2 ms·
How does jurisdiction work in a case like this? He presumably never set foot in the US so how does the law claim jurisdiction for the crime? If someone uses t
by sunstone 10y ago
How does jurisdiction work in a case like this? He presumably never set foot in the US so how does the law claim jurisdiction for the crime? If someone uses telephones to defraud US citizens in a similar way, ie remotely, do the same jurisdiction rules apply? How about selling fraudulent goods in the US shipped in from abroad?
- tptacek 10y agoIt's based on where the harm occurs; in this case, there's a clear connection to specific locations in the US. The US doesn't have trials in absentia, so the important issue here is mostly extradition, and that boils down "if you're caught in a country that (a) recognizes the crime you're being charged with in its own jurisdiction, (b) has an extradition treaty with the US, and (c) believes based on the US's extradition filings that the US has a legitimate case, you're going to end up standing trial in the US. This case is a little more complicated in that Interpol appears to have been the controlling authority for extraditing Seleznev from Maldives, but again, the principle is less that of jurisdiction than of the propriety of extradition.