Obama tries to stop execution in Texas of Mexican killer

[Lostlover]

Didn't you just say that's the way it should be, except for this one time?

Again, if so what makes this guy so much worse than any other murderer that we have to make an exception?

And I have no problem with people living, I'm opposed to the death penalty in general.

An illegal immigrant (crime number one) who murdered (crime number two) and raped (crime number three) a girl should be executed and shouldn't escape justice because of a clerical error.

Obama will probably give this "issue" lip service, but that's about it. He has to look offended for the far left.

We already saw one murderer get away because of a technicality (Casey Anthony). Two in one week is just too much.

 

[construct]

An illegal immigrant (crime number one) who murdered (crime number two) and raped (crime number three) a girl should be executed and shouldn't escape justice because of a clerical error.

What clerical error are you talking about?

And a stay of execution is not escaping justice.

 

[Lostlover]

What clerical error are you talking about?

And a stay of execution is not escaping justice.

I read online today (don't remember the site) that this murderer's identity was mixed up with another Garcia, with this one being a US citizen. So, there would be no need to call the Mexican consulate if you're believed to be a US citizen. Human error, no biggie until far-left liberals get involved.

 

[palemale]

This isn't about whether Leal gets to live or die, it's about whether the United States should adhere to international treaties. If the United States fails to abide by international agreements in the treatment of foreign nationals accused of a crime in this country, why should other countries abide by them in their treatment of American citizens accused of crimes in those countries?

Texas is just a barbaric state. Luckily, whites are now in the minority, so soon the combination of younger white voters and minority voters may one day soon elect politicians who will bring Texas up to the standards and norms of modern, civilized, democratic countries.

 

[construct]

I notice this precedent that makes me doubtful that Gov. Perry will issue a stay.

Three years ago, Texas executed another Mexican national on death row despite international entreaties. Jose Ernesto Medellin, who also had not been informed of his right to access consular officials, was put to death following pleas for a stay by the Bush administration, which also cited U.S. treaty obligations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...nal-in-texas/2011/07/06/gIQA4Zg90H_story.html

I'm guessing that's the 2008 Supreme Court case mentioned in the article linked in White Eagle's original post.

 

[White Eagle]

Ok those of you who want him executed. Let's say you go to Tiajuana one weekend and get pissed. You get arrested for a crime you didn't commit. They won't let you contact your embassy because Perry executed this man against international law. He was entitled to contact his counsel as you would be too. But now you can't. There is an international law to protect all. Mexico does not have the death penalty as we all should.
You are now screwed. I cannot help you. No one can. You have to be executed by Mexico, altho they do not have the death penalty. Pancho Villa all over again.

 

[jackoroe]

Ok those of you who want him executed. Let's say you go to Tiajuana one weekend and get pissed. You get arrested for a crime you didn't commit. They won't let you contact your embassy because Perry executed this man against international law. He was entitled to contact his counsel as you would be too. But now you can't. There is an international law to protect all. Mexico does not have the death penalty as we all should.
You are now screwed. I cannot help you. No one can. You have to be executed by Mexico, altho they do not have the death penalty. Pancho Villa all over again.

If I go to Mexico and rape and murder, I should be prepared to accept whatever penalty that country affixes to those most heinous crimes.

The fact that he raped and murdered isn't even in dispute. He did it. It's not against international law for Texas to exterminate him. The US government would be prohibited from doing so.

There is no legal basis to argue from which to argue. It's been decided by SCOTUS.

 

[TX-Beau]

Yes aren't we all big men with fat hairy ones calling for execution.

Whatever. the guy is guilty, he's not going anywhere. No one is giving him a pass, the issue is solely about how he dies, old age in prison, execution.

Some of you act like he's going to walk free tomorrow if we don't kill him.

Texas law DOES NOT REQUIRE that he be executed. Of course y'all will get your little thrill anyway because Perry is going to execute him no matter what Obama or anyone else says. He likes to see blood too, I think it gives him a chubby, he's just that much of a big man.

