Some messages of support

The views expressed on the friendsextradited.org message board are those of members of the public and are not necessarily those of friendsextradited.org.

A great many of you living outside the UK want to know how to get involved. If you have a UK passport then you can still write to the Home Office. If you are a foreign national then you could write letters to the newspapers. In the UK, the Times, Guardian, Daily Telegraph and Independent. In the US, the Washington Post, The New York Times and the Houston Chronicle. Internationally, the Herald Tribune, Guardian Weekly and the Weekly Telegraph. If there are any others that you can think of then please tell us! 

"As I am sure you are aware my husband  NIgel Potter ex. CEO of Wembley PLC is currently detained in a US prison serving a three year sentence having been convicted of conspiring to bribe a public official.  He had to be tried twice in order for the US to succeed in getting this conviction, however he was acquitted of all but three charges of wire fraud.  My husband is completely innocent, all he was doing was his job; discussing a proposal made by the Manager of a US subsidery, and he was following the instructions of the Wembley Board of Directors.  "To proceed with caution" and "To seek legal advise."  All of which Nigel did.  No agreement was ever made, and no money exchanged hands, the discussion went round in circles.

The USA sought his extradition, but timing was most unfortunate for Nigel. David Blunkett had signed the extradtion treaty on March 31st '03, and Nigel was advised that it would be brought into force imminently and that the new treaty only required the US to provide scant evidence and would afford him little protection from being extradited.  The advice was that if he fought extradition he would have been seen to have been unwilling to go to the US, and would therefore have not been allowed  bail in the UK pending the trials.  He would have faced what the Natwest Three and Ian Norris now face at the worst, of being locked up in a US prison until they are brought to trial, or at the least having to live un the US on bail until their trial. Nigel was so convinced of his innocence, and with that mis-placed confidence, he went to the US having waived his rights in extradition.  He was indicted in September '03, and the new Extradition Act became law in Jan 04. The two trials took place in Jan/Feb and July/Aug 2005.  Nigel could have been in a US prison since the indictments if he had fought extradition, away from his family and friends and legal representation.

He started his sentence on Nov 25th '05 at Allenwood Low Security prison in Pennsylvania, unlike his co-defendant who is in a Camp (equivalent to our open prison) only 40 miles from his home.  Nigel has been discriminated against  because he is not a US citizen.  His lawyers say he has been treated with unusual cruelty,having been held in 'Lock Down' for the first 10 days, equivalent to our solitary cofinement, and was unable to contact anyone, including his lawyers for the first 14 days.  The US had just swallowed him up!  A lot of his mail does not get through to him and he was denied access to his legal papers before his lawyers visited in order to discuss his appeal and only given the papers 4 days after their visit!  He is not allowed to have more than 25 letters in his possession at any one time, or to have more than 5 books in his possession.  He cannot go to a Camp because he is classed as an 'illegal alien,' which at present the Bureau of Prisons will not lift despite the Judge having recommended he go to a Camp Prison and that he should be near his lawyers.  His lawyers are an 8 hour journey away, which is impractical when trying to lodge an appeal. He is completely isolated, thousands of miles from his family.  I have managed to visit him once with our eldest son Oliver, but that in itself is difficult and expensive.

This Govenment afforded no protection to Nigel or safeguards to British Businessmen in general,  it has sold them down the river!  I therefore support this campaign to change the Extradition Treaty 2003.  It is now three years and still the US has not ratified the act.  They say the act was designed to make it easier to stop terrorism, but instead it seems to be ensnaring British Businessmen in its nets."
Jo Potter

"I am outraged that our Government can be so unjust and untrustworthy.  There told us that there would be safeguards built into the Extradition Act but as predicted there simply are none.  We must all join force and write back to our MP's and The Home Secretary to pressurise him to change this appalling Act and give protection to UK citizens."
Jackie East Sussex

"I write to give my full backing to the Friends Extradited campaign to bring to an end this whole unfair and one sided extradition act.

