This is a follow-up to the article written last night, South Sudan Embassy Just Got A Bad Rep, A Really Bad Rep. Assault Story in New York. A Discussion About Diplomatic Immunity.
There are recourses for the administration of justice. Just what exactly they are on a practical level, may take a moment or two to collect.
Here are some basic guidelines:

1. First, document the incident the best possible.
2. Second, seek an immunity waiver. (If the suspect is invoking diplomatic immunity to protect himself from continually being in the state of being arrested, that immunity can be taken away by the country that sent him here.) To obtain the waiver, the State Department may have to request it.
3. If the waiver is denied, seek an expulsion of the referent diplomat. (Realize that repercussions may be dangerous to the suspect if he does get sent home, as in sent back to his home country or sending entity, and that it is diplomatic procedure for expulsion to occur in certain situations which are severe, cases less severe than this receives this treatment, and therefore, there might be a probability that the waiver will be granted, allowing the suspect applicable amount of flexibility after having no further immunity.)

What could happen, is an immunity waiver could be requested, if granted, suspect rearrested and, or a warrant for arrest or court appearance be issued, and he brought before US or local court such as the one attached to the police department which he was initially arrested, perhaps with some kind of monitoring given the diplomatic circumstance could occur, tried before such court, punitive actions established, the diplomat could then be terminated from his post, or in some order of that. Lawyers for all sides, prosecutors, NYPD, State Department, likely most of the pertinent parties involved, and swiftly reach a conclusion or best action.

The suspect can not and does not have to be considered let to continue on scot-free with no punitive repercussion.

Detailed notes:
There are some courses of actions that can be taken as set forth by the State Department, here are some excerpts with boldface to provide a general framework:
The term diplomatic immunity is popularly, and erroneously, understood to refer to special protections afforded all employees of foreign governments who are present in the United States as official representatives of their home governments. (Per State Department's Guide to Law Enforcement on Diplomatic and Consular Immunity, 2018).
It should be emphasized that even at its highest level, diplomatic immunity does not exempt diplomatic officers from the obligation of conforming with national and local laws and regulations. Diplomatic immunity is not intended to serve as a license for persons to flout the law and purposely avoid liability for their actions. The purpose of these privileges and immunities is not to benefit individuals but to ensure the efficient and effective performance of their official missions on behalf of their governments. This is a crucial point for law enforcement officers to understand in their dealings with foreign diplomatic and consular personnel. While police officers are obliged, under international customary and treaty law, to recognize the immunity of the envoy, they must not ignore or condone the commission of crimes. As is explained in greater detail below, adherence to police procedures in such cases is often essential in order for the United States to formulate appropriate measures through diplomatic channels to deal with such offenders.

Diplomatic agents enjoy the highest degree of privileges and immunities. They enjoy complete personal inviolability, which means that they may not be handcuffed (except in extraordinary circumstances), arrested, or detained; and neither their property (including vehicles) nor residences may be entered or searched. Diplomatic agents also enjoy complete immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the host country’s courts and thus cannot be prosecuted no matter how serious the offense unless their immunity is waived by the sending state (see the following discussion).

Waivers
Always keep in mind that privileges and immunities are extended from one country to another in order to permit their respective representatives to perform their duties effectively; in a sense, it may be said the sending countries “own” these privileges and immunities. Therefore, while the individual enjoying such immunities may not waive them, the sending states can, and do. Police authorities should never address the alleged commission of a crime by a person enjoying full criminal immunity with the belief that there is no possibility that a prosecution could result. The U.S. Department of State requests waivers of immunity in every case where the prosecutor advises that, but for the immunity, charges would be pursued. In serious cases, if a waiver is refused, the offender will be expelled from the United States and the U.S. Department of State will request that a warrant be issued and appropriate entries to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database be made by the responsible jurisdiction. The seeking of waiver of immunity is handled entirely via diplomatic channels, but effective and informed police work becomes the basis of the prosecutor’s decision and the foundation for the U.S. Department of State’s waiver requests and any subsequent prosecutions or expulsions.
Correct Understanding of Immunity Frequently (and erroneously), immunity is understood to mean pardon, total exoneration, or total release from the responsibility to comply with the law. In actuality, immunity is simply a legal barrier which precludes U.S. courts from exercising jurisdiction over cases against persons who enjoy it and in no way releases such persons from the duty, embodied in international law, to respect the laws and regulations of the United States.

