The York Dispatch reports:
I don't think (Russia) can have any jurisdiction over them," said Suzanne Smith, who represented Michael Craver. "I don't think any court in the United States would honor (such) an extradition warrant."
U.S. citizens are protected from double jeopardy laws, and the Cravers were already legally tried here, Smith said. Also, the Russians don't have jurisdiction in the case, despite the fact they appear to be arguing Nathaniel was a Russian citizen, she said.
"(Russian officials) are just saying, 'We're not happy with the result. We want to do it our way,'" Smith said. "Well, you don't get to do that. I don't know anyone who would recognize Russians' authority in this particular case. They don't really have any."
District Attorney Tom Kearney, agrees, saying that any attempt to retry the Cravers would run into double jeopardy issues
The question of whether one was properly tried ... is in the eyes of the beholder," he said. "We certainly believe they were. We devoted substantial resources into the prosecution, and the jury made the call. ... And the judge seemed to think it was the right call."
I found it strange that no one commented that the crime happened on US soil, and the citizenship of the victim (which could be a matter of debate anyway) doesn't play in to it--giving the Russian government no jurisdiction to prosecute. American justice, in my opinion, failed dismally in this case, but there's nothing to be done about that now outside of working to keep Dasha away from the Cravers, socially shunning the couple, and perhaps some kind of civil action..
The Cravers are still not on the INTERPOL online database. If they do appear, I suspect it won't be until next week's show trial starts up in Moscow. I've got some questions about how that will operate myself and am still digging around.
*****
Someone on FB has created a Justice for Nathaniel Craver (Ivan Skorobogatov) page. Three are some pictures of him and Dasha I'd not seen before.
4 comments:
Regardless of what any lawyer says, this isn't double jeopardy, because two different court systems and sets of laws address the issue. Double jeopardy only applies within the same legal system. In the U.S., for instance, state laws and federal laws comprise two different systems and, with the same behavior, you can potentially violate laws from both and be subjected to trial in both court systems. This happened with the police officers who beat Rodney King in the 1990s. Acquitted at state level, convicted at federal.
Now Russia does lack jurisdiction here, but if they convict the couple in absentia, goes without saying they can never travel to Russia without fear of arrest. Works for me, if nothing better can be done.
Thank you for writing about this case.
I might add that Nathaniel was caught up in the infamous Attachment Therapy.
Attachment Therapist Lark Eshleman (certified school psychologist) was recommended to the Cravers by a prestigious Philadelpia hospital. In her book, Eshleman uses Attachment Therapy's unofficial, catch-all definition of "Reactive Attachment Therapy," which demonizes adoptees. At the Craver's trial, Eshleman claimed the boy not only had "RAD," but was self-injuring because of it.
According to Eshleman, "RAD" children are "aggressive," "destructive," prey on others, are oppositional liars, etc. However, RAD, as defined in the DSM-IV, has no aggressive or violent features associated with it -- and no self-injuring behaviors. RAD children may possibly tend to be risk-takers but that it not the same thing.
http://www.childrenintherapy.org/attachmentdisorder.html
So if Nathaniel was self-injurious, which appears unlikely considering the autopsy results, he was either misdiagnosed and not treated appropriately, or he was, as so many adopted children have been, diagnosed with the bogus "RAD" disorder simply because he walked into the office of an Attachment Therapist.
There was another bizarre claim made by a so-called adoption specialist in connection with this case that the press swallowed whole. This nonsense claim is discussed here:
http://childmyths.blogspot.com/2010/10/chewing-off-hand-demonizing-nathaniel.html
Advocates for Children in Therapy has found links to numerous adopted child abuse and death cases to Attachment Therapy and its parenting methods. Here are cases they know about:
http://www.childrenintherapy.org/victims/victims.html
It is not unusual to find government agencies and government-funded agencies recommending Attachment Therapy/Parenting. Since a case could reasonably be made that this unvalidated practice is actual torture, public funding of the practice in the USA should be considered a violation of the UN Convention Against Torture.
Thank you for writing about this case.
I might add that Nathaniel was caught up in the infamous Attachment Therapy.
Attachment Therapist Lark Eshleman (certified school psychologist) was recommended to the Cravers by a prestigious Philadelpia hospital. In her book, Eshleman uses Attachment Therapy's unofficial, catch-all definition of "Reactive Attachment Therapy," which demonizes adoptees. At the Craver's trial, Eshleman claimed the boy not only had "RAD," but was self-injuring because of it.
According to Eshleman, "RAD" children are "aggressive," "destructive," prey on others, are oppositional liars, etc. However, RAD, as defined in the DSM-IV, has no aggressive or violent features associated with it -- and no self-injuring behaviors. RAD children may possibly tend to be risk-takers but that it not the same thing.
http://www.childrenintherapy.org/attachmentdisorder.html
So if Nathaniel was self-injurious, which appears unlikely considering the autopsy results, he was either misdiagnosed and not treated appropriately, or he was, as so many adopted children have been, diagnosed with the bogus "RAD" disorder simply because he walked into the office of an Attachment Therapist.
There was another bizarre claim made by a so-called adoption specialist in connection with this case that the press swallowed whole. This nonsense claim is discussed here:
http://childmyths.blogspot.com/2010/10/chewing-off-hand-demonizing-nathaniel.html
Advocates for Children in Therapy has found links to numerous adopted child abuse and death cases to Attachment Therapy and its parenting methods. Here are cases they know about:
http://www.childrenintherapy.org/victims/victims.html
It is not unusual to find government agencies and government-funded agencies recommending Attachment Therapy/Parenting. Since a case could reasonably be made that this unvalidated practice is actual torture, public funding of the practice in the USA should be considered a violation of the UN Convention Against Torture.
Thanks so much for this information, Linda. I'm putting it in a separate blog today so people will catch it.This is very important and doesn't surprise me at all.
Post a Comment