You keep saying spy as if that mattered. The hubby's position is irrelevant to the wife's driving and to the state dept's decision to whisk her away. She killed someone accidentally, they used her immunity; that's what immunity is for. Or do you think that her hubby's job made her murder that poor kid? If not, why keep bringing up irrelevancies? The issue is the *existence* of immunity, not the fact that it was appropriately applied. Other countries protect their dips in the US and Europe and all over the world. That's what it's for.