Waiver of Immunity Diplomatic and consular immunity are not intended to benefit the individual; they are intended to benefit the mission of the foreign government or international organization. Thus an individual does not “own” his or her immunity and it may be waived, in whole or in part, by the mission member’s government. The U.S. Department of State will request a waiver of immunity in every case in which the prosecutor advises that he or she would prosecute but for immunity. The U.S. Department of State’s ability to secure such waiver may depend to a large degree on the strength (and documentation) of the case at issue. Similarly, it is of little avail for the U.S. Department of State to secure a waiver of immunity in a particular case, if the case has not been developed with sufficient care and completeness to permit a successful subsequent prosecution. Proper documentation and reporting by law enforcement authorities play a critical role in both of these respects.

Expulsion Procedure
The criminal immunity that foreign diplomatic and some consular personnel enjoy protects them from the normal jurisdiction of the courts with respect to alleged criminal activity. However, in those instances in which a person with immunity is believed to have committed a serious offense (any felony or crime of violence) and the sending country has not acceded to the U.S. Department of State’s request for a waiver of immunity, it is the Department’s policy to require the departure of that individual from the United States. Requiring the departure of a person who enjoys immunity is an extreme diplomatic tool, and it is used only after the most careful consideration to ensure that the United States is not perceived as having acted in an arbitrary, capricious, or prejudiced manner. A high standard of police investigation, records, and reporting in diplomatic incident cases is therefore essential to permit the Department to make the appropriate decision.

Written evening August 23, 2022 EST
Unfortunately, our most recent story here on HCN started out with one story is not enough, another story has to be written. This was in regard to the information found about an assault case in Reston, Virginia last Sunday. Then it was found out there was an assault of a late 50s aged women in Little Saigon, in the open streets in broad daylight, last Sunday. Now come to find out there is yet another very disturbing story involving a United Nations diplomat for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation in South Sudan, in carrying out assault or assault-like behavior in Upper Manhattan, New York, last Sunday, and it has to be said again, there is another situation being written about and has to be dealt with.
Frankly, that is the startup of one of the places where young fellas think in their minds that assault on females is 'cool', ok, allowable, and even encouraged at times. Here in the US, many are trying to figure out why there are so many brazen assaults done by young men between 16 and roughly 26. Youth that do not have diplomatic immunity are exposed to youth or young adults who do, and carry on activities, and carry on activities, repeatedly, and get away with it, because they or a member of their household, often a parent, has this magical charm called diplomatic immunity. The diplomat's kid can solicit or engage in assignation of prostitution as though it is a part of everyday life. They can run red lights, they can throw glass bottles of liquid at people, vehicularly assault, so on and so forth. Just how broad the band of behavior is might not be rounded in up in one investigation. 

Evidently, New York police arrested the suspect, and he was subsequently let go, under umbrella of diplomatic immunity.

Aspects have changed over the years. Individuals engaging in misconduct might still be asked to face consequences in the applicable framework.
The idea, or at least a part of it, of diplomatic immunity, is to ensure allowing important diplomatic relations to continue even though a latent low-lying event may have occurred which might not constitute a major criminal act, but could be enough to disrupt serious developments such as negotiations between nations. For illustration, a diplomat's teenage son gets identical wallets confused in a joke played on him, and he walks off with the wallet to his surprise is someone else's, who calls police and charges theft. As the wallet is being returned, police arrest. Come to find out, the jokester was an agent of the country that was not exactly receiving the large donation of money to make their economy better, but receiving the embargo.

Diplomatic immunity is not in place so a diplomat or ambassador or one of their kids can assault human beings, notably in reference to the incident, a female, multiple times, or even once, whenever and wherever they want.

There are other diplomacy rules in existence and effect. The suspect's actions are not ones where he can just be free as the wind whips.

