U.S. Breaks International Law By Executing Mexican National
 

Did anyone else read or hear about this? What do you think?

http://m.cnn.com/primary/_NbLYlh-idKHx2lIva#page2

Rape and murder of an underage American girl? I say cut his head off with an blunt axe.

If the U.S. violated international law, this needs to be addressed.

It's not that cut and dry though. The article glosses over the fact that Leal came to the U.S. when he was 1 1/2 years old. He also lied to police at the time about his citizenship. He claimed he was an American during the entire legal process. It was 2 to 3 years after his conviction when he came forward and admitted to being a MX National ONLY after hearing from another inmate that the MX consulate had helped defend him in his case.

That's why I said "if." I am not going to think too much about this issue but I'm sure someone is working on the investigation and so forth. The U.S. is the U.S. so they will probably find that the U.S. didn't violate international law. However, if they find the U.S. did violate international law, it should somehow be addressed.

What international law?

There's no international army last I checked. :)

But there is American arrested in other countries. This have to be addressed or there might just be a repercussion on American's access to councilor service if they're arrested in other countries.

:cool:

Had he identified as a Mexican national upon his arrest, chances are he WOULD have been advised he could contact his consul.

The moral of the story is - don't lie about your citizenship.

And we've been through this before - 3 years ago a Mexican national in a similar situation. was executed To the best of my knowledge, we've not had an increase in the number of American citizens who kill citizens in other countries (no one is disputing whether or not Garcia did the heinous crime) and then lie about their citizenship, resulting in their not being allowed consular access and then being executed.

The problem is, despite as heinous as this guy was, other countries won't necessarily look at all the specifics of his case before refusing consular assistance to Americans arrested in their jurisdictions. We are already on shaky diplomatic grounds with Mexico, and several world countries see us as bullies. We can argue the specifics all we want, but many of these countries have used situations like this to ignore our pleas. Would it really have hurt to hold off killing him to let him have a hearing with his Mexican consul? If you had the evidence to convict him and sentence him to death, it should be a formality.

What I don't get is why they never found out he was actually Mexican before he was executed. I know he lied, but aren't all those "facts" checked ohne ende before executing someone?

They did find out, and the feds (and Mexico) were asking Texas to hold off on the execution because of it. Texas said "fuck you, we're Texas"
We sign these things called "treaties."

hence i feel no pity.

My understanding is that the SCOTUS has already ruled (back in '08) that the International Criminal Court's ruling that the U.S. review these sorts of cases was non-binding on U.S. Courts. The Justice Department's request was more likely based on international politics than it was in its actual view on the law.

True, as keeping our side of treaties is generally important if we want people to keep agreeing to them with us. It doesn't mean it was illegal but it was still kind of a dick move no matter how deserved the move. But then, I'm of the mind that our attitude toward capital punishment is childish and backwards for a western nation, so I'm biased. It would have been nice if they'd delayed at some point for the requisite review even if just for the look of things.

Didn't help Amanda Knox.

And being on good terms with Mexico hasn't helped Americans caught in the wrong parts of Mexico before.