And that he would, Scott. Remember, he would be arrested and charged by US authorities who would be acting on the strength of info and data supplied by Interpol. Info and data that they would (should) vet and evaluate to their satisfaction before cuffing the perp. If they fail to do so and make a bogus arrest, then the accused can take issue with them; same as if they had acted incorrectly on mistaken information from any other source or witness.

I think there is a general misunderstanding of what Interpol does. First, Interpol focuses on criminal investigations (key) not making apprehensions (they don’t have the powers of arrest and as a fact one of their core laws prohibits them from it). Their focus is conducting investigations targeting criminal organizations, trafficking humans, drugs, financial crimes and training/support of law enforcement officers.

Next, in conducting these type of investigations, many organizations will hide from local prosecution by having their physical presence in one country while conducting their crime(s) in another country. This means the local jurisdiction is limited at best (actually stopped cold in most situations) from being able to investigate the crime. Interpol sidesteps this by have 180+ countries in it’s charter so it can complete an investigation where the victim is say, in the US but the perpetrator is in Poland. I use that example because my last major victim of identity theft (domestic victim) had been victimized by a Polish citizen. Interpol can take a case from here and work it to the other end. Without this change in law, Interpol’s investigations leading to money laundering started in the US stopped at our shores. Now they can continue an investigation which will allow local or federal officers make an arrest.

But hey, if you think some International Po-po is going to invade your residence and take you into custody for a crime you didn't commit, then maybe you should unplug your computer, throw away your cell phone and live in the woods of Idaho...just watch out for Big Foot! ;)

Clear as mud, eh.

SPF2245, or anyone else
If what you say is true and all they do is investigate, then why do they need immunity?

Terry,

I would guess that they do wire taps and such and that they don't have to have a warrant to do them. But I don't think they will be doing any actual work by themselves. To me, Bounty Hunters have far to much power as they can do about anything without having to fear any consequences.

Ron

I do not think that them getting the same as diplomatic immunity has much to do with wire taps. Although I could be wrong. Diplomats can get away with anything illeagal because of their immunity.

Also, shouldn't they have to abide by all of the laws in which ever country they are in?

So far as I am concerned I think that diplomatic immunity should be done away with and any diplomat should be held accountable for their actions by the laws of whatever country they are in. But I don't think you are going to see Interpol Agents running around arresting people unless they have the local law enforcement with them. Of course I am probably wrong about that as I now see the Black Helicopters circling overhead. Darn dopers around here.

Ron :)

Carefull Ron, They are tracking your computer use and are going to tax it or take it.

Because it would/is illegal to conduct wire taps w/o a warrant for a criminal investigation. To do so would result in a criminal act for a domestic officer investigating a criminal (non-terrorist activity). Immunity allows them to work a case, period. I know, I know...but geez, then they'll hack my information and send me to prison, for what? Driving a copy of a real car w/o permission of the design owner (Interpol also investigates patent issues)?

And trying to get a judge to sign off on a domestic case is hard enough I can't even imagine what it would take to secure one where the crime is committed in one country by a suspect living in another. That is the beauty of modern internet crimes, the suspect rarely faces the chance of getting caught due to the juristictional issues.

Also, Interpol is also made up of more computer freaks then door-kicking, 4th Ammendment Rights violating, traditional police officers everyone here fears.

In the USA, if it is suspected terrorism, didn’t they already pass a law that they could wire tap you. I could be wrong but I thought the government already took care of that.

If not, couldn’t they just say that Interpol could wire tap without a warrant. To me, the word “immunity” is wrong in this situation. That gives them the go ahead to do anything they want. Anyone remember what Hitler did when he could do anything that he wanted.

tcrist, yes it's in the patriot bill (allowing for warrantless searches for suspected terrorism), however, Interpol investigates much more...and that is where immunity will allow them to get on with their job (IMO) w/o having to try and obtain a warrant. Could this be abused, sure, if you're into selling humans or a drug dealer you may find this bill a small problem. Interpol doesn't give a rats ass about the average joe here in America.

Maybe so but I still don't like giving ANYBODY free reign to do anything they want with out having to be accountable for their actions. It's like the saying "give them an inch and they will take a mile".

Remember the post on how to catch wild pigs. Same differance here. Looks like at least 3 sides of the pin is up already.

tcrist, I agree absolute immunity would be bad. But I believe the checks 'n balances comes from the fact for an arrest to happen, an officer from that country (ie FBI/State/Local) would require probable cause (in our case). So, yes you have a point, but in the information gathering stage of an investigation this bypass works. Our system (or other nation for the matter) doesn't support international crime investigations. Which is why Interpol exsists, to be able to take and obtain information quickly so it can be used by local enforcement.