Reply #3: The standard of evidence doesn't seem very high

[muriel_volestrangler]

and that's the basic problem with the new US-UK extradition treaty - the US doesn't have to show any evidence at all to the UK (though the UK must show evidence to get someone extradited to the US - because the US constitution requires that, while this is a situation where a UK goverment can throw away its citizens' rights if it feels like it). It seems to me that a case where the evidence consists of a claim by a prisoner (who got time off for this) that there was a conspiracy, but nothing actually happened, would be unlikely to get a conviction in a proper court - but that hasn't been tested yet in the UK, thanks to the extradition treaty, and the new rules in the US mean it needn't be tested there either - Bush can just lock him up. And as Mallard says, there seems to be a matter of jurisdiction for the other guy.