Headscratchers / Lethal Weapon 2

• I'm genuinely curious about the legal aftermath of the second film. While there were oodles and oodles of evidence against Rudd and his cronies (especially when they started killing off police officers) there surely had to be some sort of Internal Affairs or even Department of State investigation at the end to clear Riggs and Murtaugh of any culpability. I'm particularly interested in the kind of defense that could apply: they didn't have any warrants for searching/destroying Rudd's property, much less arresting, let alone killing his staff (not all of their kills were in self-defense.) In fact, much of the property they destroyed wasn't even Rudd's, it was the sovereign domain of the South African government. It gets worse when you remember that they had BOTH left their badges behind in order to indulge in acts of revenge, outside the auspice (and legal procedure) of the LAPD. Would they be reprimanded? Suspended temporarily? Demoted?
  • They would be investigated and likely reprimanded. While they didn't have their badges with them, they were still police officers (a cop is still a cop unless he's put on leave and told to turn in his badge), and they had previously identified themselves to the bad guys as cops, so the argument would be that they were pursuing an investigation into the money case, found Leo was being held in custody and in imminent danger of death (which they already knew but that's beside the point), and improvised because they were unable to wait for backup. Everything that happened on the ship was then in self-defense, since they were captured and in mortal danger. They would likely be reprimanded for going in without backup, but since they were really the only survivors they could spin in however they wanted (though knowing them, they'd probably tell the truth).
  • As for diplomatic fallout, given that the South Africans were clearly abusing their immunity, the South African government would likely try to sweep the whole thing under the carpet.
  • Since any complaints the South African government might raise about Riggs and Murtagh's conduct would be rapidly countered with the plentiful evidence that South African diplomats were engaged in the far more serious acts of smuggling drugs into the United States and kidnapping and murdering local police officers and citizens, and since the United States government is going to be less than thrilled with the South African government over that to begin with, the South African government doesn't exactly have much of a leg to stand on. It's practically guaranteed that the South African government wouldn't kick up that much of a stink in case they make things worse for themselves. Most likely, they offered a lot of profound regrets and apologies, insisted that Rudd and his cronies were rogue elements operating without any official sanction from the South African government, unreservedly condemned their actions, took their lumps and, like the troper above said, just waited for the whole mess to go away as quickly as possible.
  • Diplomatic Impunity isn't. The theory behind immunity is based on the fact that sovereigns don't subject each other to the laws of their own countries, and this extends to the body of the ambassadors that each country may send while that ambassador is doing that country's diplomatic or policy work. This is why UN diplomats should technically pay their New York Parking tickets - infringing New York Traffic laws are almost never the goals or work of an outside sovereign nation. Cop killing and drug smuggling is *not* the Republic of South Africa's international diplomatic policy - Rudd wouldn't be covered, even if he was the ambassador (and if he's just a random functionary within the embassy, that's even worse- they're not covered at all). Further, nations may declare any of their ambassadors persona non grata which means that they're withdrawing their immunity. The Republic of FW De Klerk would have probably signed that order in a heartbeat in the face of evidence of Rudd's atrocities.
  • There almost certainly was an Internal Affairs investigation or three; in the very next movie, Internal Affairs Officer Lorna Cole tells Riggs and Murtaugh that they are 'required reading' and references Mad Magazines when describing their files.
    • However, given that forensic evidence could prove that Rudd was the one who shot Riggs, Murtaugh could tell IA "Someone shot my partner, so I returned fire", which is even true, and the South African government can't really dispute it without needing to explain why bullets from their Consular Officer's gun are in a police officer's back.