Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nickbat]

I am appalled by this case.

A 65-year old grandfather has been extradited to the US, without the details being heard in a UK court. He has appeared shackled in a UK court and has been denied bail.

I am not only disgusted that a UK citizen can be extradited in this way, but appalled at the couldn't-care-less behaviour of our so-called government.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9125003/Christopher-Tappin-denied-bail-by-Texas-court.html

 

[bigboykarl]

Compare poor Mr tappin with Abu quatada who we can't seem to get rid of

[Martian]

Mr Schaffer said US prosecutors fought to keep Tappin in prison because it would make him more likely to eventually plead guilty in return for a lesser sentence.
 
"The longer you're locked up the more more your morale disappears. You get a feeling of hopelessness and you start hearing stories from people and it just wears you down."

Something tells me their theory just ain't gonna work with that old boy.

As for being extradited without even facing a british court first, what the f*k is going on there and why are we allowing it?

[Olympia5776]

I too was shocked when it was announced that he was being extradited and watched the footage with some anger .
However, BBC had a Barrister on that AM explaining the process and elaborating on the "miscarriege of justice " and " sting " that CT was claiming.
The Barrister was quite firm in the fact that CT was not as innocent as he claimed stating that CT was approached by a third party asking him to procure these batteries ,that are unique and specifically for the Hawk missle system that they were destined for , CT had also to purchase them( knowingly) and fraudulantly alter the paper work to disguise where they came from, what they were , for and the final destination of goods.
The press implied he had just " innocently transported them by road "  from UK to Holland but it seems he was willingly responsible for the whole charade and did it fully aware of the vast profit he could make and the ramifications if he was caught.
He calls himself a victim ,I think he's more a greedy unscrupulous Bastad and his carefully staged look of bewilderment with limp and walking stick is just like his simple lorry load of batteries , a sham.
If the Israelis end up failing to destroy Irans nuclear bomb making facility because their jets and missles were shot down by the Hawk ground to air system then we can all thank the CT's of the world.
Think about it.

[Kevin Wood]

I too was shocked when it was announced that he was being extradited and watched the footage with some anger .
However, BBC had a Barrister on that AM explaining the process and elaborating on the "miscarriege of justice " and " sting " that CT was claiming.
The Barrister was quite firm in the fact that CT was not as innocent as he claimed stating that CT was approached by a third party asking him to procure these batteries ,that are unique and specifically for the Hawk missle system that they were destined for , CT had also to purchase them( knowingly) and fraudulantly alter the paper work to disguise where they came from, what they were , for and the final destination of goods.
The press implied he had just " innocently transported them by road "  from UK to Holland but it seems he was willingly responsible for the whole charade and did it fully aware of the vast profit he could make and the ramifications if he was caught.
He calls himself a victim ,I think he's more a greedy unscrupulous Bastad and his carefully staged look of bewilderment with limp and walking stick is just like his simple lorry load of batteries , a sham.
If the Israelis end up failing to destroy Irans nuclear bomb making facility because their jets and missles were shot down by the Hawk ground to air system then we can all thank the CT's of the world.
Think about it.

Be that as it may, I would expect him to appear in front of a UK court to decide if :

a) The evidence against him was strong enough to warrant extradition being approved.
b) That he could be expected to receive a fair trial (and get all the rights he might reasonably expect, i.e. bail if appropriate)

[Nickbat]

I too was shocked when it was announced that he was being extradited and watched the footage with some anger .
However, BBC had a Barrister on that AM explaining the process and elaborating on the "miscarriege of justice " and " sting " that CT was claiming.
The Barrister was quite firm in the fact that CT was not as innocent as he claimed stating that CT was approached by a third party asking him to procure these batteries ,that are unique and specifically for the Hawk missle system that they were destined for , CT had also to purchase them( knowingly) and fraudulantly alter the paper work to disguise where they came from, what they were , for and the final destination of goods.
The press implied he had just " innocently transported them by road "  from UK to Holland but it seems he was willingly responsible for the whole charade and did it fully aware of the vast profit he could make and the ramifications if he was caught.
He calls himself a victim ,I think he's more a greedy unscrupulous Bastad and his carefully staged look of bewilderment with limp and walking stick is just like his simple lorry load of batteries , a sham.
If the Israelis end up failing to destroy Irans nuclear bomb making facility because their jets and missles were shot down by the Hawk ground to air system then we can all thank the CT's of the world.
Think about it.

You seem to know far more about this than anyone else. How so?

It is my understanding that he was a victim of entrapment by US agents.

"Indeed, a spokesmen for his lawyer previously commented, “This is a case in which the Customs agents caused the offence to be committed rather than merely providing an opportunity for the defendant to commit it. Ultimately the US agents resorted to proactive deceit and told lies in order to attempt to ensnare and entrap a respected British businessman."

