I don't believe she's being executed.

And you know better. Why do you troll?

No she isn't. I'm not trolling this one. I don't believe Italy has the death penalty so I could be wrong in bringing her up. I was thinking though more so in respect of our laws and other countries' laws. Just because we have the death penalty and other countries don't, does that mean we flex our muscles less in respect to American citizens because we know they at least won't get death?

I believe other countries have to recognize that death is an option and though they can advocate for lighter sentences, if it does not occur you shouldn't take your toys and go home.

I agree. Hell, I'm assuming his own defense attorney(s) didn't even know about his citizenship (BC they probably would have made contact with the consulate themselves).

They did find out he was Mexican but he was already tried, convicted, and sitting on death row at that time. One would think they would have found out about this guys nationality but given the fact that we have sanctuary cities where no one asks and a Justice Dept that sues states that require officers to check into the nationalities of the people they arrest can you really be surprised that something like this would happen?

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,2041...136236,00.html

Italy does not have the death penalty

I agree that we shouldn't change our rulings just to make another country happier with the verdict. Mexico is even trickier because so many of her citizens come here not to visit but by migration. The man executed wasn't here on a trip, or just here to go to school, he was here to live permanently as a citizen. Therefore, if he wants to live here as a citizen, he should be subject to all laws and the consequences of breaking those laws as any citizen is, regardless of where he was born. Why should he get any preferential treatment? Just my honest opinion.

What matters is that Texas didn't give the Mexican access to consular service from his Consulate. Amanda Knox received it, even the hikers in Iran received consular service. If an American was arrested in Mexico, he would received Consular service. The outcome of the trial is not in question, but access to consular service is.

They could've just give the dude access, somebody from the consulate said hello and we can't help. Then off with his head, no harm done.

Amanda Knox identified herself as an American. Hence she was offered consular access.

Garcia did NOT identify as a Mexican citizen, and we all know that it would be horribly racist to assume he was Mexican because of the way he looked. Laws which would require police to confirm citizenship are regularly denounced as racist, so there you go. Since he identified himself as an American citizen, he was not offered consular access.

He's been on Death Row since 1995, they knew he was a Mexican national for more than the past month or so. As moe.ron said, it would have been simple to go through the motions for the purposes of adhering to treaties that we would like other countries to follow with our citizens.
Source
Also, the article points out that it negatively affects our relationship with Mexico, something we do need/want, and is a bit of a stunt for the governor in case he decides to throw his had in the ring for 2012. Because we can't look ~soft~ on crime as a conservative.
/or we could stop executing people...

Don't mistake me - I think Perry was once again an ass to not grant the 30 day reprieve to review whether or not consul access would have made a difference in the trial. At this point, what's 30 days? I do have every confidence that any review would end up confirming the verdict.

Given that Garcia himself admitted to the crime, I'm not shedding big salty tears over someone who tried to play the system and ended up shooting himself in the foot.

eta - I have tried in vain to establish exactly when Garcia revealed his nationality. It was not during the trial; the closest I can come is the fact he appealed on the basis of his not being given consular access in 1998.

in 2008, the SCOTUS ruled that that article required an act of congress or that it is self-executing. which it was neither, so it really didn't apply.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medell%C3%ADn_v._Texas

since 2008, no act of congress has happened, either.

SWTXBelle- This guy was already sitting on death row when he came forward that he was a MX national and started crying that he never received access to the MX consulate. The Consulate really couldn't do anything for this guy anyway post conviction other than make funeral/body transfer arrangements (if his wish was to be buried in MX). What Leal-Garcia and his lawyers were really aiming for was clemency from the governor based on the fact that he wasn't allowed access to the consulate during his initial trial. From what I've gathered they wanted a new trial or a commuted sentence.

I also think any comparisons to Knox or the Iranian hiking group are totally off base as well.

Not my point. I didn't claim it violated domestic law, just that it was a bad idea.

Depends on the type of comparison you are making.

This type of comparison. All foreigners arrested in the U.S. are allowed access to consular services from their consulate. No one is accusing the U.S. of denying foreigners that right at the time of their arrest. This entire boondoggle only happened because this guy lied about his nationality to authorities at the time of his arrest, trial, conviction, etc. Knox and the hikers freely admitted their country of citizenship at the time of their arrest or detention, this guy didn't.

However, despite that perfect logic, there remains a risk that countries would use incidences like this as an excuse to NOT permit consular access to US citizens. Though some countries would use any excuse to decry the US, it's not really necessary nor ideal to pitch softballs, we could at least put in the effort.