Diplomat from United Nations accused of raping neighbor claims immunity, released without charges

Share:

New York, NY: A United Nations diplomat from South Sudan was arrested on allegations of raping one of his neighbors in upper Manhattan.

But NYPD authorities were forced to release him after claiming ‘diplomatic immunity’, which was confirmed by NYPD Detectives.

According to an online Fox News press release column:

“Charles Dickens Imene Oliha, a 46-year-old career diplomat for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation in South Sudan, is accused of making a pass at a woman out walking a friend’s dog in upper Manhattan. 

When she rejected his advances, he allegedly then proceeded to follow the victim into her building and up to her apartment, forcing them inside and raping the woman twice before fleeing the scene, law enforcement sources told N.Y. Daily News.”

Diplomat from United Nations accused of raping neighbor claims immunity, released without charges
The UN in New York City.
Copyright free image, unsplash.com

The police report states that the victim was on her way to walk a friend’s dog in the early afternoon. The two crossed paths in the lobby of the Wadsworth Terrace in the Fort George area of New York, where both lived.

Oliha approached her to spark a conversation, but the victim denied his advances and attempted to carry on about her usual business.

According to the report, Oliha told her he was going to follow her, but she replied, “No, you’re not.”

As the woman opened the door to the apartment, Oliha allegedly forced his way in. He allegedly then proceeded to rape the victim using a condom. He then raped her a second time without a condom.

The victim told the NYPD investigators that she was in a state of shock and went to sleep. It wasn’t until she spoke to a friend of hers several hours later who convinced her to contact the police to report the rape.

Oliha was later detained for the suspicion of rape. He was questioned by detectives of the Special Victims Unit, or SVU, who told the investigators that he was a diplomat.

That claim was confirmed by the NYPD, he was quickly released without charges.

Diplomat from United Nations accused of raping neighbor claims immunity, released without charges
screen shot taken from:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCnApdmJTV0

In a statement issued by a State Department to Fox News Digital:

“We are aware of the incident referenced involving a diplomat accredited to the United Nations.

We take these allegations seriously, and we are working closely with the New York Police Department and the Mayor’s Office of International Affairs, as we do in all legal and criminal cases involving foreign diplomats assigned to Permanent Missions and Observer Offices at the UN. 

We do not comment on the specifics of ongoing investigations.” 

That sounds like a cookie cutter response.

Whether or not this disturbing allegation will lead to charges or any type of acceptable resolution remains to be seen. But many critics of the diplomatic community have doubts. Oliha isn’t the first diplomat to be involved in a criminal matter.

According to the NY Post:

“In another case involving diplomatic immunity, Martiniano Sosa — the husband of an Argentine diplomat — was allowed to walk free after allegedly beating a United Nations worker to a pulp, police sources said.”

In that case, the accused, Sosa allegedly threw a drink at a United Nations worker’s face and punched him while both were at the Cuban Embassy in Midtown in 2018.

The employee was severely injured.

According to the NY Post:

“Sosa was covered under the diplomatic immunity of his wife, Argentine envoy Natalia Babio, and did not face criminal charges, sources said. It’s not clear if Sosa ever faced any repercussions for the incident or spoke about it publicly.”

But there is some hope for justice.

Close up on the scales of justice
Adobe stock

In another similar incident in 2018, a British diplomat was beaten by her husband because of the choice of clothes she wore. The husband, Youssef Amrouche, was detained but released a short time later by the NYPD once his credentials as the spouse of a diplomat were confirmed.

The host country rescinded the diplomatic protection and Amrouche was formally charged and came to agreement with prosecutors.

Oliha’s allegations are unsettling and unnerving- and completely unbecoming of the purpose of diplomatic immunity.

According to the US Department of State Office of Foreign Missions:

“International law requires that law enforcement authorities of the United States extend certain privileges and immunities to members of foreign diplomatic missions and consular posts.”

We just hope that diplomats don’t consider rape a privilege and that true justice is served- that’s the real American way.

Diplomat from United Nations accused of raping neighbor claims immunity, released without charges

Local criminals offered immunity.

New bill would give ‘criminal immunity’ to drivers hitting protesters in street, as long as it’s not ‘on purpose’

Posted March 6, 2021

Running over these said protesters is obviously illegal, regardless of the fact that the drivers are sometimes in imminent danger.

Because of this, Tennessee lawmakers are considering a bill that would bring criminal immunity to drivers who hit protesters illegally blocking the road.

According to the bill, if a driver hurts or kills a protester who is illegally blocking a roadway, they will not face prosecutions as long as they “exercise due caution” and do not intentionally hit them.

Lawmakers supporting the bill say it protects drivers from harm if they’re targeted during a protest.

In a recent hearing on the bill, Representative William Lamberth said:

“If you’re intentionally cause harm this bill won’t cover you, that’s not what we’re trying to do here,” 

FOX17 reported that lawmakers discussed the bill in a criminal justice subcommittee meeting. Representative Bruce Griffey, who co-sponsored the bill, said he wanted stronger language to protect people trying to drive away from protests.

Griffey said:

“Maybe [we] add a provision if someone is trying to flee the situation to avoid the life threatening situation and they happen to hurt someone in the course of fleeing,” 

There are mixed feelings on the bill however, as the ACLU and the NAACP of Tennessee are strongly opposing it with the claim that it unfairly targets those who are advocating for social justice and reform.

