US Embassy Worker With Diplomatic Protection Left UK Before Met Interviewed Him in Child-Image Probe

A US embassy worker covered by diplomatic protection left Britain before he could be interviewed by the Metropolitan Police over suspected offences involving indecent images of children, it has emerged.

The staff member, who has not been named, was returned to the United States in August after allegations came to light, with conflicting accounts over how he departed and when UK authorities were told.

He is understood to have been an embassy employee rather than a diplomat, but nonetheless covered by diplomatic protection.

The Metropolitan Police said US authorities told it on 25 August about a US investigation into suspected offences in London relating to indecent images of children. The force said it continues to liaise with US authorities.

The US Embassy said the employee had been reassigned to the United States after allegations emerged. It said it had quickly informed UK law enforcement and taken swift action. The embassy has not named the employee or publicly described him as a diplomat.

Reports Conflict Over How He Left Britain

Some reports state that US personnel searched a flat in Putney on 25 August and detained the employee before taking him to an American military facility. The reports said he was then flown out of Britain on a US military-linked cargo flight.

Other reports say he left on a commercial flight. It also reported that he was an embassy staffer rather than a diplomat, but was covered by diplomatic protection.

The Met has confirmed that US authorities notified it on 25 August, but has not said whether British officers tried to interview the employee before he left the country.

The embassy said it was aware of allegations concerning an 'individual assigned to the Embassy' and that personnel are expected to 'adhere to the highest standards of conduct'. It added: 'We take these allegations seriously.'

Diplomatic Protection Could Affect UK Prosecution

The employee's precise diplomatic status could affect whether Britain can prosecute him for alleged conduct in London.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, given effect in UK law by the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964, provides diplomatic agents with immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state. Other embassy personnel can have narrower protections depending on their role and status.

He is understood not to have been a diplomat, but to have been covered by diplomatic protection. The scope of immunity varies between categories of diplomatic and embassy staff.

Immunity from the receiving state's jurisdiction does not exempt a person from the jurisdiction of the sending state. The Vienna Convention also allows the sending state to waive immunity.

The protections do not determine whether the alleged conduct can be investigated or prosecuted in the United States. They can, however, affect the ability of British authorities to exercise jurisdiction over an employee accused of conduct in the UK.

Met Confirms Suspected Offences In London

The Met has confirmed that the suspected offences were said to have occurred in London, although the force has not said it is leading a separate UK prosecution.

'On Tuesday August 25, US authorities made us aware of an investigation they are conducting into suspected offences in London relating to indecent images of children,' the force said. 'We continue to liaise with them regarding this matter.'

The UK government has said foreign diplomats are expected to abide by British law and that it would not be appropriate to comment further while the US investigation is continuing.

No charge against the employee has been publicly announced in Britain or the United States, and he has not been publicly identified.

The case has also been linked in some reports to a separate US investigation involving the employee's brother, who is alleged to have sent material to him. That connection has not been independently established by the Met.

The employee is now back in the United States. The Met remains in contact with US authorities, but neither side has publicly disclosed what evidence has been obtained, whether British police will interview him or whether a UK prosecution could follow.