I also understand that his profit from the shipment was a mere £500 - hardly enough if he was really aware of the consignment and its destination.

I heartily agree with Kevin's point. The "facts" on which the extradition was requested should have been heard in a UK Court.

Still, if you know better and feel justified in calling him a "greedy unscrupulous Bastad [sic]", then you are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine.   

[Olympia5776]

Oh Nick ,Nick , Nick ..........I never questioned your right for opinion or meant  , it seems , to offend you personally  in calling him that which I did.
You seem to have taken this man to your heart ... commendable .
The extradition treaty between UK and USA is a bilateral agreement which both parties agreed upon signing that they trusted each other implicitly that a fair trial would be given to any and all parties extradited in both directions.
I think , with all respect , that for the USA to request ,and the UK to grant, a highly sensitive  extradition of a UK citizen /suspect it would be based on a little more than a deal resulting in a £500 profit.
And as for his ignorance in knowing what the batteries were for I read some of the court proceedings reports from El Paso ( freely available via Google ) and the additional public revelations of Mr T's business dealings over the last decade certainly don't quash my deep suspicions of the man.
Are we suggesting that Mr T thought that for Iran to surreptitiously and covertly seek to procure banned components for a missle system a deal worth £500 profit would be a reasonable sum to expect or accept ........?
The significant point is that he was a willing party in a highly illegal , and possibly treasonable  act to benefit a country with ill intentions to both ourselves and USA..
Regarding the entrapment aspect , is it not immesureably better that , if true , it was a sting resulting in his arrest rather than the batteries being successfully delivered to The mad mullahs of Iran.
Whichever , he has never ,as far as I know , denied his complicity and therefore willingness to participate in the act but only offered the " poor me " defence.
I'd suggest that if you feel the need to defend poor incarcerated UK citizens abroad who have fallen foul of the legal system in the country of their gaol there are more worthy beneficieries of your sympathy.
Oh , and in response to your first question , I assure you I'm not a Scottish born , Irish based covert US Federal agent..... so speak freely

[Nickbat]

Oh Nick ,Nick , Nick ..........I never questioned your right for opinion or meant  , it seems , to offend you personally  in calling him that which I did.
You seem to have taken this man to your heart ... commendable .
The extradition treaty between UK and USA is a bilateral agreement which both parties agreed upon signing that they trusted each other implicitly that a fair trial would be given to any and all parties extradited in both directions.
I think , with all respect , that for the USA to request ,and the UK to grant, a highly sensitive  extradition of a UK citizen /suspect it would be based on a little more than a deal resulting in a £500 profit.
And as for his ignorance in knowing what the batteries were for I read some of the court proceedings reports from El Paso ( freely available via Google ) and the additional public revelations of Mr T's business dealings over the last decade certainly don't quash my deep suspicions of the man.
Are we suggesting that Mr T thought that for Iran to surreptitiously and covertly seek to procure banned components for a missle system a deal worth £500 profit would be a reasonable sum to expect or accept ........?
The significant point is that he was a willing party in a highly illegal , and possibly treasonable  act to benefit a country with ill intentions to both ourselves and USA..
Regarding the entrapment aspect , is it not immesureably better that , if true , it was a sting resulting in his arrest rather than the batteries being successfully delivered to The mad mullahs of Iran.
Whichever , he has never ,as far as I know , denied his complicity and therefore willingness to participate in the act but only offered the " poor me " defence.
I'd suggest that if you feel the need to defend poor incarcerated UK citizens abroad who have fallen foul of the legal system in the country of their gaol there are more worthy beneficieries of your sympathy.
Oh , and in response to your first question , I assure you I'm not a Scottish born , Irish based covert US Federal agent..... so speak freely

Seems like you've found him guilty already.

The salient points, for me, are:
 
1) He is innocent until proven guilty
2) The extradition request should have been judged by a UK Court, not politicians, in consideration of the facts as presented by the US.
3) Mr Tappin should have had the right to launch a defence to the allegations in a UK court.
4) There is no doubt that he was involved in a sting operation; that is not in dispute.
5) There is no way that this 65-year old, with no prior convictions, could be considered a danger if released on bail. He is in solitary confinement 23 hours a day. He is unable to speak to his sick wife. He is apparently ineligible for the less secure custody options as he is "foreign".
6) The trial will be years away. His only hope of seeing his family again and returning to the UK is to plea-bargain, which will reduce his sentence - even if he is innocent.

It's all wrong. IF, and it is a big if, he did wrong then he should face a fair and open trial in the country in which the offence was alleged to have been committed: i.e. The UK.