This Government needs to realise that one of their first priorities is to provide protection for British citizens and not just hand them over to rot in jail with no evidence having been provided."
Peter Thomson

"This is an outrage and I'm ashamed to be American. Oh no, British, apparently. Please keep the mails coming with what needs to be done. Thanks"
Terry Dicks

"My family lost a treasured and precious Auntie on the plane crash into the Pentagon on Sept 11th. More than most, I have reason to want to see the perpetrators of this horrible crime (and others like it) brought to justice. This is what the new Extradition Treaty between Britain and America was supposed to be about bringing terrorist and murders to justice.

You may or may not agree with the Act, you may argue that it erodes civil liberties in the UK and gives the US too much power, particularly as the Act is not reciprocal. On the other hand you may argue that it gives terrorist and murders nowhere to hide and will force them to answer for their crimes in the country that they were committed.   

No matter what your views on the treaty might be, one thing you cannot argue is, that this Law was NOT written and passed to extradited Bankers or others accused of fraud to the US. This is an abuse of the new Treaty and what it was intended to do. If this extradition goes ahead, what other “crimes” will be handled in the same way? As a UK citizen, if you burn the American flag outside the US embassy in London as a protest, will you be charged and extradited to the US to face a jail term for an act that is not a crime in the UK?  You might say that’s ludicrous, but is that any more ludicrous than extraditing three UK bankers accused of defrauding a UK bank with a transaction involving a UK asset and who have not been charges with any crime in the UK?"
Nicole, Australia

"I currently live in Madrid. I’ve lived here for over a year. Every day I take a train from Atocha station to get to work. I took a train on the morning of 11th March 2004. I was on the first train that got bombed in the terrible terrorist attacks. Luckily I was not harmed, after the first bomb I left the train, moments after that the carriage I had been in exploded and I ran for my life. I’ve never been more terrified. I demonstrated with the rest of Madrid the next day and since then I thank God that I’m alive. 

It is claimed that the changes to the Extradition Act will help bring to justice terrorists who carry out such terrible acts. Could anyone please explain to me why the Act is being used to extradite three British bankers? I consider using it in this way an insult to the victims of terrorism.

I abhor terrorism and support measures designed to capture and bring the perpetrators to justice. But I also abhor duplicity and it pains me that a Government I voted for and a party that I have supported all my life are being duplicitous. That three British bankers who have been charged with a crime against a UK bank, and allegedly committed in the UK have to stand trial in Texas is ludicrous. We have a perfectly good justice system in the UK. So why do they have to go to Texas? There are no co-defendants to consider as the other two accused have entered into a plea and co-operation agreement with US authorities. The evidence required to mount a defence is in the UK, not as Ms Flint incorrectly (again) claims in the US.

Why is this being allowed to happen? Is it in the interests of this so-called and very one-sided Special Relationship with the US? As the SFO haven't deemed fit to get involved is it another example of contracting-out of public services by the UK government?

In 2003 the Government assuaged the public’s fear about the erosion of civil liberties by claiming that the UK/US extradition treaty under the 2003 Extradition Act was brought in to deal with terrorists. Now barely one year on this so-called anti-terrorist law/treaty is being used to extradite three British bankers because the US Government thinks they committed a crime in the UK against a UK bank. Can anyone tell me how this serves justice?  How does this help the fight against terrorism? I honestly can’t see it."
Dominic, Madrid

"As a Brit living in the US for over 3 years now, I have no doubt at all that BDM will have very little chance of a fair trial if they are extradited here.  In the US in particular, the mass media and news coverage are extremely adept at feeding the average citizens need and desire to receive news in "sound bites" and "snap-shots" in what is the ultimate fast-food, fast-news, instant-gratification (yet puritanical) society.  In order to give the public what they want, the depth of analysis and portrayal of events is often shockingly inadequate, shallow, misrepresentative and 'pre-packaged' in such a way as to beggar belief.  It is inconceivable to me that the local or national media would fairly present the case to the general public in what is a highly complex case.  What chance then a fair trial by jury ?   Recently, senior Enron employees filed documents in federal court in Houston asking that their case be transferred to a more neutral venue such as Denver or Atlanta, stating ""As much as we would like to be tried in Houston, the sad reality is that we cannot get a fair trial there. The community has an emotional, sociological, and financial stake in the outcome of the case". The 75-page motion with a box full of reports and exhibits showed that 31.8 percent of Houston area survey respondents used negative descriptions when asked about the accused: "He is the devil," said one Houston-area respondent. Another said "Jeff Skilling is an arrogant, conniving, pompous, brilliant crook".  There is no doubt that the Houston jury-pool is severely tainted, but I question whether these other locations will not already be similarly tainted too.

