• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Canadian Territory In Devon

Delightful said:
Seems there's a tiny chapel in Devon which is technically Canadian territory.
Odd little place, I paid it a visit recently. :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolford_Chapel
Click to expand...
Fascinating, have lived in Devon off-and-on for decades (including my school years) and never heard of this. So if I commit a crime in Devon and then hide inside there, can the British police arrest me ? Also how about my tax status if I spent 180 days of each year 'living' there?
 
Paul_Exeter said:
Fascinating, have lived in Devon off-and-on for decades (including my school years) and never heard of this. So if I commit a crime in Devon and then hide inside there, can the British police arrest me ? Also how about my tax status if I spent 180 days of each year 'living' there?
Click to expand...
You can be extradited...
 
I will try to visit that when I am in the UK.
 
kesavaross said:
Do you need a passport and visa to go inside?
Click to expand...
I got that covered.
C4C06C3A-3785-46B5-B5CE-36D802C5BA39.jpeg
 
Paul_Exeter said:
Fascinating, have lived in Devon off-and-on for decades (including my school years) and never heard of this. So if I commit a crime in Devon and then hide inside there, can the British police arrest me ? Also how about my tax status if I spent 180 days of each year 'living' there?
Click to expand...
You might be extradited, however you could claim Church sanctuary. It's a modern legal 'grey area' but it's respected out of tradition. You get forty days to decide whether to surrender to secular authorities and stand trial for their alleged crimes, or to confess their guilt, abjure the realm, and go into exile by the shortest route and never return without the king's permission. :)
 
Stormkhan said:
You might be extradited, however you could claim Church sanctuary. It's a modern legal 'grey area' but it's respected out of tradition. You get forty days to decide whether to surrender to secular authorities and stand trial for their alleged crimes, or to confess their guilt, abjure the realm, and go into exile by the shortest route and never return without the king's permission. :)
Click to expand...
Where do you live? Seems to have been outlawed in the UK:

"There was a significant case between 1516 and 1520 regarding a large sanctuary at St John’s Priory. This led to calls for reform and Henry VIII declared that the ancient kings and old popes never had the intention of letting the sanctuaries be used to such a gross extent.

Henry proceeded to abolish almost all sanctuaries and removed the possibility of using the privilege for almost all crimes. The practice did not breathe its last until a statute of 1624 which stated ‘no sanctuary or privilege of sanctuary to be hereafter admitted or allowed in any case"

https://englishlegalhistory.wordpress.com/2013/05/27/the-privilege-of-sanctuary/
 
Ah, but the legal wrangle between the Ecclesiastical and Temporal courts might give you some time to leg it back to the border.
 
Paul_Exeter said:
Fascinating, have lived in Devon off-and-on for decades (including my school years) and never heard of this. So if I commit a crime in Devon and then hide inside there, can the British police arrest me ? Also how about my tax status if I spent 180 days of each year 'living' there?
Click to expand...
I thought that all this stuff about being on 'foreign land' when you're inside embassies and consulates etc was not true?
 
Diplomatic immunity exists to protect embassy staff - and their family - from either being arrested for inadvertent law-breaking or the host nation using obscure laws to arrest and imprison the Embassy. This immunity has nothing to do with the Embassy being 'home turf'.
What usually happens is that the host government puts its case of diplomatic staff breaking the law. In effect, they build a criminal case then present it to the officials boss. Should the case be found proved then the staff might be ordered to attend court (usually in the possibility of non-custodial sentence) or be recalled home. In theory.
What really happens is that the Foreign department considers a) how serious the crime is, b) the possible maximum sentence - any custodial sentence must be avoided, c) the level of importance of the suspect, and d) how more important the host nation is over the foreign nation.
Bottom line is any criminal claiming diplomatic immunity must be pretty confident in their 'value' to their bosses. They may get them off any criminal charges - by refusing them to attend open court - but what happens to them when they get home depends on how much embarrassment to the home government.
Think about it - if Diplomatic Immunity was available to anyone who could get to the embassy, how many idiots abroad would break the law (drunkenness, criminal damage, personal injury, even murder) then leg it to the consulate* just to get out of a court appearance and get sent home?

* The difference between Embassy and Consulate? Scale. An embassy is the government whereas consulate officials are government employees working abroad.
An embassy is located in a country’s capital city, whereas consulate is located in major cities.
An embassy represents a country’s political interests, whereas consulate represents a country’s commercial interests.
An embassy is headed by an ambassador, whereas consulate is headed by a consul general.
An embassy offers a wider range of services, such as issuing visas and passports, whereas consulate offers limited services, such as assisting with emergencies.
 
Stormkhan said:
Diplomatic immunity exists to protect embassy staff - and their family - from either being arrested for inadvertent law-breaking or the host nation using obscure laws to arrest and imprison the Embassy. This immunity has nothing to do with the Embassy being 'home turf'.
What usually happens is that the host government puts its case of diplomatic staff breaking the law. In effect, they build a criminal case then present it to the officials boss. Should the case be found proved then the staff might be ordered to attend court (usually in the possibility of non-custodial sentence) or be recalled home. In theory.
What really happens is that the Foreign department considers a) how serious the crime is, b) the possible maximum sentence - any custodial sentence must be avoided, c) the level of importance of the suspect, and d) how more important the host nation is over the foreign nation.
Bottom line is any criminal claiming diplomatic immunity must be pretty confident in their 'value' to their bosses. They may get them off any criminal charges - by refusing them to attend open court - but what happens to them when they get home depends on how much embarrassment to the home government.
Think about it - if Diplomatic Immunity was available to anyone who could get to the embassy, how many idiots abroad would break the law (drunkenness, criminal damage, personal injury, even murder) then leg it to the consulate* just to get out of a court appearance and get sent home?

* The difference between Embassy and Consulate? Scale. An embassy is the government whereas consulate officials are government employees working abroad.
An embassy is located in a country’s capital city, whereas consulate is located in major cities.
An embassy represents a country’s political interests, whereas consulate represents a country’s commercial interests.
An embassy is headed by an ambassador, whereas consulate is headed by a consul general.
An embassy offers a wider range of services, such as issuing visas and passports, whereas consulate offers limited services, such as assisting with emergencies.
Click to expand...
There was a case years ago where a diplomat from Colombia came over and his son was mugged by three youths at at Tescos.
They both went to look for them and found one of them still there.

The Father hit the youth so hard that he fell back and cracked his head on the ground and died.
He wasn't prosecuted.

(Of course the papers had the usual words by the parents - he wasn't a bad lad................)
 
Last edited:
Delightful said:
Seems there's a tiny chapel in Devon which is technically Canadian territory.
Odd little place, I paid it a visit recently. :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolford_Chapel
Click to expand...
It’s just up the road from where I live, I’m aware of it but I never really thought anything of it. I guess it shows you never fully realise what you have in your own doorstep.

(Please don’t make me give up my FT membership, I’ll try harder I promise!!)
 
As a Londoner, born and bred, while I lived there I often went on local walking tours and guided walks. I've a fair few of guide books with glimpses of history that I find fascinating.
Wherever I've lived, I've delved into local history and legendary.
 
Stormkhan said:
As a Londoner, born and bred, while I lived there I often went on local walking tours and guided walks. I've a fair few of guide books with glimpses of history that I find fascinating.
Wherever I've lived, I've delved into local history and legendary.
Click to expand...
Indeed. It's a great way to enjoy whatever area you are in - I try and find out about local history, folklore, geology and wildlife. Very interesting!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top