GPS_Flex
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 20, 2005
- Messages
- 2,726
- Reaction score
- 648
- Location
- California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
...review what about the case? What purpose would the review have served? Texas never denied the fact that the man never got his consular rights.
What would that review have unearthed?
Why postpone the execution to review what you already know? Why not review it after you execute him?
In 2009, while on assignment for Current TV, my colleague Laura Ling and I were arrested by North Korean soldiers for crossing the frozen Tumen River, which separates the Republic of China (sic) and North Korea. We were imprisoned and isolated from each other for four and a half months. We were repeatedly interrogated, eventually put on trial and sentenced to 12 years’ hard labor. It was only through the extraordinary efforts of the State Department and former President Bill Clinton that we were pardoned and allowed to return home.
It is difficult to describe the fear that comes with being arrested and detained in a foreign country. The sense of darkness in that first week of North Korean captivity was unbearable. My biggest fear was nobody knowing where I was or what had happened to me. The strained relations between the United States and North Korea only increased my despair.
In the middle of the second week, though, I was handed a lifeline: a meeting with the Swedish ambassador, who represented U.S. interests and pointed out to North Korea its responsibilities under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. His hard work yielded a meeting no longer than 10 minutes, but the significance is hard to express. I can only mention the sense of security I now had — that someone outside of North Korea was monitoring my case. The prompt consular access, I believe, protected me from any physical mistreatment by my captors. I was allowed to meet with the ambassador three more times. The meetings were my only communication with the U.S. government — the only way for me to ask for help and to deliver messages to my family. I know the importance of what the Vienna Convention provides.
you want us to believe that tejas did not know that he was a mexican national at any time
absurd
?without him giving us this information, we could only know he wasn't here legally. Do we just guess on which foreign consulate to give him access to?
article
For those who don't think the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (to make sure some people aren't confused which multi-lateral treaty we are talking about) is important.
Who said that this is a "get out of jail free" card? This isn't Monopoly!
Tell that to the people who trying to make a huge case out of the fact he was told he could call a consulate.
here is a blog entry explaining further the danger caused by the continuing illegal actions on the part of the State of Texas
Ah, c'mon Ludahai! A blog post?
In fact you're much brighter than he is.
You know, the stupid assumption here is that the rapist had no clue he had the right to a lawyer and that a lawyer from another country would some how know better than a lawyer from this country as to his rights. Does anyone really doubt the outcome would have been different? He raped and killed a child. He got much better than he deserved.
I just don't get how this man's rights are violated. We have more rights for suspects than any country in the world...probably combined. What could have possibly been different if he knew he had the right to a Mexican lawyer?
Except that he is in Beijing and he knows what he is talking about in this instance... it will happen sooner or later... and I hope the person they will do it to is from Texas... it WOULD be fitting...
He did NOT have a right to a Mexican lawyer and no one here is saying the end result for him would have been any different. He had the right to consult the Consulate/embassy of his country in the US (I believe there is a Mexican consulate in Houston) and they could have provided assistance, but NOT do anything to circumvent U.S. law. Mexican lawyers are not licensed to practice in Texas.
The reality is that a right that any foreign national in any country has WAS violated. Even China and the DPRK abide by this treaty ... sad the U.S. (at least the State of Texas) doesn't...
What is this constant "no one here is saying" ****? What do you think this thread is about, agreeing that the bastard should die? No, it's not. It's about whiners wanting to cling to a notion that he wasn't given the chance to call the Mexican Embassy for help, cause he's Mexican. And what do you think that means? It means these whiners think he could have gotten off easier, somehow with their help. It's the same old **** from the anti-death penalty crowd.
here is a blog entry explaining further the danger caused by the continuing illegal actions on the part of the State of Texas
Put the shoe on the other foot, though. Let's say an American citizen was sentenced to death in Russia, but was not allowed to contact the US Embassy. The Right-wing (maybe not you, but Conservatives in general) would be shouting the loudest about his legal rights being trampled on, etc.
Pretty sure the main thrust about that writers opinion is that the Texas decision to follow through with the sentence given to a rapist/murderer following due process and appeals will give China another excuse to continue doing what China already does. It doesnt mean China would suddenly stop doing what it does...just that they would have another thing to throw back in our face. Id take that comparison any day of the week if China were to actually give people rights, fair trials, and an open book on appeals.
And Ludahai...you yourself have said it...if the sentence was commuted to life...who would care? Would this have ever even come up? The fact is that the rapist/murderer has been in America since he was TWO. The consul notification argument is nothing but a dodge to avoid the death penalty.
What is this constant "no one here is saying" ****? What do you think this thread is about, agreeing that the bastard should die? No, it's not. It's about whiners wanting to cling to a notion that he wasn't given the chance to call the Mexican Embassy for help, cause he's Mexican. And what do you think that means? It means these whiners think he could have gotten off easier, somehow with their help. It's the same old **** from the anti-death penalty crowd.
BS......it's been pointed out multiple times by me and others that Texas did nothing wrong or illegal. The SC has ruled multiple times that the killers failure to ask for his rights did not change the outcome of the trial and Texas was under no obligation to retry him.
Due process was afforded to this individual identical to ANY US citizen. What wasnt done was a man that raped and murdered a 16 year old child that had been in the US since he was 2 years old was not identified as a foreign national and told he could meet with the mejican consul. Blame his attorney. The state of Texas arrested a criminal...Mirandized him, provided him a lawyer, tried him, convicted him, and sentenced him to death. The absolute reality is that if he had been sentenced to life imprisonment you wouldnt even know his name nor give half a squirt about him OR his rights.Except that due process in accordance with his rights was NOT provided. China actually DOES provide consular access, as does Burma and the DPRK.
Except that the US is in violation of a treaty it signed and ratified and expects others to follow. How can the U.S. now expect others to follow this (or any other treaty) when the US has just ignored it?
Wasn't the guy here since he was two?
And you think SCOTUS is ALWAYS right? I hate so-called 'conservative' judicial activism as much as liberal...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?