Looks like a politically motivated prosecution to me. The U.S. is right to deny extradition since it does not appear mrs . Sacoolas would get a fair trial.
Based on what we know so far, there is no evidence to support a criminal charge of "dangerous driving" which implies either a wanton disregard for the consequences of her actions or intentional dangerous driving, neither of which can be supported by the facts as we know them.
1. Mrs Sacoolas left the base late at night;
2. She was accompanied by her teenage child in the car;
3. She had been in the UK for three weeks;
4. She had not been drinking alcohol or was under the influence of drugs;
5. After the accident, she called the police and stayed with mr.Dunn until they arrived;
6. She cooperated with police at the scene of the accident and submitted to a breathalyzer test.
The "dangerous driving" charge is only based on the fact that she was driving on the wrong side of the road, but UK prosecutors have to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. There is already more than reasonable doubt that this was just an unfortunate accident since: she had only been in the UK 3 weeks; it was late at night; she was not used to driving on the left side of the road.
If she did go back voluntarily, she would be denied bail and held in jail for 12-18 months or more until the trial, but even if found guilty, she is unlikely to receive more than 12-24 months in jail. If she is found innocent, as is likely, she will still have spent substantial time in a foreign jail.
The fact that the Crown Prosecutors know all that and would still charge her shows that they are caving in to mob pressure and that this is a political decision. Under the circumstances, mrs. Sacoolas could not get a fair trial in the UK given all the negative publicity and ongoing media circus.
She is right not to go back and U.S. courts will never agree to her extradition.
__________________
|