My point is that I seriously doubt whether "Three on-the-run Brit's finally captured" (you can see the headlines now) can expect to receive a fair trial anywhere in the US if in fact they are extradited, which only goes to emphasise the need to resist this patently unfair and biased law."
Steve, New York

"Surely it is blatantly obvious that if there has been a crime committed it has been staged by British individuals, against a British company, in Britain?? It is similarly obvious that the three accused have co-operated fully with the British regulatory authorities and are indeed welcoming a fair trial should one be needed. To extradite the three to the U.S would be denying them their rights as British citizens and would effectively be "throwing them to the lions" as the main prosecution witness is a man desperate to avoid imprisonment himself by implicating as many others as possible. This is a typical example of us yet again pandering to the Americans in our misguided view that we somehow maintain a "special" relationship with them. To extradite them is an outrage and a hugely sad indictment of our legal system and of Britain as a whole." 
Steve, South Africa
 
"May I just offer you my full support in lobbying the government to seriously reconsider the extradition laws with the united states.

I find it totally unacceptable that British citizens can be treated in this way by our so called peoples party. We are not talking about  AlQaeda Terrorists we are talking about British citizens who may or may not have comitted a crime in this country. British law has always said that "You are innocent until proven guilty" Surely by extraditing the BMD  our government is handing over its own people to a law system where plea bargaining  is the normal basis for prosecution.If the American legal system is so fair why dont we use such  a "FAIR" system in our country.BMD  deserve a fair trial in this country they are not terrorists and should not be treated as such." 
Colin

"When I heard that a British citizen could be extradited to America without first having the chance to appear in front of a British court of law to answer charges made against them I was horrified. I simply could not believe it. I thought that British law had evolved over hundreds of years to become one of the most respected of any civilised society. And that the law was supposed to protect its people from those things that would harm and undermine our way of life. Now it appears that the law is only as good as America wants it be.
 
Yesterday I attended a remembrance day parade. I was there to pay my respects and to honour those men and women who gave their lives so that we can live our lives in peace and in freedom. Freedom from dictatorships. Well, it seems that not all dictators wear a funny black moustache and a bad haircut. It seems that dictators now come in all shapes and sizes. Well, enough is enough, we are British and proud of it and its about time the government remembered who it was who voted them in. Not Americans but Britons.
 
Be assured that I will be writing to my MP and demanding an explanation. 
Jim
 
 I wish to register my support to your endeavours to stop the proceedings that threaten to allow Bermingham, Darby and Mulgrew to be extradited to the USA for trial and to have the treaty recently entered into by the British government withdrawn or significantly amended.
 
The whole idea of this treaty and the attendant 2003 Extradition Act is quite wrong and it must be withdrawn or amended forthwith, whether or not the USA is willing to enter into a reciprocal arrangement - it perverts natural justice and goes against the fundamental rights that UK citizens should expect, based on our traditional experience of legal process."
John

"I wish to see British justice administered to British citizens accused of crimes against a British victim.David Bermingham, Giles Darby and Gary Mulgrew should not be extradited to the US; this is not their best hope for a fair trial or of receiving proper justice."
Michael, Brighton

"The British Government should be doing all it can to have these men tried in Britain so they can have a fair trial.  If they are tried in Texas it will most definitely be a witch-hunt and will not be a fair trial.  I wish you all good luck for the weeks ahead."
Kristin, Stirling

"I agree with your principles and objectives as set out, but also believe you are overlooking there is another possible charge for crossing borders with telegraphic messages in pursuit of fraud, which is an offence under US/Texan law, and not under UK law.  As far as allegations of defrauding Nat West go, the UK is the only fair forum.

