Runaway Maths Teacher

[zebo]

Do we think it was necessary to go through the French courts, apply for extradition and bring him back in handcuffs when he said all along he was willing to return to the UK? Why couldn't they simply have put him on a plane, he wasn't going to jump off!

[jno]

how do you know?

[B00]

Cause he said so jno- silly!

[McMouse]

UK issued a European Arrest Warrant. French police arrested him and put him before a Magistrate. He was in the system and the French authorities were obliged to follow the rules and return him to UK. Don't know about the cuffs.

[baza]

he has lied before, bought a return ferry ticket and only used it one way.

[Octavius]

There is no obligation for another state to hand someone over, and in fact they have legal authority over people within their borders. So it has to be officially and legally applied.

[jno]

very true, baza, if you can't trust a man when he buys ferry tickets, you can never trust him.

[ludwig]

He's untrustworthy. I bet he'd previously promised he was never going to abscond with any of his pupils. That turned out to be untrue.

[pdq1]

What happens when he returns and continues his romance? He may have lost his job but surely they can't restricts his movements. Anyway she is 15 and soon will reach the age where she can do what she wants.

[FredPuli43]

He's got a history of flight. Why should he dictate when he chooses to come back, and write his own rules? He's wanted to face a charge here and we, and the French, are entitled to make him return on our terms, not his.

Yes, the girl will be 16 soon enough.If we'd only wanted him for the sex offence, to which he might answer that he didn't have sex, we might have had some difficulty since she is already of the age of consent in France. But child abduction is an offence in both countries.and inarguable.

[penelope2]

Child abduction ?? Surely abduction is the taking (away) of somebody by force. Didn't see much evidence of force from the CCTV pictures of them boarding the ferry.

[ll_billym]

Procedures in law have to be followed so that when people get tried for the case against them they they don't get off, or certain charges get dropped on technicalities.

Plenty of cases where police etc. did not follow the procedures and this happens.

In this case I think it is interesting that he is charged with abduction rather than anything else, I am not sure what this charge specifically means but I am assuming it has nothing to do with them having sex.

[sandyRoe]

If she wouldn't testify how could he be charged with having sex with her? As she's under 16 the abduction charge should be easiest to secure a conviction.

[jno]

abduction (kidnapping more or less) may also be hard to prove; it may depend on showing that he was in a position of authority even if he was too lovestruck to exercise it and that it was his duty to stop her running away. But they might have difficulty persuading a court that this amounts to abduction.

[FredPuli43]

He's taken a child out of, beyond, the care and control of her parents. That's the end of the story. It doesn't matter whether she consented or not. It's no answer to say he was a schoolteacher, who might be in loco parentis when she's at school or on a school outing. He wasn't in that position at any material time, for a start. He has no real defence.It's immaterial that he is not a classic kidnapper, who might pass the child on to someone else, say for prostitution, or demand a ransom.

[237SJ]

The rule for a prisoner (convicted or non-convicted) to be carried on a UK registered passenger aircraft is that the prisoner has to ask for the transfer and it has to be agreed by both governments so I guess that`s why there was a court case involved. Their escort would always be carrying handcuffs - that`s normal procedure.

[zebo]

The only reason I asked for opinions is that it seemed a bit heavy handed to me, but, if that's the law, then that's the law!

[237SJ]

Well, more or a aviation regulation than a law really (although I`m not completely sure about that). If the person is convicted, there will be two escorts. The reason the prisoner has to ask for the transfer is presumably because that would mean he/she is willing to go and won`t kick off when they get on the aircraft.

[237SJ]

"more OF AN" (I wish there was an edit facility)

[youngmafbog]

FP, be interesting to see if your post stands up when in front of a jury. You may well be factually right but I suspect emotions will get in the way here, especially once the slippery scum lawyers get into full swing.

Remember Jury's can be very fickle.

[FredPuli43]

Yes, youngmafbog, that's what lawyers jokingly call 'jury equity', from the branch of the law called Equity, which is the application of established legal principles of fair play and justice to override strict interpretation of statute or precedent.If you can conjure up any 'defence' which gets past the judge ruling that it isn't one, the jury may feel that the accused really ought not to be convicted and punished and, though they think he is technically guilty, acquit.

Problem is to think of such a defence. They might try arguing that the man genuinely believed that he was in loco parentis and entitled to act as a parent. Not sure that such a mistaken belief would amount to a defence in child abduction; it's not like mistakenly taking an umbrella in a stand because it's identical to yours, which can't be theft because you're not acting dishonestly; but it's worth a run, perhaps, however much the claim runs against any obvious facts.

Chances are, however, that his counsel will advise him to plead guilty to that count. Counsel won't invent a defence; tell the client to give a different account to that which he's giving just to make a new defence fit;and if this man comes up with such a fanciful version, his counsel will test it with him, cross- examine him on it, and ask him to apply some common sense, which the man will do.