Text 21027, 175 rader
Skriven 2011-07-18 18:07:04 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: Another Euro in jail
============================
Hello Robert,

On Monday July 18 2011 07:21, you wrote to me:

 MV>> One does not need a passport to leave a country, unless you were
 MV>> in the former DDR. Passports are to get IN, not to get out.

 RB> Try to get on a plane at Schipol with a destination outside the EU
 RB> without a passport sometime.

As I told you:

 MV>> That is because the airline wants to make sure you get IN at the
 MV>> other side, so they so not have to take you back on their cost.

The last time I flew by commercial airline was in 1995, A flight from Amsterdam
to Zürich. That is outside the EU. I went there quite often as my company had a
major client there. I do not recall ever having to show my passport on the way
out. My memory may fail me...

 MV>> But there are other ways to leave a country than by commercial
 MV>> airline.

For example: by car, on foot, by boat or by private airplane.

 MV>>  If DSK wants to leave the US, it would be hard to stop

 RB> And Strauss-Kahn hardly has another option than to fly back to France,
 RB> assuming he can't swim the Atlantic.

He could hire a private plane and fly to St Martin. That is a little Island in
the Caribian.  Or he could get there by boat.

St Martin is French territory. From there to France is an inland flight.

Or... he could go to Mexico and go to the French embassy saying he "lost" his
passport.

 RB> Whatever the reason, without a passport he can't leave the country.

Yes, he can.

 MV>> But there are other ways to leave a country than by commercial air-
 MV>> line. If DSK wants to leave the US, it would be hard to stop him.

 RB> Although that would be taken as proof of guilt and "flight to avoid
 RB> prosecution", as the term goes.

By the Americans, yes. But that would only matter if he plans to return to the
US. After the treatment he received, he may not be all that eager to go there
again.

 RB> Remember what happened to Roman Polanski when he visited Switzerland?
 RB> I doubt if Strauss-Kahn is interested in having to live the rest of
 RB> his life without leaving France.

Who says he can not leave France. That would only be an issue if the US issued
an international arrest warrant that was recognised by the countries DSL wanted
to go.

 MV>> And of course he would not have a problem to enter France without
 MV>> a passport.

 RB> If he could get there without one. But he can't.

I am sure he can if he wanted.

 RB> And it's a good question whether your statement is really true -
 RB> people arriving from outside the EU, you and me, have to show
 RB> identification to be admitted.

No decent country refuses entry to its own citizens. A passport is in essence a
request from the one government to another to "let this law abiding citizen
pass".

But I do  not need that to get into my OWN country. All that is needed is that
I convince the guy at the checkpoint that I am a Dutch citizen. A passport or
identity card is the easiest way to do that. But there are other ways. Properly
pronouncing this sentence "Zeven schele geitjes gingen gezellig samen googelen
in Scheveningen". http://www.vlist.eu/downloads/ZSGEITJE.WAV would get me half
way in. ;-)

They can give me a fine for not being able to show an ID. (To me great regret
we are now obliged to carry an ID in The netherlands) Fine EUR 30,-. But they
can not refuse entry to my own country.

 RB> The French might let in Strauss-Kahn without an ID because he's so
 RB> well known

He will not have a problem convincing the gate keeper that he is a French
citizen.

 RB>  - but they might also be disinclined to do so if he
 RB> suddenly showed up as a fugitive from American justice.

Not likely. Like the French are not all that popular in the US, the reverse
also goes. The French are unlikely to arrest DSK just to please the US.

 MV>> But he agreed to not leave the US and I suppose he will stick to
 MV>> that agreement.

 RB> Whatever you may conjure up in your own mind, he's certainly not in
 RB> the US voluntarily. In fact, if you remember, he was taken off a plane
 RB> headed for Paris.

That was before the credibility of the key witness collapsed.

 MV>> Given that it is an "his word against hers" and the prosecution
 MV>> has de facto discredited "her", I think he *expects* to be
 MV>> aquitted.

 RB> Maybe. Maybe he will, but that's not up to him.

What he expects is up to him. ;-)

 MV>> Yes, time is against him. No doubt him missing the presidential
 MV>> election will be an item when the million USD compensation claim
 MV>> is filed.

 RB>  ;-) Dream on.

Wait and see...

 RB>>> And then there's the other charge awaiting him in France - a
 RB>>> strange one dating from a claimed sexual indiscretion nine full
 RB>>> years ago, but still something to be faced.

 MV>> And probably be dismissed.

 RB> You certainly are convinced of things you have no direct insight on.

If I were convinced I would have said so, but I used the word "probably".

 MV>> Waiting nine years and then jumping on the band wagon when he is
 MV>> charged in another case, does not make a strong case.

 RB> I agree, but if you'll remember, it was you who were always wanting to
 RB> establish innocence or guilt in a court proceeding. What's happening
 RB> now should be to your liking.

No. when someone was to be convicted, I wanted the GUILT to be established in a
court of las. I never had a problem with someone assumed to be innocent and let
it go at that without a court decision.

I have no problem when charges are dropped, when there is no solid case.

 MV>> Also keep in mind that in France they take a totally different
 MV>> look on people having affairs than in the US.

 RB> Who are you trying to convince - me or yourself?

The facts are well known. Many journalists have reported on it. One of them is
Philip Freriks. www.philipfreriks.nl

He retired as anchorman from Dutch television news last year. He lives in
France and is married to a French woman. He is still active as a journalist and
connaisseur of France. He writes books on France. He has written several
columns on DSK and how the French look at it.

You don't have to believe it of course, but the French really do take a very
different look on adultery than the people of the USA.

 MV>> The best thing for him would be to retire, he is old enough for it
 MV>> and rich enough to do it in comfort. Let us wait for his memoirs
 MV>> to be published.

 RB> At any rate, they would be a hot seller ;-)

Presumably.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)