Jurisdiction question

by Praiaaa 24.07.13 10:33

Trying to understand the jurisdiction issue.
Supposing a crime took place in another country - eg Portugal. The crime is investigated by the Portuguese police. They form a view of what the crime was, but there is insufficient evidence to obtain a conviction under Portuguese law.
So they shelve the case, to be re-opened if new evidence emerges.
Then a foreign police force - for example UK police takes an interest, because possible derivative crimes have taken place in the UK - eg fraud.
Presumably the latter force - lets call them 'The Met' for the sake of argument - have no way of charging suspects for the original crime, all they can do is if they find more evidence, they can present it to the Portuguese police, and it may or may not be sufficient to re--open the investigation.
Regarding the secondary crimes on UK soil, surely these can only be prosecuted if the trial for the original crime has secured a conviction?
I am thinking of a hypothetical situation where a victim dies, the body is concealed = crimes to be tried in Portugal; the perpetrator(s) try to raise money under false pretences to fund a search for the missing person, whilst knowing that the person is actually dead = crime to be tried in the UK, but only after the outcome of the Portuguese trial.

by Angelique 24.07.13 10:37

Yes in think word you/we are looking for is "fait acompli".

Everything is held in abeyance - the actual crime, the cover up and subsequent supposed fraud and two countries with different procedures, simply because this is what was required.

by Angelique 24.07.13 10:47

Just as an aside, has it ever crossed other members minds that it was also necessary for there to be much debate around the disappearance of said child. Insofar as it helps any campaign or fund raising because by debate we are keeping "the show on the road". Even in respect of the "trolls" and "pro sites" actively and sometimes using abusive language that simply give discussion sites even more determination never to give up.

by AndyB 24.07.13 11:46

While generally your presumption that the second force could not prosecute the original offence is correct there are exceptions. These are murder, manslaughter, bigamy, offences under the official secrets act and certain sexual offences. Whether any of these apply would be largely determined by the cause of death of the hypothetical victim.

There's an interesting discussion on jurisdiction (from a British perspective) in the Link below

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jurisdiction question

Jurisdiction question

Re: Jurisdiction question

Re: Jurisdiction question

Re: Jurisdiction question

Log in for more topics