I read the article at
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/sep/14/ministers-u... and was not able to find out anything about this person not having diplomatic immunity or that he was not in a role that granted him such status
like I said, this seems to be handled just as I thought, through the UK putting pressure on the US to act according to their wishes
it's really up to the US to classify what staffers are under immunity, that's just how it goes. it may not be right or moral but that's part of what allows them to station staff in other countries without fear of them being compromised and so on.
> based on the media reports, it seems this person was in one of those roles that did not require diplomatic immunity.
if you could give a reference to this, that'd be great. remember though, it doesn't have to be a "diplomat" role. just being in an official role or attached to such, or being family of such person is enough in most cases.