I just read that a confidential DEA report explains that it was our former minister of justice - Lene Espersen - who called the former U.S. embassador Cain in to order him to let the DEA demand Camilla Broe extradited.
And it doesn't stop there. An article from the Danish newspaper BT explains that they ordered the DEA to invent charges about 10 episodes with the narcotics smugglers. Our present chief of the police Reinmann gave the Americans a manuscript advising them how to fabricate their case. Apparently Americans must have little or no experience in writing charges down. Otherwise he wouldn't have done it.
I am quite shocked. It seems that her ordeal is fully based on that some politicians should achieve some political goal.
I am not blaming the DEA for allowing her back for a trial. It is free publicity for them that someone gives them a manuscript for a crime and all the have to do is to pick her up and issue a press release telling people that it doesn't matter for how long so-called criminals are on the run. They will be arrested in the end.
Most people know how Danes struggle with immigrants. I am a immigrant. I know my place and I know that I would never be accepted as a Dane on the same level with Danes who are coming from families who have lived in this the most developed country in the world for generations. I won't seek a shortcut which is associating with criminals. It is a solution sought by too many immigrants in Denmark. So many in fact that the newspapers are told to be quiet about the ethnic origins of a criminal to avoid accusations about racism.
I have not been in the United States but I guess that they see immigrants in the same way. I guess that they would like to tell immigrants that they should not come to the United States and take the jobs from ordinary tax-paying citizens and associate with criminals to get a job where their salery is coming from criminal acts. It seems that the wages Camilla Broe got for her work while she worked in the United States was profit from crimes.
In Denmark we always say that money does not smell. It should not matter how your employer gets his money to pay you for a legal job, but of course here we are talking law not morale. Of course if you work in a business who sells arms to countries in war, you must think about the victims in these wars. Of course you have to think twice before you walk in shoes made by small children who have just lost their diapers or drink a cola manifactored by a firm who have killed off employees from trade unions.
It does not made you a criminal in legal terms but you have a morale burden to answer for.
However here we are talking of actions which should never have reached the court systems. Danish tax-payers have paid for the actions of Espersen and Reimann - not Camilla Broe. It is unfair in a time where we are facing a financial crisis and people loose their jobs. It was expenses we could have avoided.
But more important the Danish parliament was mis-informed. It is against the law. Now we have no choice to ask members of our parliament to demand a vote of confidense. The present government must resign. The present minister of justice has a more serious problem explaining this case than he had explaining his role in a car accident months back.
Here is the articles:
Danmark bestilte udlevering af Camilla Broe, BT
DK bestilte udlevering af Camilla Broe, TV2
Book: Fall of the Guardians
2 months ago
4 comments:
You will please leave a link to the so-called confidential DEA-report - I haven't seen it yet.
I have, however, seen the article in BT - full of crap and inaccuracies and errors as everything is in that newpaper. And you know what. The worst part about it is not that BT is wrong - the worst part is that you believe they are right.
As to the article: There is nothing in the BT-article that Lene Espersen requested the Americans to ask for extradition. ON THE CONTRARY she expressed doubt as to whether extradition was legally possible.
When the Americans insisted, the police district in the district where the case was handled and the head prosecutor of that district went to a meeting (no where is it stated that it was the police that requested to meet Ambassador Cain), and explained what elements should and must be included in an application from the United States in order to make an extradition possible...
So where is your evidence: NO WHERE - at least not yet - may be because there is no evidence much less truth to the newest rumor.
I dont have to link to it. Reimann has confessed that he gave the Americans a lesson in how to write legal documents in a country with a more advanced legal culture than they were used to.
He also states that they somehow got things wrong in their statement during the trial. You can read his statement in this article.
It is an important piece of information. The only thing the prosecutor have to do now is to approach the judge and apologize for allowing a wrong testimony.
I guess that there could be consequences for members of the prosecution if they choose to keep silent with the differences between the version the Danish police have and the US police have.
The fact is the Danish Authorities have the duty, due to diplomatic obligations, to counsel a foreign countries in legal questions that the foreign questions pose to the Danish Authorities. And that's what they did. But it is a far cry from forcing that country to ask for extradition, and there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the Danish Government actively solicited the American Government to ask for the extradition of Camilla Broe - that would also assume that the American Government would not have asked for extradition but for the Danish Governments request... it is a lie, it is false, and it is ludicrous.
What false statement is it that the police have made in the court - answer: NONE!
Reimann himself comments om the U.S. report
- Det er en misforståelse, når amerikanerne siger, at vi opfordrede til at sætte udleveringen igang, siger Johan Reimann.
So the Reimann finds himself misunderstood. When the source to the testimony given in court dismiss what the U.S. agents told when they testified their testimony must be wrong.
It is perhaps not perjury if they correct it as soon as possible when given the chance in court.
But it remains a fact that the Americans believed that the Danes were in the process of forcing them to demand her extradition.
It was perhaps not what Reimann and the rest of the Danes wanted the Americans to understand, but they saw it as pressure.
Post a Comment