If the only call for extradition were the cross border matter, I would prefer to campaign on the proposition that there should be no extradition for acts which may be criminal abroad, but which are not criminal in UK."
Michael

"Please register my disapproval of Bush's lackies and the treatment of the Natwest3."
Stephen, Cumbernauld

"I would like to register my support for Gary, Giles and David.  I believe that it is their right as British Citizens to face any charges against them in their own country, within the legal system they live and work.  Extraditing them to another country seems to me to be a purely political move, and it is unfair that these men and their families should be used in this way."
Nova, Glasgow

"I seriously question the rationale which justifies extradition. I would like the rationale of why this case is to be tried in the U.S.A. to be fully explained.

I can understand immediate extradition in the cases of national security...it is apparent that whatever the case against them the FSA has chosen not to charge...nor has their employers. They were legally employed by a British company operating in a British based employment framework

Is there any recourse to the European court of human rights?

In saying this, I do not condone any illegal or unethical acts that they may or may not have carried out in their tenure. If this case is allowed to go to USA then it reflects very badly on the FSA, who should be the first point of discipline if the employer does not wish to press charges."
Louise, Singapore

"I believe that the extradition proceedings for the three accused including Mr Mulgrew should stop and that the case should be heard in the UK."
P G Hopkins

"It is not right that British citizens should be extradited to the US, this should stop now and the case brought in the UK."
Zoe

"I whole heartedly believe that this is a truly unjust way to bring the accused to so called justice and that a trial in the USA would really not give them the fairest possible trial for the reasons stated in the Friends Extradited."
Rebecca, Kent

"It seems to me that this Extradition treaty with the US is nothing more than a means of US prosecutors making a name for themselves, and consequently a lot of money, by pressing high profile extradition cases. This could end up as just another revenue stream for the US legal system. The Act has to be amended now, before it’s too late."
Jane, Brighton

"I have reviewed the website in some detail and am supportive of all the measures you outline. Is there any value in having NON UK citizens register or write letters? How is the data for registering used?"
Jim, Hawaii 

"I am outraged that the U.K. Government could ratify this Treaty. Certain sections of the Press and the Tory Party continually bemoan our perceived loss of sovereignty  to the European Parliament  yet allowed this to go through with barely a whisper of dissent(with the notable exception of Menzies Campbell M.P.)

British Citizens should have an alienable right to be tried by a jury of their peers for an alleged crime committed in this country.

I wish you success in your campaign. I have written to Caroline Flint and my local M.P. Rosemary Mc Kenna"
Eileen, Cumbernauld

"As a friend of the three men accused I sat through some of their extradition hearing and listened to judge Evans pathetically sum up and deliver a totally unconvincing and unjust (politically driven) verdict as to why these three men should stand trial in a US court.

THEY WANT TO STAND TRIAL, but they want a fair and un-biased trial. Three UK citizens accused of a crime against a UK bank (where is Nat West if indeed a crime has been committed?)  With the conduct taking place in the UK, it should be heard in the UK.

So it is up to us as friends and family to help them seek justice UK JUSTICE. This website is a great start but it is only the start-tell anyone you know, relations, friends, work colleagues to log onto the site and write to their MP's. The guys need help to be heard, let’s help them be heard IN THE UK."
Joe, Brighton

"The continued erosion of our rights as UK citizens is of great concern to me personally.  As a result of your website I have written to David Rendell my MP and David Blunkett. Let's hope that something positive comes of this."
Malcolm, Berkshire

"I hope and pray that someone i.e. David Blunkett is able to stand up to the USA and their bullying ways and allow justice to take its course.  These men must stand trial as British citizens in their own country."
 Sara, Brighton

"This is just to register strong support for the appeals of 3 men who have been subjected to quite unjust treatment so far as a result of a careless, unjust and arrogantly presented piece of legislation.It stems from a government which seems to lack  identifiable principles for the safeguard of its subjects from arbitrary power.