NAACP Tennessee legal redress Van Turner said:

“It’s the republican response to the social justice protests a year ago, but nothing to the insurrection we saw in Washington D.C.,” 

The bill also strengthens punishments on protesters. It would upgrade penalties for illegally blocking streets from a misdemeanor to a class E felony. That brings the maximum penalty from $500 to $3,000, and the person would lose their right to vote, FOX17 reported.

Turner said:

“I shouldn’t lose my right to vote because I’m exercising my first amendment right to peacefully assemble in a protest,” 

During the raging riots masked as protests, many innocent bystanders, such as people walking on the street, or individuals eating in restaurants fell victim to the violence around them.

This bill will also create new laws to address these issues, including making it illegal to throw something at someone during a protest, and making it illegal to harass someone nearby who isn’t part of the protest.

The ACLU’s Policy Director Brandon Tucker issued the following statement on the bill:

“The ACLU of Tennessee strongly opposes this dangerous anti-protest bill, which targets peaceful assembly and undermines Tennessee’s long-practiced tradition of nonviolent resistance.

This legislation would suppress protest by turning obstruction of traffic into a felony offense, robbing individuals of their right to vote if they are convicted of these new felony charges.

It also offers immunity to drivers who run over protesters in the road and criminalizes speech that causes ’emotional distress’ to or ‘frightens’ another person.

This vague and troubling suppression of free speech can easily be abused, leading to the criminalization of protesters’ words and beliefs.

As was demonstrated this past summer, the government does not need more tools to criminalize, abuse or potentially kill protesters. We will be working hard to defeat this disturbing bill.”

Diplomat from United Nations accused of raping neighbor claims immunity, released without chargesOur heroes immunity was questioned by Mexico.

Mexico’s president wants to restrict DEA agents, including forced intelligence handover and stripped diplomatic immunity

Posted December 7, 2020

MEXICO CITY, MX Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has reportedly crafted a proposal with regard to how DEA agents operate within Mexico.

The proposal, which was submitted to the Mexican Senate in early December, would effectively restrict the current-standard of how DEA agents function in Mexico and remove their diplomatic immunity.

When it relates to diplomatic immunity, typically the chief DEA agent in the country is afforded complete diplomatic immunity while standard agents receive a watered-down iteration of said immunity.

But according to a summary of the language present within the submitted proposal, it reads that “foreign agents will not have any immunity.”

Part of the submitted restrictions would compel DEA agents that have gathered any intel in Mexico to then hand that information off to the Mexican government.

Furthermore, any time a DEA agent makes contact with a Mexican official, the official would be required to submit a detailed report of that interaction to Mexico’s Foreign Relations Department.

But with Mexico’s history of corruption finding its way into several facets of its government and police agencies, there are rightful concerns about the ramifications adhering to that proposal (if passed) would conjure.

Mike Vigil, the DEA’s former chief of international operations, commented on the concept of DEA agents simply handing over their intel to the Mexican government:

“That is not going to happen…Sadly, there is endemic corruption within the government. It’s going to be leaked, it’s going to compromise agents, it’s going to compromise informants.”

 

As recently as 2017, a commander of a Mexican police intelligence-sharing unit had obtained DEA intel and was later charged with passing that information off to the Beltran Leyva drug cartel for literally millions of dollars.

Outside of concerns over corruption it what Vigil says to be a “burdensome system” that would be essentially self-imposed by the Mexican government regarding “bilateral operations”:

“It’s just going to make a burdensome system. It is going to hinder bilateral operations, it is going to hinder the bilateral exchange of information. This is going to be much more detrimental to Mexico than to the United States.”

Those sentiments seem to stem from the proposal, including a mandate that any Mexican public servant that has any sort of interaction with a DEA agent – even so much as a text message – would have to “deliver a written report to the Foreign Relations Department and the Public Safety Department within three days.”

Vigil explained that the “vast majority” of intel related to counteracting cartel activities comes from the DEA’s presence in the country and not from Mexican intelligence operations:

“Ninety percent of the information sharing goes from the DEA to Mexico, rather from Mexico to the US. The vast majority of counter-drug successes in Mexico come from DEA information.”

There is some speculation on whether this proposal by President López Obrador was at all inspired by the recent debacle involving former Mexican Defense Secretary Salvador Cienfuegos.

Back in October 2020, Cienfuegos was arrested in the U.S. under charges related to drug trafficking and money laundering. But roughly a month after his arrest, the DOJ dropped the charges against Cienfuegos after Mexican officials applied some serious pressure on the matter. 

Shortly after the charges were dropped, officials returned Cienfuegos back to Mexico.

Mexico’s Foreign Relations Secretary Marcelo Ebrard released a statement in November expressing disdain toward the Justice Department for trying to prosecute Cienfuegos in the U.S. for crimes allegedly committed in Mexico:

“Whoever is culpable according to our laws will be tried, judged, and if applicable sentenced in Mexico, and not in other countries, and that is the basis which has been encouraged by this agreement.”

Acting U.S. Attorney Seth DuCharme said of the dropped charges back in November that maintaining foreign relations with Mexico was more important than trying to prosecute this single case:

“The United States determined that the broader interest in maintaining that relationship in a cooperative way outweighed the department’s interest and the public’s interest in pursuing this particular case.”

While some may have thought that the dropping of charges against Cienfuegos in November marked that a closed issue, this proposal drafted by President López Obrador seems to betray that there is still underlying anger over the arrest of Cienfuegos back in October.

FB Group Page

Share:
Submit a Correction
Related Posts