By This is interesting, that the US is still deciding whether to turn over the PFC involved in June fatal traffic accident to the Korean authorities:
U.S. Forces Korea has filed for a two-week extension to decide whether it will release criminal jurisdiction to South Korea in the case of a U.S. soldier who was driving a military truck that struck and killed a woman.
South Korea’s Ministry of Justice requested a “release of criminal jurisdiction,†on July 26 and USFK had 28 days to respond or to request a 14-day extension.
USFK legal officials requested the extension on Aug. 18, said command spokesman David Oten, and must make a final decision by Sept. 1.
U.S. officials have said they “will thoroughly review the matter and give full and sympathetic consideration to this request.â€
Now the family of the deceased Korean civilian has already said they don’t want to have the driver punished for the unfortunate accident yet the local police submitted a request for trial of the PFC never the less. I find it surprising that USFK hasn’t made a decision on this matter yet. The only thing I can think of is that they are seriously considering handing the PFC over as a sacrificial lamb to quell anti-US sentiment.
Can you imagine if this soldier goes to jail over this even though the family has already said they don’t want him too? I think what may be happening is that there may be a pre-trial agreement in the works between the Army, the family, and the local court to possibly try the soldier in Korean court and offer a plea bargain that includes no jail time but an apology and hefty compensation from the Army to the family. This would be an arrangement that would make everyone happy.
Once again this is just speculation on my part, but I guess we will see what happens on this issue by September 1st.
4:30 pm on February 18th, 2007 1
If they turn the guy over, it will be a big mistake.
It was a big mistake to put the tank accident GIs in a court martial too.
Now, I agree, if the USFK prosecution believed they had a strong enough case to win a conviction, they should have done it. But, it seemed at the time the US military came up with it as a way to dampen anti-US activity. That was doomed from the start.
Even if the soldiers had been convicted, Korean society would have gone crazy because the proven criminals were not tried in a Korean court and put in a Korean jail. On the other hand, if the evidence was not enough to convict and the soldiers got off, the Koreans would, as they did, go even more crazy and call it outrageous to even consider the US military could judge itself — completely ignoring the fact that Korean soldiers are never tried in a civilian criminal court but always in the Korean military system.
If USFK hands these guys over and there is no clear reason why they were not considered on duty at the time or performing routine tasks on duty —— it will only set a precident for every case after this.
It will not lower the anti-US feeling about this particular case more than it is right now.
And when the next accident happens, if USFK doesn’t hand the GIs over, Korean society will use this case as a justification for outrage.
It is like the recent trend in US officials visiting Korea or the Ambassador to sit down to debate with the anti-US groups or in such a setting.
They had virtually no chance of winning anybody over who was not already pro-US alliance or neutral. And it ran the significant risk of having something small they might have said being blown all out of proportion and misquoted and causing more anti-US activity for a little time after it.
But, my main point in this examples is for us to look at the July 10th riots. One of the reasons the groups gave to being so pissed off an beating the heck out of the riot police and tearing down the fence around the US bases was —- that the ambassador or some other high ranking US official in Korea at the time refused to have a sit down with them to go over the Pyongtaek and other issues.
Making such efforts rarely wins in the long and even short term in Korean society.
The US already set a bad precident when, eventually after a few years, sending the USFK Yongsan civilian contractor to Korean court to face the fine in the water dumping case.
It really does shoot to all heck the idea of principle that USFK says is in the SOFA agreement. It makes it look as if USFK is only going to hold jurisdiction on cases of alleged crimes while on duty — if they think Korea might put the soldier in jail when the US deems it is not a jail-able offense, but if it is just going to be a fine, then USFK will let a soldier who was on duty and had an accident, an accident for which a Korean would not even stand trial, go before the Korean court.
USFK should follow the SOFA guidelines for accidents like this.
Unless there was some kind of clear cause of the accident on the soldiers part that stands outside the normal routine of duty —- like if the guy had been drunk at the time even though he was at work — USFK should not hand this guy over.
Reply
4:36 pm on February 18th, 2007 2
“When a servicemember is at fault in a traffic accident in the US, they are subject to local police jurisdiction.”
I don’t know if that is true or not.
In the US, there are overlapping jurisdictions like local, state, federal, and military.
A GI driving his personal vehicle off base and getting in an accident would be subject to the local police — if there were some reason to arrest him.
But, I’m not so sure a GI driving a tank on manuvers would fall under local jurisdiction.
My wild guess is that there is set in place a system to handle such things — like the local prosecutor can ask for jurisdiction or can petition the court for jurisdiction or leave it/give it to the military.
In this tank accident, however, it is highly unlikely a soldier would have been tried by any criminal court – civilian or military.
The military and probably individuals up the chain of command and the two soldiers would be sued in local court.
Reply
4:38 pm on February 18th, 2007 3
I’ll start with the last first.
“These days the US is largely in Korea for its own interests.”
That’s ridiculous. With the end of the Cold War, being in Korea is much more of a liability than as asset. It sent from an effort to contain the communists in the global war of ideology and influence to just detering North Korea alone. It is Korea that benefits hugely from having the troops in country. I makes sure NK knows it can’t win a war. It couldn’t against South Korea by itself, but we don’t know if NK knows that.
South Korea complained about the US moving off the DMZ and the downsizing of troops and handing over responsibilities, because they see these as first moves to leave, and they don’t want that.
South Korea doesn’t spend anything on its own military like it would take to replace USFK.
“Should have been fried” that is equally ludicrious.
A Korean soldier in the same situation would never have been tried in a Korean court, and Korean society wouldn’t have paused a second over it.
A GI in the US would not stand trial for that accident.
And there is a big difference between 2002 and today. No World Cup and no election. All hell isn’t going to break loose. We would have already seen lots of it if it were. I would give it a 30% chance.
Explain to me how the GIs in the tank and the leadership were negligent.
Explain to me how you know they weren’t paying attention to what they were doing.
Do you have information, besides the two dead girls, to back that strong conclusion up?
“Everybody knows” —- just another gross distotion.
“Do the crime, do the time. Drive like a jackass in Korea, go to Korean jail.”
Factually wrong.
Koreans would not be put on trial for such an accident, whether soldier or civilian.
Once a monetary settle has been reached, that is the end of it. And USFK came to such an agreement.
That is how it is done in the Korean civilian criminal process.
And lastly, eplain to me how the SOFA is largely written in favor of the US.
Reply
4:40 pm on February 18th, 2007 4
1. The GIs who drove the AVLB over the middle schoolers should have been fried. They and their leadership were negligent, they weren’t paying attention to what they were doing, and everybody knows it. GIs drive like jack-asses in Korea, whether they are in tanks, trucks, or POVs. It’s a universal truth.
2. When a servicemember is at fault in a traffic accident in the US, they are subject to local police jurisdiction. So what if Korean courts differ from American courts? If you do the crime, you do the time. Drive like a jackass in Korea, go to a Korean jail.
3. USFK won’t turn the GI over in the LMTV case because they don’t want to set a precedent. All hell will break loose with the anti-USFK protests, and it will be like 2002-2003 all over again.
The US-Korea SOFA is bullshit. It is largely written to favor the US in just about everything. These days, the US is largely in Korea for its own interests. Korea shouldn’t have to give so much up for the US’s benefit.
Reply
7:27 am on June 25th, 2007 5
I wish the US would leave Korea and the Koreans would leave the USA.
Reply