Subject: Re: Neutral Zones - Navassa & Murder?<br/>
Date: Apr 02, 2003 @ 14:45<br/>
Author: L. A. Nadybal (&quot;L. A. Nadybal&quot; &lt;lnadybal@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="9539.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="9551.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic9531.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="9549.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="9551.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1439021622">Wait a minute - that&#39;s not right.<br/>
Navassa is US territory under the jurisdiction of the US Department of<br/>
the Interior.  US federal laws apply, and there is a federal law<br/>
against murder.  The US federal government can prosecute a murder<br/>
there.  The Dept of the Interior would turn the case over to the<br/>
Department of Justice.  You wrote there is &quot;no LOCAL law&quot;.  In a place<br/>
where there is no state, county or similar local legal administration,<br/>
the federal law is the local law, precisely because the area is under<br/>
federal jurisdiction.<br/>
<br/>
Len Nadybal<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> --- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, &quot;Karolis B.&quot; &lt;kbajoraz@y...&gt; wrote:<br/>
&gt; Antarctica is for one thing really everyone&#39;s land (national claims <br/>
&gt; put aside). <br/>
&gt; But really what about the Moroco-Spain neutral areas?? are they no <br/>
&gt; ones&#39;s or common land.<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; I also always wondered about law in such places. Who has legal <br/>
&gt; jurisdiction? in Antractica, in ESMO, in...?<br/>
&gt; And also about legal jurisdiction on uninhabited US overseas <br/>
&gt; territories. Like Navassa. US Federal law doesn&#39;t prohibit murder. <br/>
&gt; Well, Navassa has no residents, no local law. So if someone was to <br/>
&gt; take their parents-in-law to Navassa and leave them there to die, or <br/>
&gt; outright shoot them, wouldn&#39;t they be not responsible? </span></blockquote></div>