The police may have let the suspect go, however, it does not make the behavior correct. 
Confusion sets in sometimes, and people that engage in wrongdoing start thinking that the wrongful behavior is actually correct, and they can kick back and laugh when faced with the prospect of arrest, because they have the diplomatic immunity.
Is this what happened here?
The question is up on the table for sure.
A rescue to the suspect's defense might help save face.

An aspect of this case is there is a background with South Sudan that involves certain expectations.
For decades, maybe even a half century, maybe longer, there has been mixed views sometimes even criticism about the potentiality of South Sudan coming into existence, regardless of whether it really has or has not for a length of time known to the story it comes from.
The practice of the way of life known as Islam, is supposed to have a big part in the developments in the region, Sudan, South Sudan, just a few hops over the sea from the Arab Peninsula, basically a region just up or down, or just miles west of where the last Prophet (of Arabia) {salal..} had according to some records his second wife from after the first passed away. She was tall, and so on, to jog back memory.
[Edit Nov. 3 2022: "Sawdah and Sakran emigrated to Abyssinia[4] when Muhammad ordered many of the Muslims to perform Hijrah in order to avoid persecution by the Quraysh". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawdah_bint_Zam%27ah [4] Tabari, Tarikh al-Rusul...; ... bin Qys... according to many online sources as a reference pertinent clans. Maps validating claim of locale https://etc.usf.edu/maps/pages/3600/3644/3644.htm; preceding paragraph intended to be a brief reference, however perhaps a portion of the last sentence more safely reworded to: according to some records, a region where his second wife may have stayed at least for a time after...]
There are some discomforts in a number of regions of the world with South Sudan is what the bottom line is, and now a story like the assault is being exposed.
Was the woman someone the diplomat had some kind of marital or permissible relation with? 

If not, there is big trouble brimming.
A judge may have to judge; here in the US, among cousins in the same apartment unit may not fly to form the basis of social rules as it might in remote areas of Sudan many years ago where for instance there are only 2 or 3 cars per 20 or 30 square miles, and the young adult folks had access to minimum education about social laws. Many walks of life and cultures side by side exist here in the US.

Well some might say the diplomat was not a Muslim, and so the expectations and rules about 'zina', or fornication briefly, does not apply to him. Geographically, it may be a close call back where the suspect is or was from, and persons not Muslim may be welcome to live in Sudan or South Sudan, or even be diplomats.

However, the behavior exhibited in this incident, diplomatic immunity rules aside, is brushing too close to one, the massive population of South Sudan and Sudanese that recognize some kind of rule set involving not only fornication, Muslim or other religion, but an assault on top of that, and, two, numerous folks in New York that know about the referent zina/ fornication/adultery rules, exacerbated by assault, and of course worldwide in general.

Minimally, this is one where if the facts of what has been disclosed to the public are correct, and there indeed was an assault, this individual needs to no longer be a diplomat. 

Going so far to say he should be sent back to South Sudan and let the authorities deal with him there, might be out of line because the consequences he might face could be of intense danger.

At the accepted to state level, the behavior read about in the Manhattan incident report is straightforwardly not tolerated, by US citizens, by individuals that state they are Muslim, by New Yorkers, or any aboveboard diplomatic entity or embassy.

Written evening August 23, 2022 EST
Just when one might think that the issues in one region were belabored, come to find out, at almost the exact same time but in another place, in the USA, another horrorful incident occurred. Both of them infuriating to the point that criminals engaging in the type of crime better freeze and pray for mercy.

On the East Coast last Sunday evening was a break-in and assault perpetrated by a feller supposedly in his early 20s, in Reston, Virginia, a relatively newly developed suburb of Washington DC, located in Fairfax County. HCN story about it, the about hour long press conference with Fairfax County police officials has been viewed, my position stated on what happened is strengthened by it, https://www.hcrestnews.com/washington-dc-metropolitan-area-news/reston-virginia-in-spotlight-due-to-knife-wielding-masked-male-late-night-condo-break-in-assault-on-female.

There is an effort to minimize the amount of repeating the story. Right now there are many who are indignant and disgusted; somehow, criminals have been allowed to roam areas not only where they have no business, but roam at all. As I watch footage of the event on the West Coast that occurred, aside from EST to PST differences, that happened about 5 or 6 hours earlier, I see (memories of) film clips from certain mob and horror films, as though the criminals used them as a script and carried them out.

