A former US Army veteran was sentenced to life in federal prison on Thursday for his rule in a murder-for-hire plot in the Philippines in 2012. Joseph Manuel Hunter, 53, paid $35,000 to two men to kill a Filipina woman. Moreover, Hunter, whose nickname is “Rambo” also provided these men with the weapons. The other two men, Adam Samia and Carl David Stillwell, are serving life in prison. Samia fired two shots into the woman’s face and Stillwell helped dispose of the body, prosecutors said.
“With zero regard for human life, Joseph Hunter callously helped to arrange the murder of a Filipino woman in exchange for money,” US Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said.
Rambo was a former US army sergeant. Samia claimed to have worked as a “contractor” for clients in the Philippines, China, Papua New Guinea and the Democratic Republic of Congo. All three men had extensive firearms training.
According to a statement by the United States Attorney’s Office, the three men agreed in 2011 and 2012 to commit a number of murders across the world in exchange for a salary, including “bonus payments” for each victim.
In early 2012, Samia and Stillwell traveled to the Philippines where Hunter gave them information on their victims and weapons to use in the killing. After watching their female Filipino target for months, the two men murdered her by shooting her in the face multiple times then dumped her body on a pile of garbage.
“(These men) conspired to end the lives of people overseas whom they had never met. Today a unanimous jury convicted them for their craven indifference to human life,” US Attorney Geoffrey Berman said.
This isn’t Rambo’s first time in a US court. In fact, he was sentenced to 20 years in February 2015 over the planned killing of a US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) agent and informant.
US Attorney Preet Bharara described Hunter as “an admitted contract killer, convicted drug trafficker, and ringleader of trained assassins.”
“Hunter and his cohorts turned from serving their countries as soldiers to becoming mercenaries for hire, plotting to kill a DEA agent and informant and trafficking in massive quantities of cocaine,” US Attorney Preet Bharara said.
The three men were convicted last year after a 12-day trial. The investigation into the three men was an international effort, bringing together US law enforcement agencies with the Royal Thai Police and the Philippines National Police.
Analysis
Before, crimes used to be limited to the country of the criminal’s origin. However, with the modernization of technology and globalization, these crimes can be executed in any part of the world. The creation of a borderless world allows criminals to evade arrest. Thus, their crimes go unpunished. For example, the creation of the European Union resulted into relatively easy trade and travel between the European countries. However, these lax borders can also be used by criminals to flee and evade arrest.
To solve this problem, international crimes are mitigated through extradition treaties. Under Presidential Decree 1069 (Philippine Extradition Law), extradition entails the removal of the accused from the requested state and his/her subsequent transfer to the requesting state for criminal investigation/ trial. In other words, the fugitive found in one country is surrendered to another country for trial or punishment. International Law does not really impose any obligation nor duties on states to extradite. Rather, extradition is a matter of bilateral treaty. This highlights the interplay between diplomacy and foreign relations as the extradition of a criminal involves the “cooperation and coordination of law enforcement personnel, prosecutor, and other government officials from the two countries” (“Criminal Extradition and International Diplomacy”, 2018).
Extradition is both a municipal and international law. Municipal in the sense that the country must adopt the treaty as part of the law of land and international in the sense that it governs the relations between two states in regards to the treatment of the fugitive.
Extradition of criminals is “mutually beneficial” for the two states as well as the international community as a whole (“Criminal Extradition and International Diplomacy”, 2018). With it, crime is suppressed as criminals realize that there is no escape. It also fosters cooperation between the two extraditing countries and it also “helps countries avoid international tension and diplomatic crisis” (“Criminal Extradition and International Diplomacy”, 2018).
The case of Hunter and his allies shows the benefits of extradition. With the joint effort of the US, Thailand and the Philippines, the three men were captured.
However, while extradition is beneficial, it is not perfect. For one, not all criminals can be captured. Due to the ease of travel, authorities can have a difficult time in arresting the criminal. Moreover, there are limitations in extradition such as the exceptions for political and military offences.
Furthermore, extradition is based on a state’s confidence on the administration of criminal justice of another state. In other words, state A trusts state B to take the accuse to trial. However, this can be a problem if this “confidence is shaken” (Manheim, 1935, p.109). When this happens, the requested state may “refuse to grant extradition” and/or the requesting state may forcibly get the criminal from the requested state (Manheim, 1935, p.109).
Moreover, countries can also do well to strengthen their requirements for foreigners to stay in the country. For example, Philippine visas are relatively easy to procure seeing as it does not really need a lot of requirements. To avoid housing criminals, the Philippines should place more stricter regulations regarding its visas. That way, passage in and out of the country is more controlled and easily monitored.
References:
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/07/asia/philippines-us-mercenary-gets-life-in-prison-intl/index.html
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/04/18/asia/us-philippines-murder-for-hire-intl/index.html
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/international-law/criminal-extradition-and-international-diplomacy-law-essay.php
Mannheim, H. (1935). Some Recent Problems in the Law of Extradition. Transactions of the Grotius Society,21, 109-125. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/743066
Jia's Thoughts on Things 