If it garners us some good will to let him die in a hole somewhere, where's the problem with that?

Oh yeah, no one dies and we don't get to feel all butch and shit.

 

[chrisrobin]

Yes aren't we all big men with fat hairy ones calling for execution.

Whatever. the guy is guilty, he's not going anywhere. No one is giving him a pass, the issue is solely about how he dies, old age in prison, execution.

Some of you act like he's going to walk free tomorrow if we don't kill him.

Texas law DOES NOT REQUIRE that he be executed. Of course y'all will get your little thrill anyway because Perry is going to execute him no matter what Obama or anyone else says. He likes to see blood too, I think it gives him a chubby, he's just that much of a big man.

If it garners us some good will to let him die in a hole somewhere, where's the problem with that?

Oh yeah, no one dies and we don't get to feel all butch and shit.

If the execution goes ahead as planned, and we know it will, it will not enhance Herr Perry's "presidential bid."

 

[TX-Beau]

I have no Idea how Secession Perry gets to where he thinks anyone outside the south will ever vote for him, and even outside Texas is questionable.

 

[palemale]

If I go to Mexico and rape and murder, I should be prepared to accept whatever penalty that country affixes to those most heinous crimes.

The fact that he raped and murdered isn't even in dispute. He did it. It's not against international law for Texas to exterminate him. The US government would be prohibited from doing so.

There is no legal basis to argue from which to argue. It's been decided by SCOTUS.

The protections of the laws apply to the guilty and the innocent. The example WhiteEagle gave was of a person wrongly accused being arrested. You're comfortable with the United States flouting international treaties even if it may result in innocent Americans being denied rights under international treaties because our country fails to honor those treaties?

 

[Lostlover]

The protections of the laws apply to the guilty and the innocent. The example WhiteEagle gave was of a person wrongly accused being arrested. You're comfortable with the United States flouting international treaties even if it may result in innocent Americans being denied rights under international treaties because our country fails to honor those treaties?

What's your solution to this? Throw out the conviction? Retry the case?

In Mexico you have to ask permission to breath. I can't imagine ever going to another country, living in it illegally, raping and murdering some girl and then calling foul because I didn't have access to my consulate.

I know he's doing this to save his life. But who will stand up to this desperate attempt to save his life via a legal loophole that somehow might negate his deserved execution?

Also, imagine if you were the victim's family... a technicality and wrongdoing by law enforcement means he won't feel the wrath of the justice system.

 

[Lostlover]

Didn't you just say that's the way it should be, except for this one time?

Again, if so what makes this guy so much worse than any other murderer that we have to make an exception?

And I have no problem with people living, I'm opposed to the death penalty in general.

I'm saying he should die for his crime.

And, hopefully, cases involving illegal aliens will become a federal matter and not a state one. State politicians, like the governor of Texas, can play politics with these cases.

 

[TX-Beau]

...But who will stand up to this desperate attempt to save his life via a legal loophole that somehow might negate his deserved execution?

Huh? Let me put this in caps for you. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE THIS "LEGAL LOOPHOLE," (which isn't a legal loophole at all actully) IS GOING TO "NEGATE" HIS EXECUTION BECAUSE PERRY ISN'T LEGALLY REQUIRED TO PAY ANY ATTENTION TO IT.

The man is going to die in prison one way or another, you just want to see him die NOW. That's not about justice.

Fine and dandy, you'll get your wish. Keep your lube handy.

 

[TX-Beau]

And, hopefully, cases involving illegal aliens will become a federal matter and not a state one. State politicians, like the governor of Texas, can play politics with these cases.

HUH? You live in Arizona and want the Fed to assert full jurisdiction over the border?

Texas politicians don't "play politics," with executions, they just grease the execution mill, we execute the guilty, the mentally challenged, the innocent, whatever. If a few innocents and retards have to die, so be it, the price of a civilized society, right?

