Atlanta was guaranteed to serve time in the kinder, gentler federal system instead of local DC prisons and given a light sentence followed by convenient early release. But… the diplomat was returned to the US by Georgia.

At least some semblance of honor and accountability back then. Now it's all about who's got the privilege. Those poor parents. That woman should never have been driving if she didn't know how to do it, and it's disgusting to hear those at the top act like ,"Oh well, stuff happens". Privilege.
 
Dunn suspect 'needs to return' - PM tells Trump
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson tells President Trump that Sacoolas "must return."

If it has come to this level, where the case and its resolution is a continuing point of active discussion between state leaders five months after the traffic accident and death, it indicates the case has taken on a life of its own and is not going away. How it is resolved, most likely that will be worked out largely behind the scenes and will take time.
 
Last edited:
Dunn suspect 'needs to return' - PM tells Trump
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson tells President Trump that Sacoolas "must return."

If it has come to this level, where the case and its resolution is a continuing point of active discussion between state leaders five months after the traffic accident and death, it indicates the case has taken on a life of its own and is not going away. How it is resolved, most likely that will be worked out largely behind the scenes and will take time.

Mr. Johnson can talk on the phone to the President as many times as we wants about this but it is not going to happen. Sadly I think Harry’s family will only hold her accountable with their civil suit but I’m worried all her assets will be transferred to her husband’s name. I’ve wondered if her car insurance would pay out she would have had to have insurance?
 
I wonder if someone with some legal training can speak to Gregjrichards question about the transferring of assets? If a spouse transfers assets, are these assets protected or does the unity of the marriage relationship mean the spouse is also liable for the cost if the civil suit is successful?
 
I wonder if someone with some legal training can speak to Gregjrichards question about the transferring of assets? If a spouse transfers assets, are these assets protected or does the unity of the marriage relationship mean the spouse is also liable for the cost if the civil suit is successful?

I do not have any formal legal training.

That aside, transferring of assets to avoid a court ordered debt resolution is known as 'fraudulent transfer'. These transfers can be voided by the court and the property given to the creditor. But..... the property must be located and the court informed about it. Locating it can be difficult.

As for spousal liability for civil suits, it would depend on the state where the civil suit was placed. Then, it can get very fuzzy....

Most states are not common property states. These states would appear to give broad, or perhaps even very broad protection to a spouse's separate assets, especially in what is called "tort debt (law suit related debt) verse contractual debt from purchases.

But.... even common property states can make a distinction between tort and contractual debt regarding spousal obligations. For example, Texas defines itself as a 'common property' state- but then adds alot of fine print into that definition to the extent that it can be more like a hybrid common / separate property state in some regards.

Then, one needs to factor in what a state's exempt property is. I believe most, if not all states, have forms of exempt property that cannot be seized pursuant to a lawsuit. Say, a 'homestead' residence of a certain value, cars under a certain value, trade tools etc.

But... state law on exempt property can range from very token exemptions to very numerous exemptions with broad definitions regarding 'exempt' that can make actually collecting any lawsuit awards de facto impossible in many cases, even with a court order.

In short, the answers to your questions are very exact (sarcasm):

- Fraudulent transfers can be voided- well, if the transfer can be identified and if the property can be located. Courts do not assist in locating property for seizure.

- Spouses might be responsible for tort debt in some states- but...absolutely not in others and 'most likely not' in still others.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the time you put into clarifying the topic for us. It is a concise explanation that will probably serve as a recurring guide for people on Websleuths who have similar questions over time. Again, thank you.
 
Mr. Johnson can talk on the phone to the President as many times as we wants about this but it is not going to happen. Sadly I think Harry’s family will only hold her accountable with their civil suit but I’m worried all her assets will be transferred to her husband’s name. I’ve wondered if her car insurance would pay out she would have had to have insurance?
I am not sure even that her insurance will be valid unless she has fully disclosed the accident to them and told them she told the police that she took liability for the accident at the time. She also lied to the police that she was not leaving the country. If she is sued then her car insurance would certainly be involved in one way or another. I presume she was insured to drive at the time of the accident so that could be another source of recompense for the family. I am glad they have a good lawyer. Regarding any assets, I am not a lawyer but I don't believe you can transfer assets to avoid liability as the courts would know if that happened and could confiscate them anyway IMO.

ETA another possibility is that she writes to the CPS and admits the offence and it could be dealt with in her absence perhaps so that a settlement through the insurance could deal with it maybe. MOO.

ETA2 I just saw Cryptic's response also on this and agree.
 
Last edited:
Interesting new piece in The Guardian that examines the Dunn case in light of wealth and privilege rather than nationality.

For two high-profile cases are now shaking faith in the system on both sides of the Atlantic. On one side sits Anne Sacoolas, the wife of a diplomat stationed at a US listening base in Northamptonshire, who flew back home to the US in a hurry last year after being involved in a car crash in which 19-year-old Harry Dunn died. She is resisting all attempts to extradite her.

And on the other is Prince Andrew, who was this week accused of offering “zero cooperation” with inquiries into his friend Jeffrey Epstein, despite being contacted by both the FBI and prosecutors investigating the latter’s alleged involvement in sex trafficking. The Queen’s second son is hardly busy at the moment, having been retired from royal duties after an excruciating Newsnight interview about all this, but apparently hasn’t responded to appeals to share anything he might have learned about Epstein. So now lawyers for Epstein’s victims are threatening to subpoena the prince if he ever visits the US again, just as lawyers for the Dunn family are exploring options for getting Sacoolas arrested if she ever leaves the country.


For Prince Andrew and Anne Sacoolas, the law is just an obstacle to navigate | Gaby Hinsliff
 
The thing is, officials seem very comfortable lying like to us like we're idiots. So who knows what's true? This, at least, is a more palatable reason for her to avoid justice. But if this is how she drives in the UK, then I wonder how good she was as a spy. Skills got rusty, to say the least.
 
Harry Dunn family criticise Raab after Sacoolas CIA revelation

It says in the article that "Sacoolas had previously been in the UK between 2013 and 2015."

Just read that. Wonder if she was behind the wheel then? Suggests that one main line of possible defence, that she was woefully unfamiliar with the UK and particularly its RHD driving conventions, could not have been relied on in court.

Indeed, keeping her out of court and far away from the detailed coverage that this case might have drawn seems a likely reason for whisking her back to the US. That strategy has backfired spectacularly, and I expect that the Dunn family and the UK papers will continue to dig into this case and AS's background until some settlement is reached. I just don't seeing this going away anytime soon.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
139
Guests online
269
Total visitors
408

Forum statistics

Threads
609,782
Messages
18,257,896
Members
234,757
Latest member
Cissy
Back
Top