Nice n' comfy now
And I’ll say it again, Got to love them Texans! The Texas government, when dealing with people who have been caught and charged of heinous crimes follow the State’s “Manner of Law” to the fullest; however, only after the person has been charged, been to trial by jury and found guilty and after the penalty phase is decided go on about the State’s business.
For some reason I believe that Texas has a much better understanding of how the United States was designed, with certainly a better understanding of the U.S. Constitution. It doesn’t matter if the appeals come from the White House, Department of State, or the International Court of Justice at The Hague, Texas is in charge of what happens in Texas.
Texas will execute five Mexicans on death row, a spokeswoman for the governor said Thursday.
Starting with Jose Ernesto Medellín, who is scheduled for his appointment on August 5, 2008. Mr. Medellín, one of six young men that a jury found had raped and strangled Elizabeth Peña, 16, and Jennifer Ertman, 15, in a park one night. Mr. Medellín was 18 at the time and had lived most of his life in Texas; he signed a confession in English.
Again according to spokeswoman, Allison Castle, “This is an individual who brutally gang-raped and murdered two teenage women. We don’t really care where you are from; you can’t do that to our citizens.”
State Department officials said the execution of Mr. Medellín and the other four convicted killers might erode the ability of the United States to help people accused of crimes abroad.
“Well, that is all well and good,” responded an unnamed source “seems to me that just recently some folks were released from Bangkok without any known intervention from the State Department!”
Moreover, in several cases, the U.S. State Department refuses to come to the aid of U.S. citizens in foreign custody believing that type of cooperation is showing respect to the host nation. Hmmm, maybe we should ask Billy Hayes whose story was that of Midnight Express (Turkish jails) or Alice and Darlene (Claire Danes and Kate Beckinsale) whose story was also featured in the film, Brokedown Palace in Bangkok, Thailand.
We have the ’spirit’ of the law in the U.S.A. and it should be upheld with duty; moreover, we have the “Manner of Law” which the very departments, who are making pleas in these cases, are partially responsible…think about it.
More later…Here is a great read about the particulars: of course hat tip to the New York Times.
religion
illegal immigration
politics
August 15, 2008 at 5:36 am |
The execution of Jose Medellin: Texas fulfilled their obligations to the law
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info below
The only treaty violation was that Texas failed to notify the rapist/torturer/murderer, Jose Medellin, “you can contact your consulate if you wish”, as per the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VC) (1963) (1).
Some may ask “Is that it?” Such a reaction is understandable.
One or all of the following errors have marked the coverage of this case.
1) “The US/Texas denied Medellin consular access” or
2)”The US/Texas failed to notify the Mexican consulate of the detention” or
3) “The US/Texas denied Medellin a hearing on the notification issue”
As to the first claim, Medellin was never prevented from contacting his consulate. Medellin and his attorneys were free to contact the consulate or consulate attorneys, whenever they so desired. Medellin and his attorneys chose not to contact the Mexican consulate for 4 years.
The US admitted its error, that it violated the VC, by not informing Medellin that he could contact his consulate. As a simple matter of practicality, who doesn’t know they can contact their own consulate?
In addition, Medellin grew up in Texas and spent his later 15 years in Texas, prior to committing these heinous acts when he was age 18. He attended Texas schools. Texas did not know Medellin was a Mexican national. (2)
The second claim would, specifically, violate the intent of the VC. In the debate, prior to VC ratification, it was decided that only the detained party should be given the option of contacting their consulate. I suspect this was done in order to protect the detained party, in case they were in trouble in their own country.
For the third claim, there is this:
As the US never denied violating the notification provision, the real issue before the The Internal Court of Justice (ICJ) was “what remedy exists for that violation?”
The ICJ instructed: “(Texas/US must) provide, by means of its “own” choosing, review and reconsideration of the convictions and sentences of the [affected] Mexican nationals,” “with a view to ascertaining” whether the failure to provide proper notice to consular officials “caused actual prejudice to the defendant in the process of administration of criminal justice,”
Several courts (3) and judges thoroughly reviewed the notification claims, including extensive oral arguments. The did this, even though there were procedural bars, because of the timing of the claim. No prejudice was found.
