NatWest Three extradition row heats up. By Dan Martin

The row over the extradition of the NatWest Three intensified on Friday when a government minister accused the bankers involved of using a highly skilled public relations campaign to win over the public.

Baroness Scotland, who flew to Washington yesterday in an attempt to persuade the US to sign the 2003 extradition treaty at the centre of the controversy, said: "The defence has conducted one of the best PR campaigns ever seen."

She added that the case of David Bermingham, Gary Mulgrew and Giles Darby had involved a "frenzy of misunderstanding and distortion" perpetuated by the press, whil

Continued...

» Register now

The full article is available to registered AccountingWEB members only. To read the rest of this article you’ll need to login or register.

Registration is FREE and allows you to view all content, ask questions, comment and much more.

Comments

No, they should not have been extradited

AnonymousUser | | Permalink

AFAIUI the alledged crime was committed in the UK, by UK citizens against a UK company. The UK company and the UK law enforcement agencies have declined to take any action.

On this basis my belief is the the extradition should not have happened.

Blair, by failing to take action to cancel the one sided extradition treaty and ensure that the rights UK citizens are protected, bears ultimate responsibility for this.

I hope he can sleep easily knowing that his inaction leads to great stress and trauma for the individuals concerned, and for their young families. I could say a lot more about Blairs behavious over David Kelly, invasion of Iraq etc, but this isn't the place. However if rational professional people like myself are concerned about the integrity and competance of the government and PM, isn't it time they started listening?

carnmores's picture

In yesterday's sunda times

carnmores | | Permalink

Simon Jenkins outlined a clear case for the trial to be heard in America and on balance i agree with him.

what i do take exception to is the 'normal' treatment of suspected felons pre trial. it is typically american to shackle everybody and try and paint them as guilty.

America would never give up one of their citizens so in future we should ensure that there is reciproccity

one other point these 3 guys resigned, as i understand it, from Nat West. so instead of calling them the Enron 3 which is possibly pushing the boat out a bit, we should find a different name someone suggested calling them the Greedy 3.

listerramjet's picture

this government

listerramjet | | Permalink

knows all about public relations campaigns, but the public are won over by the facts!

NatWest Three - the accountants' view

dan06 | | Permalink

As the NatWest Three - Giles Darby, David Bermingham and Gary Mulgrew - await their bail hearing in the US after being extradited on charges relating to the collapse of Enron we are looking for our members' views on the case.

Should the NatWest Three have been extradited?

Let us know what you think by posting a comment here or by e-mailing us at editor@accountingweb.co.uk

Dan Martin
Business Editor
AccountingWEB

But the unanswered question ....

Anonymous | | Permalink

still remains as to why the NatWest Bank did not instigate proceedings in the first place?

The NatWest has a duty to its shareholders and surely this must form part of any solution?