Obama tries to stop execution in Texas of Mexican killer

A Mexican in San Antonio raped and murdered a young American girl, was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. But Barack Obama wants to have Congress pass a law to prevent the murderer from being executed. He contends that it would cause "irreparable harm" to US interests abroad.

Obama tries to stop execution in Texas of Mexican killer

US president warns Texan authorities that execution would put America in breach of international legal obligations

President Barack Obama has asked the Texan authorities not to execute the convicted rapist and murderer Humberto Leal Garcia.

President Barack Obama is attempting to block the execution in Texas on Thursday of a Mexican man because it would breach an international convention and do "irreparable harm" to US interests, citing international law:.

The White House has asked the US supreme court to put the execution of Humberto Leal Garcia on hold while Congress passes a law that would prevent the convicted rapist and murderer from being put to death along with dozens of other foreign nationals who were denied proper access to diplomatic representation before trials for capital crimes.

The administration moved after the governor of Texas, Rick Perry, brushed aside appeals from diplomats, top judges, senior military officers, the United Nations and former president George W Bush to stay Leal's execution because it could jeopardise American citizens arrested abroad as well as US diplomatic interests.

Leal, 38, was convicted in 1994 of the rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl in San Antonio. Few question that he was responsible for the killing but the Texas authorities failed to tell Leal, who was born in Mexico and has lived in the US since the age of two, that under the Vienna convention he was entitled to contact the Mexican consulate when he was arrested.

Obama

International law? Now we have to cede our control of our state laws to the UN?

This guy has go to go.

When did the US lose its sovereignty?

The UN should have NO authority on how states run their legal system...

Yes I agree, Obama has TO GO!

I would first ask, what are his ties with this guy? Or, what kind of political ties does this Mexican have?

Or, has he received like, some kind of threat, if he doesn't help get the guy off?

Supporting a rapist, I just can't see it. I mean the guy has 2 little girls himself, so, I really can't see him supporting it, unless his hands are tied.

I don't think foreigners should have diplomatic immunity either. If you are stupid enough to do the crime you should be prepared to pay the price.

Overall, it seems funny, they sneak into the US, do a crime while illegal and then try to claim they should be judged differently because they are illegal. We should kick the UN out of country and quit paying them.

reply to post by mishigas


Isn't this just more of Obama telling Texas to conform, because Texas is the only independent state. Surely this is why? It is more of a..."You're on your own if you dont conform?"

Aren't Texas trying to do something against the TSA?

I noticed also the article mentions he's lived in the US since he was 2 years old. He's now 38. So after spending 36 years in this country illegally, we're supposed to allow this man a chance to meet with the Mexican consulate? I'm pretty sure if I snuck into another country illegally and then raped/murdered a teen, I would probably be executed (unless of course it was Canada )
I say let him fry.

reply to post by LightAssassin

Isn't this just more of Obama telling Texas to conform, because Texas is the only independent state. Surely this is why? It is more of a..."You're on your own if you dont conform?"

Aren't Texas trying to do something against the TSA?

Oh yeah, there's no love lost between Obama and Texas. May Texas thrive and prosper!

reply to post by mishigas


Its a local issue, so im not sure what Obama thinks he can do. Secondly, since Congress cant pass any defacto laws, I dont see how congressional legislation would work in this case either.

As far as the death penalty - thats a debate in and of itself for sure. But the thought that it will act as a deterent to people who come from countries whose due process is a lot less dainty than ours says a lot.

I for one would liek to see the FEderal Government actually charged as an accessory to the firls rape and murder for failing to enforce immigration laws, or hold states / cities responsible for acting as sanctuaries (hint hint San Francisco).

By failing to enforce the laws that let these people in the country in the first place should be taken into account when illegals commit crimes on American soil.

Can the death penalty act as a deternt? It doesnt seem to when people decide to commit murder, knowing full well they end result could be a needle in their arm.

Then again if the ACLU has not turned our prison / jail system into a state / federal day camp with all expenses paid we might not be where we are now. Those who are convicted are to serve their debt to society, not run up the debt on society.