People like you love to scream EXECUTE!!!!!!!!! over cases where the criminal is obviously guilty, and then keep screaming it so you don't just sound bloodthirsty - which is what you are - until someone tries to point out how many people here in states like mine were innocent and died because people were screaming EXECUTE!!!!!!! and feeling very smug about themselves.

Which is when you start talking about justice and punishment and other lofty things to cover the fact that you don't care how many people died who didn't deserve to die simply because you wanted your hyper-punitive revenge immediately, and didn't stop to think that in a justice system that is not colorblind or infallible perhaps we shouldn't be doing irreversible things quite so rashly.

 

[chrisrobin]

What's your solution to this?

I would follow International Law, Mr. Perry notwithstanding.

 

[Lostlover]

HUH? You live in Arizona and want the Fed to assert full jurisdiction over the border?

Texas politicians don't "play politics," with executions, they just grease the execution mill, we execute the guilty, the mentally challenged, the innocent, whatever. If a few innocents and retards have to die, so be it, the price of a civilized society, right?

People like you love to scream EXECUTE!!!!!!!!! over cases where the criminal is obviously guilty, and then keep screaming it so you don't just sound bloodthirsty - which is what you are - until someone tries to point out how many people here in states like mine were innocent and died because people were screaming EXECUTE!!!!!!! and feeling very smug about themselves.

Which is when you start talking about justice and punishment and other lofty things to cover the fact that you don't care how many people died who didn't deserve to die because you wanted hyper-punitive revenge immediately, and didn't stop to think that in a justice system that is not colorblind or infallible perhaps we shouldn't be doing irreversible things quite so rashly.

That's an inaccurate assessment of my stances. I am on record (on JUB too) of supporting Illinois' moratorium on the death penalty. I have seen nothing so far that would question his guilt in this matter. So, therefore, I support swift justice.

I don't like meddling with our court systems from outside entities like in this case. I don't like a guilty man desperately claiming his rights were violated in a country he has no business being in the first place.

I didn't like seeing Bush play politics with the Department of Justice when they fired 50 liberal prosecutors. I also don't like Obama taking up this case to appease his base or Latinos or international public opinion.

Don't play politics with the legal system. Don't say a country denied you rights when you weren't supposed to be in the country to begin with.

 

[Lostlover]

I would follow International Law, Mr. Perry notwithstanding.

I would too, however the horse has left the barn...

 

[TX-Beau]

That's an inaccurate assessment of my stances. I am on record (on JUB too) of supporting Illinois' moratorium on the death penalty. I have seen nothing so far that would question his guilt in this matter. So, therefore, I support swift justice.

I don't like meddling with our court systems from outside entities like in this case. I don't like a guilty man desperately claiming his rights were violated in a country he has no business being in the first place.

I didn't like seeing Bush play politics with the Department of Justice when they fired 50 liberal prosecutors. I also don't like Obama taking up this case to appease his base or Latinos or international public opinion.

Don't play politics with the legal system. Don't say a country denied you rights when you weren't supposed to be in the country to begin with.

???

So you don't support execution, unless it's "swift justice," and the criminal is illegal?

That's kind of tortured. Have you really thought this out, or are you simply reacting?

Unfortunately for you, constitutional protections apply to everyone in this country however they got here. Take that up with your Congressmen if you don't like it.

As far as "don't play politics with the legal system," Well that's just kind of a pointless platitude kind of like saying "don't do drugs," you can either tell yourself that over and over and cover your eyes, or you can look at the actual situation and try to come up with a more useful response.

I agree, no one should play politics with the legal system. Definitive statement.

There, where did that get us?

 

[construct]

Legal loophole? We've got 5th and 6th Amendment issues going in this case, specifically the freedom from self-incrimination, and the right to counsel. The confession was made when he was not in custody and without counsel. I'm presuming he wasn't informed of his rights. I would say that on its face that looks like it could very well be harmful error. And if the trial attorney didn't preserve it, there may be a case of inadequate counsel, which I believe is what his present attorney is saying. That, too, could very well be harmful error.

Yes, I think if any of these things are proved, he should be granted a new trial.