aegix drakan said:
We aren't talking about him just hopping state lines here. This is leaving the country entirely, which is MUCH harder to chase you over.
If you hop state lines, it becomes harder to arrest you since the police in the state you committed the crime aren't allowed to pursue justice outside of their state (jurisdiction), meaning they have to co-ordinate with the police in the area you are in order to bust you, which takes time to do, especially since the new state you've gone to isn't likely to have extensive records on you. You're not the first to think "oh I could just hop state lines after a robbery". LOTS of criminals do it. It's not "invalid" because you left the state. It's just more time consuming and difficult for the cops, so for smaller crimes, they tend to get ignored.
Now amp that up to 11 when it comes to hopping countries.
There's a REASON why Edward Snowden and the WikiLeaks guy haven't been arrested and brought back to the US. It's because nations do NOT have police authority in other countries. You can't just send a US cop to go arrest someone on UK soil, for example. It's a violation of that nation's sovereign rights and will REALLY piss them off (it used to be considered an act of war, even). Some countries have extradition treaties to make the process easier (it becomes similar to just hopping state lines in that case. They get the information on the suspect and then arrest him and send him back), but in a lot of cases if you go to a new country it becomes impossible to prosecute you for crimes done in another country and massively inconvenient to arrest you and send you BACK to that country for prosecution. I doubt japan is going to raise enough fuss about this guy sexually assaulting some women that the US or UK will get off their asses and arrest him and send him back. Too much paperwork and effort for them to arrest the guy, considering he didn't commit murder or grand robbery or anything "huge". He "just" sexually assaulted a bunch of women. Hardly something most nations will think is worth the time to chase someone in another country for.
Now, if king moron DOES go back to Japan, he's liable to be arrested for his crimes. But as long as he doesn't go back (or waits until the statue of limitations on the crime expires), it becomes unlikely he'll ever be prosecuted for what he did.
Oh, and before you think "perfect bank heist plan away!", consider that banks have a lot of money and pride and will be able to leverage for your arrest and extradition muuuuuuuch easier than if you had done a crime against someone with much less power and pressure.
(BTW, I'm not a lawyer either.)
Read Kathinka's post.
And then go read the first two paragraphs of the Wikipedia article on Kim Dotcom.
And then consider that Julian Assange is living in an embassy and cannot leave it due to knowledge that he would be immediately arrested and extradited to either Sweden or the US.
And recognize that Snowden isn't in jail because he's living in a country that has no extradition treaty with the US, and that he fled his original destination, Hong Kong, despite not having violated any local laws - why would he do that if the Hong Kong cops couldn't round him up and ship him back to us?
You've got a strange notion of the way the law works. You can still very much be indicted even if you've fled the state, or the country. Your actual arrest may be tougher (mildly or considerably, depending on where you go), but the idea that we just throw our hands up and say there's nothing to be done because you got on a plane? That's ridiculous, and not at all true.
I understand that you people don't like the guy and want him stung to death by scorpions because he
kissed girls, but all these claims about how he's a mass sexual assaulter that's just been wily enough to evade prosecution hold no water, at least when made in this particular time continuum.