After the Name said and with it. Between- (Evil) doings only done when the person that carries it out knows about it, or its reverse. Do not worry much about the grammar, the reference is to something not originally written in today's English. There will be a crackdown, and if there is not one, there will be crackdown.

On the West Coast, Oakland, California, according to camera footage readouts, sometime around 4 to 5 minutes after 2pm PST last Sunday, a dentist in her mid 50s was assaulted on a clear balmy day, where a firearm was discharged at least 3 times, and evidently robbed as well. Twitter footage et al, Da Lin on Twitter: "Surveillance video of Sunday's shooting & killing of an elderly Asian woman in an attempted robbery in Oakland's Little Saigon. Suspect car parked/waited on 5th Ave near E 11th St for 30-45 mins before victim car pulled up. 2 cam angles of the shooting. @KPIXtv @BettyKPIX https://t.co/ajgImYibRZ" / Twitter, Outrage after Asian dentist slain in Oakland's "Little Saigon" section (yahoo.com).

This before racial elements involved with crimes are even assessed. There is a behavior going around affecting just about every stock, identity, ethnicity, and so on.

There may be some differences in culture in the two areas, but the essence of the incidents were about the same. Someone assaults, without much care about human life and dignity. Then ran off like a coward. Further, left plenty of clues behind. This may be a case where if police in one immediate jurisdiction did not seize every clue and make an arrest, that another jurisdiction has the practice to accomplish that within hours.

More than arrests are on the way. The USA is not here for young men to be roaming around with sweatshirts, ski masks, cheap conditioned cars with tinted windows, knives, and cheap firearms, to assault, sometimes fatally, any female they so choose, whenever they choose, regardless if their gang boss told them so, or they received a cue they might get compensated a sum of money.

The buck needs to stop.

Published Sunday evening before dark August 14, 2022 EST

The situation altogether is a serious issue. Armed individuals that appear ready for the front lines of combat in a military raid operation in a foreign war, standing outside the FBI building in Phoenix, Arizona yesterday.

Here are some of the key components of what makes it an issue:
The right to keep and bear arms.
General understanding that protesting with arms can be taken as a threat with firearms; the line in the stand between simply protesting while concurrently having the right to keep and bear arms (in the process o protesting) is extremely thin.
[It may just be a matter of time before the judgement call is made that  protesters have gone too far, crossed the line and now are in arrestable offense territory.]
A popular suggestion is to gate the building off.
At that, there may be other locations susceptible to similar events.
Cordoning further off from the FBI office premises may preempt last drifting possibilities or thoughts they might thereof of the events still having memories that loom that unfolded on January 6th 2021 midafternoon at the DC Capitol.
Protestors may have left the immediate scene in Phoenix, but there are no guarantees they won't be coming back.
From an all-around safety standpoint, there are no guarantees that everyone in, were, or will be in possible events in the unforetold future, the protesting crowd, are actually Trump supporters.
Basically, the prudent rule of thumb is, if you see people with guns standing outside, the bottom line is, there are people with guns outside, regardless of their slogans, outfits, who they are standing beside and so forth.

The guns seen with some of the protesters in Phoenix flat out are very dangerous. They are not little old hand-me-down handguns brought from great grandma's house from cowboy days, they are high powered rifles that can gain precise aim and do serious damage if fired.

The scene puts the FBI in a really awkward moment. Perhaps not everyone remembers that the FBI covers a broad range of purview; they are present and put their lives on the line to react to and address major emergencies involving high round number or gun magazine incidents, usage of weapons of mass destruction and so on. Their lives are on the line after events as well, such as after investigating a terror attack, where terrorists might just want to follow them around for years. All to say, it's a tense moment to be standing armed in front of the very same entity that may have saved your life in ways unbeknownst the day before.

An altercation with both sides pointing weapons would be a serious firefight almost unheard of, like an unprecedented battle on US soil. No one wants all that.