("citizens" is the spin word, dishonestly introduced to replace "subjects" in legislation for the first time by its predecessors, to help to mask its arbitrary use fo power.)"
Duncan 

"Hello... I've been following the case of the 3 Nat West alledged freudsters, and as an old school friend of one of the accused, am certainly keen to support the campaign for the case to be held here in the UK. I have seen 1st hand how this whole sorry saga is affecting him, and want to 'do my bit'!"
Steph

"My uncle is Giles I would just like to say please help him and the other two because I couldnt stand seeing anything bad happen to him so please any one, everyone please help!!!"
Charley, Wiltshire

"Michelle, Natalie, Sophie & Lucy wish to offer our support to the three men above who face extradition to the USA as we feel it is unjust."  

"I am absolutely appalled at the treatment of my good friend Dave Bermingham and also at a totaly unjust law that the plonker Blunket has passed."
John, Surrey

"Hi just sending a message to express my support for Gary Mulgrew and his colleagues and their fight to be tried in the UK"
Gavin, Gwyneddd

"As an Irish citizen / resident, I am not sure whether I can be of any assistance, but I am happy to lobby any party that you identify!"
Marc, Dublin

"I am writing to register my support for BDM and give my full backing to the campaign. Keep up the good work!"
Harriet

"We would just like to register my support for Giles, who we know as a friend, and for David and Gary.  The stance being taken by the US is entirely inappropriate and should be resisted by our Government.  They are UK citizens and, if culpable, should be tried by UK law."
Mark, Nicola, Katie and Sophie

"I reflect with interest on the subject matter web-site and the content therein.

My note is drafted with no opinion or view represented as to the innocence or guilt of the parties concerned, my candid preference is that process should be left to the English judicial system.

HOWEVER, it does strike me as crassly wrong that any British Citizen can face such abusive treatment by ‘the system’ in which they trust, when ‘the system’ in which they trust contradicts the basic premiss that both a) an individual is innocent until proven guilty and b) is founded on a process where in leymans speak fair play and good reason shall prevail !

Quite simply ‘if’ the alledged offences were commited in/on our own fair Isle then that is where justly they should be tried.

I have no confidence in supporting a judicial accord which under the circumstances appears to absolve its responsibilities, deffering to the mighty eagle and its modern day representative ‘Wyatt Earps’ !

Furthermore it grieves me that all three alledged offenders are being abused within an accord that was clearly intent on addressing previous shortcomings in bringing to justice Terorists of the worst kind."
Alistair

"Hi have recently heard about this case and in common with many other people I feel that Gary and the other people implicated should be brought back to England."
Bryan, Torquay

"Good Luck to all three of you, lets hope that justice prevails"
Vicki, Brighton

"As citizens of the UK we are totally anti a one way extradition policy to the US.  This is a case of the playground bully throwing his weight around for no apparent reason except for the fact that he can."
Ed & Annabel, Goring

"I fully support the three British 'alleged' criminals and any proceedings should take place in the UK and not in an American kangaroo court."
Mike, Bristol

"I would like to register my support for your cause in the hope that the government will change this extradition act and protect the right of British citizens against all foreign aggression. In a democratically elected government it is to be expected that justice will prevail."
Jenny, Castle Hedingham

"I believe the US Government & the Citizens of the USA would not tolerate any US Citizen to be extradited for an Alleged Crime committed in the US of A so why can't they understand that the citizens of the UK will not tolerate this unacceptable procedure either?

BDM should be allowed a fair trial ("innocent until proven guilty") and this could only occur in the UK in front of a UK Judge & Jury. Why can this not be accepted if the majority of the Alleged crime took place in the UK & the Accused are UK Citizens. The trial should take place in the UK. Equality for all. Full Stop."
Laura

The views expressed on the friendsextradited.org message board are those of members of the public and are not necessarily those of friendsextradited.org.