Curious, how do you think we should deal with crimes of this type, if not (at minimum) restraining suspects from leaving the country and having a judge preside over the legal proceedings?
Hutchins was fortunate that he had some money and a sort of safety net in the form of donations, a network of people who knew him, etc. For most people without that type of support, I would imagine being prevented from leaving the States for an extended amount of time would be nothing less than devastating.
I think that actual equality would have him awaiting trial on bail back home in the UK, not Los Angeles.
Please check your language. Why does this wind you up so much?
I refer you to this that goes into in in more detail: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20541499
Other people get it, if you don't; you don't and can stop bothering me with aggressive questions. People on the internet don't, in general, "gonna have to explain". It's optional.
I can't tell if you're missing the point deliberately or not. Either way, I'm not interested.
There is quite a stark difference between waiting in your home, with your family, while being able to continue your day to day life (if you are a resident/citizen) and not being able to go back to your life, losing your job in your home country, while not being allowed to find a job either in the US, all the while you have to pay for accommodation and food for months or a year out of thin air (in the case of most non-residents).
How can you think both those situations equally suck?
I put it to you that the person so affected, and sentenced to time served, would in fact find it to be a "big deal".
Otherwise it's basically: Have you got access to lots of money, or are you going to spend years in prison? He was really lucky that he knew people who could offer him place to stay, contact lawyers, help with bail. Majority of people would be completely screwed in that situation.
A "framework", here, would probably include factors like "are we friendly with the country in question and can we get their law enforcement to monitor the defendant", the nature and severity of the crime, "does the defendant have the resources to 'disappear' in their home country", etc, etc. Besides the first question, it's pretty much already what's considered when deciding whether to grant bail.
(Note- I'm not sure the idea of releasing a defendant to another country is a good one, but it's not like the courts wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an agent of a foreign country working in an espionage capacity and Marcus Hutchins.)