Lack of enforcement, selected prosecution, the ACLU representing any intrest that runs counter to the US.. Doesnt exactly deter does it...

reply to post by mishigas


Forgot to add International law does play a part in this. The US is a signatory to international agreements that deal specifically with how foriegn nationals are treated within the US.

In addition to providing the full weight of the US legal system, they also get the ability to contact their consulate / embassy, have access to documents and interrogations done in their language.

Essentially its an added group of safetys put in place. US Citizens get these same courtesies when they are arrested in foreign nations who are also signatories to the treaty.

It also allows a person (foreign national) who is charged tried and found guilty of a crime to be able to request they srve out the remainder of the sentence in their home country as well.

What Mexico has done in the past when dealing with their nationals who are charged, tried and convicted of murder in the US is to argue its a violation of that treaty to have a foreign national senetenced to death. Mexico filed a complaint some time back in another situation where one of their nationals murdered a person in texas and was found guily and sentenced to death.

Mexico went so far as to file complaints with the UN and part of the UN, for lack of a better term, court system. The UN ordered the US to stop the execution.

That was ignored as well because of US sovereignty, and rightfully so since there was no breakdown in the US legal system nor the manner in which the mexican national was able to contact his emabssy for additoonal assistance.

I see where the president is going with this. And in theory it makes sense. We would want the same done for our citizens. I think that Mexico is using this as some BS excuse for something else. Hogwash in my opinion.

If I was the governor of Texas I would go with the life in prison deal on the condition that mexico paid for the prisoners incarceration for life.

Let them put their money where their mouth is. Balls in your court Mexico.

reply to post by grey580


Problem is why should the Govenor interfere with the legal system and the manner in which the verdict was reached based solely on a political issue that is not relevant to the case?

Since its a local issue I am not sure what standing Obama thinks he has. Hell im not even sure where the Federal Courts have any standing in this. They would have to show a breakdown in the system itself and find a constitutional violation, and I dont think they are going to find any.

Should be intresting for usre though to see how this plays out.

Why was the earlier thread on this subject closed, when it was posted sooner, and had more contributions?

There are less contributions in this thread, less discourse, and the other was locked?

Seems a bit redundant to me that I should have to transfer my opinions from that thread, to this one, when my opinions were related to what was being discussed directly in that thread.

I say fry him. This is a capital punishment case. Not only did he commit the crime of rape and murder, he also commit the crime of illegal immigration. After he is executed his body should be dumped across Mexico and Mexico should be billed with the cost of his stay, trial and execution.

If this keeps happening, I will start to take payments under the counter in cash, no way I will pay taxes if it goes to illegals.

Oh I see, so this is the "Pro-Execution Only" thread, the other was a debate and clearly needed to be locked.

Ahh, of course, silly me.

reply to post by grey580

I see where the president is going with this. And in theory it makes sense. We would want the same done for our citizens. I think that Mexico is using this as some BS excuse for something else. Hogwash in my opinion.

If I was the governor of Texas I would go with the life in prison deal on the condition that mexico paid for the prisoners incarceration for life.

Let them put their money where their mouth is. Balls in your court Mexico.

I have lots of doubt and skepticism that all other nations would adhere to terms of the treaty. The ones that will would do so regardless of the treaty.

And Mexico's answer to paying for the prison costs? "Here, senor, we will give you 10,000 illegals free of charge."

Originally posted by SyphonX
Oh I see, so this is the "Pro-Execution Only" thread, the other was a debate and clearly needed to be locked.

Ahh, of course, silly me.

yup, silly you. So............mister great master mind, what do you propose we do with the guy? Let him live in a prison for the rest of his life soaking up our tax money?, let him go back to mexico, a free man? If you can't come back down to reality, and realize that there are real bad people in this world that need to be put down like rabid dogs, well you could always join the peace core instead of read ATS.

just to add, yes, I do agree with The_Professional on this one, I say FRY HIM.

