If someone breaks national law within an embassy or consulate, they can be prosecuted under local national law UNLESS they have diplomatic immunity. In the case of the Saudi consulate, the 15 Saudi operatives who flew in just prior to Khashoggi's murder would not have diplomatic immunity. Local hires within the consulate would also not have immunity.
If a US Embassy or Consulate were considered sovereign, the Marines posted would be tasked to guard the safety of the facility and people within it. That is not the case. Marines guarding US Embassies and Consulates are only tasked with guarding the classified material located within the structure.
KnotaDinghy wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 6:23 pm A part of the Embassy can break the law of the country the Embassy or Consulate is in.
Embassy has been defined as the people not the building. Yet the building and grounds are still afforded rights to the country utilizing them. It is the head of the diplomatic Embassy to ensure if laws are broken, the criminal is held accountable table. And should allow entrance to the host cou try's law enforcement. Yet, that isn't always the case.
In this particular case - Saudi Arabia and Thrkey are working together to investigate. They are interviewing witnesses, analyzing samples, searching woods. But only because SA allowed them entry and agreed to work with them.
The US still grants Embassies here the concept of sovereignty. We should not overstep our bounds in this investigation.msb64 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 4:57 pmAn embassy, or consulate in this case, is not considered "sovereign soil". You cannot break the laws of a host country within a consulate or embassy.KnotaDinghy wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 3:57 pm Not more valuable by any means.
His life was (is) valuable and what happened needs to be discovered.
But as a country we cannot dictate to other countries how they investigate the murder (disappearance) of one of their citizens in their own country. We can request information but not demand or direct.