The easiest and probably safe to say, smartest move to be made in terms of everyone involved, is to figure out a way to express your view and positions which will not involve use of firearms by anyone.

Based on information in other news sources, the protesters may feel that President Trump is having a certain aspect of post administration 'picked on', and that the FBI which is a federal agency that really sees no political party divide, is being used as a strong-arm for supporters of certain political views and actions to get their way.

On the other hand, there may be those that feel that acquisition of the 'papers', said to be in the Trump property, in this case by FBI, is standard procedure, and so there should be no cause for unrest (by protestors and supporters of a leader or political figure) for a job that would be done regardless of who was President and what the point of political argument is.

Mar-a-Lago. A house. A search warrant.

Lest mistaken, there is a thing called Due Process. Did Trump simply be asked for the papers? Here is where it might be getting sticky; the January 6th riot panel may be a point in a series in a sequence of events, where the search warrant was en segue, or it follows, the developments in the hearings. This encompasses other developments such as meetings and ascertaining of other documents. It may be possible, if the hearings went differently, the method of obtaining documents may have been different. If a search warrant, the method and manner of search and acquisition, had been more amicable, maybe the escalation of events in Phoenix would not have occurred the way it did.

Then again, methodologies are analyzed often very carefully by law enforcement bodies. This is not to say everyone is perfect. It is also to to say that there may be a zone where doing a deeper analysis and slowing things down, breaking it up into smaller chunks, discussing and holding topics in hearings that are as substantive as possible, may help placate where all of this either got to or where is going.

Usually, when a raid or seizure occurs it is indicative that the party that held the documents might make an attempt at obstructing their acquisition by federal authorities. Did that happen? That might be one of the crux points why there was a reaction to the raids, that were making a statement that they felt the raid was a disrespectful affront.

That 'usually', may have some elements of folkways, rehearsed procedures again involved, it is a prickly matter.

The President's job, for conversation sake, is not to hoard boxes of sensitive data; for a long time, the beginning of the President institution, President Washington, he had advisors that help him with secret and sensitive data. Thereat, that type of data is to understood to be of some degree already shareable with applicable parties.

Which leaves these closing words, softly, there is too much gun waving going on, and for reasons that could be averted through refined approaches to what is known and unknown, benchmarks already gone through, and untraversed unidentified directions and lays.

Published mid evening August 12, 2022

The following news article gives a lot of information about the background of issues and what is known to the public thus far: https://www.nj.com/news/2022/08/nj-man-charged-with-stabbing-author-salman-rushdie-on-lecture-stage-in-new-york.html.

How did I find out, with nothing in surroundings but electronic equipment and maybe glimpses of the sky? A sort of shimmering of something happened making the news in the Mid-Atlantic region today, but what was it? This event found.

Given all of the resentment and rioting in the past, it seems an inevitable climax of lashing out by someone or some collective against Rushdie was not there in the mix with other recent news information for some years, although there was a sense among many that something like this or at least an attempt thereunto, might emerge someday. 

Some other angles in details and background about today's event:
The day the stabbing event happened had at least a twofold aspect, in today, of one, being Friday, the congregation day that adherents to the way of life established as affirmed by the Seal of the Prophets* recognize and perform certain actions, for example, able males go to Juma' prayer meet and so on. The second aspect is today is nearing or possibly even the middle of the first Hijri, lunar month, known as Muharram, just a few days past the 10th, known as Ashura Day. 

The author of 'Satanic Verses', who wrote about the Seal of the Prophets in ways which were taken as uncomfortable, perhaps very uncomfortable, whereat the 'subject' of the book in the Seal left sayings which discuss the virtues of the 10th, Ashura, of Muharram, (and) at least the fasting in the middle of the Hijri months, and the obligations for Friday, -the author of 'S. Verses' promulgates himself, and hence his literature, which is attached to him, on this day Friday. Whereat, it may be possible, that, that combination did not sit well with everyone, especially adherents to the path practiced by again the Seal of the Prophets.

