In an entry yesterday, we looked at the curious case of Saudi prince, Bader Al Saud, 26, who killed Orlando Ramos, 37, in a crosswalk while driving drunk without a valid license. His punishment was a year in a converted home. He then disappeared. The Court has now ordered him to appear to answer for violation of his probation.
He is now listed as “unknown” but his attorney believes that he is in Riyadh. I am no expert on the history and jurisprudence of the Martha’s Vineyard court system but this would probably be the first effort to enforce a detainer or warrant in the Saudi Kingdom. The KSA may have had to deal with Saddam, but they are now facing a bunch of irate wasps at “The Vineyard.” God help them.
In the meantime, the probation people can’t explain how they lost track of the young prince. How many probationers for manslaughter does Martha’s Vineyard have?
For the latest story, click here.
I hope he doesn’t have to go to bed without his milk and cookies when they catch him. Oh, the horror of it all. Irate or not, enforcing a detainer against a royal in Saudi has about as much chance of success as enforcing a summons in Hell. That’s the Bushies strategy of last resort by the way.
There needs to be an investigation of the probation officials in that jurisdiction. They are eiher not doing their jobs or they may have received some monetary inducement to look the other way when the Prince flew the coop. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Bush regime is involved in the Prince’s flight from the jurisdiction.
Sorry about my spelling problem. I can spell “either” when I put my mind to it.
Is it customary for a Probation officer to have 50 foot Sloop and a Maserati?
Just ask’n …
From a Nov, 2005 news story:
“23-year-old Bader Al-Saud pleaded guilty to motor vehicle homicide and driving without a license Thursday, after a Suffolk County Court judge accepted the plea deal he reached with prosecutors.
Al-Saud was a student at Suffolk University when he ran down and killed 37-year-old Orlando Ramos while driving drunk on Charles Street in October 2002.
Prosecutors say they agreed to the one-year sentence because it was the only way they could get Al-Saud to serve time. They were concerned that defense attorneys were going to argue that just a month before the crash Ramos had stepped in front of another car and had displayed suicidal tendencies.
Al-Saud was allowed to choose the jail as part of the agreement.”
Excerpt from a Nov 17, 2005 story.
BOSTON (CBS4) ―
Prosecutors say they agreed to the one-year sentence because it was the only way they could get Al-Saud to serve time. They were concerned that defense attorneys were going to argue that just a month before the crash Ramos had stepped in front of another car and had displayed suicidal tendencies.
Al-Saud was allowed to choose the jail as part of the agreement.
+++++
Another story, true or not, had indicated the family of Ramos had sought millions.
Sorry, didn’t mean to double postificate…
I have not handled many criminal matters over the years, but is it normal for the defendant to choose the jail? That sounds a bit odd to me. If the prosecutors were afraid of evidence that might indicate that the victim may have jumped in front of the car, why would the defense attorneys agree to the “confinement”? The Prince would have no problem paying the defense attorney’s bill, so, once again, why accept this? I am still wondering about extra curricular payments across some tables here.
rafflaw,
Quit being so cynical! Nothing to see here, move along.
Jill
whooliebacon,
I love the “nothing to see here” and “double postificate”! Does the holy postif have his own postal-see?