... Disclaimer first: This is a hypothetical that came up during a discussion elsewhere. No real people were harmed during the creation of this question, and any resemblance to current or past events is purely an accident.
Here's the scenario:
- Alice is a British citizen and foreign exchange student currently studying at MIT.
- Kurt is a German citizen visiting Boston on a tourist visa. Because he's planning on a bit of traveling, he rented a car.
- Because Kurt is also a bit of an idiot, one fine evening he gets behind the wheel after drinking a bit too much, and Alice is killed in a hit-and-run during his DUI, which ends nonfatally a bit later against a lamp post.
There are three nations that would have an interest in this case:
- The USA, or at least the state of Boston where a DUI with a fatal accident took place;
- The United Kingdom, who have lost a citizen through no fault of her own and may want to have a word with the person responsible, or at least reparations of some kind for her family;
- Germany, who probably isn't happy with their citizen's behaviour right now, but is obligated to look out for the citizen's rights under their constitution.
Presumably, the US has first right here because they're the nation in which the crime happened, but how does international law shake out the rest of the order of precedence? Would the order of precedence change any if it had been a deliberate murder (say, Kurt buys a weapon in Boston, goes to the pub Alice happens to be in as well, a drunken argument happens and Kurt uses his newly purchased weapon to settle it)?