An additional formal hearing wasn’t held because a claim has to reach a certain level of credibility or weight before a hearing is granted. The appellate considerations found that there was no prejudice and that the error was harmless, Therefore, a formal hearing was not held. In fact, as a matter of law, it was also barred.
Based upon the case facts, an additional review of the same material in the same case would have had the same result. In addition, the legal process had determined that the ICJ did not have authority over Texas courts to force an additional hearing or any hearing. Texas said no to the ICJ and all other denouncers because there was no need to repeat a process that had already taken place.
Texas met the ICJ and VC burden in the three court reviews, inclusive of the oral arguments.
Texas did so, in response to its own due process.
A violation of a treay occurred. A remedy was prescribed and carried out. The Texas/US treaty obligation was fulfilled.
Medellin was justly executed and had 15 years of extraordinary due process protections.
Some say that US citizens may be subject to additional abuse because of Texas’ decision to execute this rapist/torturer/murderer. Why?
An equal “abuse” would be to (1) arrest US citizens for just cause; (2) fail to tell them “you can contact your consulate, if you wish to”; and (3) give them the extraordinary due process provided to Jose Medellin.
While all citizens would like to get consul notification and those party to the treaty are entitled to it, did all the States (parties to the treaty) give such notification to all detained US citizens and other detained foreign nationals since 1967? Of course not.
Texas didn’t know Medellin was a Mexican national. Even if it did, almost no US police officers had even heard of the Vienna Convention, prior to 1997. Were many police, anywhere in the world, aware of the Vienna Convention since 1967? Unlikely. Did they recite it when they didn’t know the detainee was a foreign national? (2) Also unlikely.
Would the world condemn the US and punish US citizens for the same violations they have committed, only because their violations have not been adjudicated? Soe will and some won’t.
That said, the treaty should be honored and all States should provide such notification.
My opinion is that Mexico brought this case to the ICJ, as an anti death penalty cause, and, possibly, with a wee hint of anti-Americanism, and not as a principled stance in support of consular rights.
Fact: Mexico, intentionally, included only death penalty cases and avoided all other non death cases of detained Mexican nationals within the US.
Fact: Had this really been about consular rights and the honoring of treaties, Mexico would have filed ICJ lawsuits against every country that had violated the rights of Mexican Nationals under the VC. Mexico didn’t.
Fact: Mexico only singled out the US, strictly avoiding non death penalty cases. The VC applies to all cases of detention. Any lawsuit, based upon principle, would have been directed at all violators and for all cases. Mexico didn’t do that.
In other words, absent the death penalty, Mexico never would have filed the lawsuit.
Wouldn’t we all like to see what percentage of foreign nationals, detained in Mexico, since 1967, had been properly notified: “you have the right to contact your consulate, if you wish.” What do you think? 1% or less?
NOTE: The VC specifically states that it does not infer individual rights, but is intended to facilitate consular relations.
The only human rights violation in this case was the hour long gang rape/torture/murder of two wonderful girls, Elizabeth Pena, 16, and Jennifer Ertman, 14.
Remember them?
Take a look. http://www.murdervictims.com/Voices/jeneliz.html
(1) Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (1963), Article 36, paragraph b, last sentence
(2) From a practical standpoint, is there no obligation on the part of the detained party to notify the authorities of their foreign national status? Or, are all the world’s police supposed to be clairvoyant?
copyright 1999-2008 Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS , VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O’Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
Pro death penalty sites
homicidesurvivors(dot)com/categories/Dudley%20Sharp%20-%20Justice%20Matters.aspx
www(dot)dpinfo.com
www(dot)cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPinformation.htm
www(dot)clarkprosecutor.org/html/links/dplinks.htm
www(dot)coastda.com/archives.html
www(dot)lexingtonprosecutor.com/death_penalty_debate.htm
www(dot)prodeathpenalty.com
www(dot)yesdeathpenalty.com/deathpenalty_co
yesdeathpenalty.googlepages.com/home2 (Sweden)
www(dot)wesleylowe.com/cp.html