This is a legal grey area of the law. And one that should be approached with the greatest of cautions. The first is that he is a foreign national, who has been in this country since the age of 2. In that time frame, he has gone through the school system. On his arrest, he was advised of his rights, but it can only be believed that as no one knew of his status, and he did not volunteer it, he was not given the right to speak to the Mexican consular authority. And there in lies the problem, as neither the treaty or the local laws cover for what to do when someone who is an illegale immigrant has comitted a crime, and especially one who has no intentions on leaving the US? And how to balance the treaty that the US signed with that of justice in a case like this. Too many unanswered questions, however the US Supreme court has ruled on other cases like this before, and it has very rarely gone against the US states. And to further add in, what if he had taken advantage of any of the amnesty laws that have been gone through congress, he would have been granted citizenship. Would he have turned it down just to avoid the punishment that was handed out by the courts?
If he and his family were here on a visa, and he was not given a visit to the Mexican consulate, then it would be a breach of justice, but in this case, he and his family did cross illegally. They can not have it both ways, they can not come into the country and break the law, while at the same time expect full protection under the law.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Yes, it's a local issue. The way I see it, our obligation to the rapist is Miranda. It's his lawyer's job to request contact with the embassy. So let the rapist sue his lawyer.

This is what happens with these UN international treaties where we effectively surrender our sovereignty to the UN.

Originally posted by ugie1028
When did the US lose its sovereignty?

The UN should have NO authority on how states run their legal system...

Originally posted by Manhater
I would first ask, what are his ties with this guy? Or, what kind of political ties does this Mexican have?

Or, has he received like, some kind of threat, if he doesn't help get the guy off?

Supporting a rapist, I just can't see it. I mean the guy has 2 little girls himself, so, I really can't see him supporting it, unless his hands are tied.

edit on 5-7-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)

GEEZ folks. Read.

This isn’t just President Obama.

This isn’t about guilt or innocence.

This is not about US sovereignty.

This isn’t about the death penalty.

This is about foreign nationals being able to meet with their respective diplomats. SIMPLY MEETING WITH THEM.

Every time a US National is arrested abroad in Mexico, Thailand, Pakistan, ANYWHERE short of countries like IRAN US Nationals get to meet with their embassy representatives. And even Iran allows it sometimes!

It doesn’t decide guilt or innocence.

If we execute foreign nationals without even letting them speak to a representative of their own country, then we cross a very scary bridge where US citizens can be arrested and executed abroad while being denied access to their embassy. THAT is BS. Rick Perry is putting Americans all over the world at risk.

The White House has asked the US supreme court to put the execution of Humberto Leal Garcia on hold while Congress passes a law that would prevent the convicted rapist and murderer from being put to death along with dozens of other foreign nationals who were denied proper access to diplomatic representation before trials for capital crimes.

The administration moved after the governor of Texas, Rick Perry, brushed aside appeals from

diplomats,
top judges,
senior military officers,
the United Nations
and former president George W Bush
to stay Leal's execution because it could jeopardize American citizens arrested abroad as well as US diplomatic interests.

Texas can go ahead and execute him, but only after he has had access to Mexican diplomats.

GEEZ PEOPLE. THINK. DO you want other countries to have the right to execute Americans at will without them ever being able to explain themselves to US Diplomats first?

Cuz that is what Rick Perry is telling the world. Go ahead and deny US Embassies access to and execute any American citizens you like

Iran confirms three Americans are being detained
articles.latimes.com...

U.S. official visits American held in Cuba
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Barack Obama meets freed US hiker Sarah Shourd
www.telegraph.co.uk...

American held for ´insulting´ Thailand´s king
www.thehimalayantimes.com...

The top 10 cities where Americans were arrested and the number taken into custody:
1. Tijuana: 520
2. Guadalajara: 416
3. Nuevo Laredo: 359
4. London: 274
5. Mexico City: 208
6. Toronto: 183
7. Nassau, Bahamas: 108
8. Mérida, Mexico: 99
9. Nogales, Mexico: 96
10. Hong Kong: 90
travel.latimes.com...