Another dimension which may not have sat well with adherents is that the legacy, example and so forth of the Seal of the Prophets, whereas perhaps in some view, in a linear timeline, whatever happens for the rest of time after the seal or the seal itself carried by the Seal, and so on, the seal marks that event and there according to the principle will have no other come after him in the applicable aspects, basically, self-explanatory that, that is innate with what it means. So for thus far roughly 1400 years ago, until now, the examples of how to live are still carried on throughout the world, and there will be many more years that it will, and whether people follow the way, do not, forgot, forget, or only have tiny fragments of vestiges and understanding in the centuries in the future, etc., a nearly eternal legacy (of the Seal of the Prophets) is contrasted to Salman Rushdie's 75 years thereabout of living so far, and the 30 something years or so ago he embarked on his 'Satanic Verses' project, which infuriated many adherents.

An aspect that does not sit comfortable with adherents, is Salman Rushdie's continued use of the name, despite what might be a conflict of interest. Explaining, Salman is a name that had a member of the Sahaba, or close surrounding followers and helpers, around the very man Salman Rushdie chose to be the subject of his referent book. Salman Al Farasi or the Persian, the Sahab, singular form, was known to be his name.
The second name, Rushdie, perhaps close to the word Rushd, one of the the words close to Rasheed, Rashid, various transliterations, is one of the '99 Names', or Isma (names) al Husna, briefly translated glorified names, found in Quran, the book that was revealed to the Seal of the Prophets, the man who Salman Rushdie chose to discuss in the manner he did.

Somewhere between further background and further reading:

Among other things, New York has a large Muslim population; a large number of different aspects of teachings and knowledge can be found there; famous translator of the Quran Yusuf Ali, resided or stayed there for a time, where there may be some discrepancies and mild amount of resentment in that original Quran can only be original Quran, but generally, popular consensus is there was not a blaring purposefully antagonistic evil in what Yusuf Ali translating effort was doing. Dr. Rahman a historic figure (who came to America from then India, the region of in East Pakistan) that had both pedigree that is said to be distinguished, and preceptor to preceptor lineage through what is popularly understood to briefly be called the Qadiri chain (of preceptors, guides, or teachers), was a resident of New York for a time as well. Again, contrasts and conflict of interests can be seen by adherents familiar with these and much more where a man in Salman Rushdie said to be from India, that gained access to some knowledges, was discussing the Seal of the Prophets in ways interpreted by adherents as condescending, disrespectful, sacrilegious and other terms in that vein, meanwhile are numerous legacies in the other direction in New York.


The concept of Freedom of Speech, especially here in America, is a national treasure. Albeit, there are some that believe that even though freedom of speech may exist in whatever form or fashion wherever it may be, that certain established principles such as affirming the affirming, for lean words, of exaltation, dignity, and so on, especially of Prophets, remain set, regardless of the freedom of speech laws, and there exist feelings by some that freedom of speech rulings can sometimes be taken to far, or taken advantage of. It is known that words that could be perceived or interpreted as vehemently discomforting or having misportrayals about Prophets could eventually lead to unrest.

Perhaps these sentences above help explain general mindset and views, a languageless understanding, or having no language barrier, why the expressed literature of Salman Rushdie rubbed the wrong way with many throughout the world, and still so even though it has been some decades now, and also explain why those that support promulgating Salman Rushdie's works are felt to be on opposing sides to adherents as  well.

There is a chance that the level of indignancy still felt by adherents of the 'guided way' may have reduced some had Salman Rushdie rescinded his statements, or apologized, or something along those lines; rather his works are still promoted.


Another discussion, is there is something in the Quran, which discusses, the opposite of something is not taken up until one knows the the original source, basically, the right way of doing things first. Knowledges and traditions carried on in India, hometown of S. Rushdie, are being 'found again' as we speak. That S. Rushdie may have been limited in scope of his literature is a matter of concern, and that he talked about what he knew about, and talked in a way that was hurtful to many, might encapsulate a rationale by adherents for a general disdain of his literature piece and the effort to continue promoting it.


*'Real' prophets, such as those that were revealed a 'Holy Book'.
Notes: (Seal of the Prophets (sometimes found Khatm) is a title or 'name' of Prophet Muhammad, sala...and peace, partial translation of post name lauds, and also has the practical use of that in that that was an aspect describing him. (reference 'this day perfected...').