He was not denied access to the Mexican Consulate. No one at the time of his trial knew he was Mexican. Because he had lived in America since he was two it was assumed by everyone that he was American. Unless you can demonstrate clearly that he was ever denied access to the Mexican Consulate before or during his trial, you should cease making these charges.
But you're from a more sophisticated part of the world, are you? Where might that be?
It's not that complicated, unless of course you don't believe that countries reciprocate on this stuff. Oh wait, since most of you don't give a damn what happens anywhere else in the world and have never traveled beyond the borders of your own probably red-neck state, I can see why you don't care.
Why would anyone involved the Mexican Consulate if no one knew, including the defendant himself, that he was Mexican?
Do you think countries should send notices to consulates throughout the world to be on the alert in case they have arrested a non-American, despite no claims being made that such is the case?
Last edited by Grant; 07-08-11 at 10:15 AM.
As for breaking laws, that is done all the time by our government. Obama just told the Justice Department to stop enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act. He is also breaking, or ignoring which is the same thing, a federal law.
.Leal claimed he did not learn of his consular access right until two years after his capital conviction. He said he learned of the right not from any official, but from a fellow prisoner.
Eventually, between 2010 and 2011, Leal was visited by a representative of the Mexican government more than 10 times, said Judy Garces, press relations spokeswoman with the Mexican Consulate in San Antonio
Certainly there was a treaty but no one, including his lawyers, were aware that their defendant was Mexican and they quite likely never heard of this treaty either.
The Supreme Court has ruled that while the treaty was ignored, unwittingly, it really made no difference to the case.
Ultimately more defense lawyers, and illegals, will hear of this case and demand to call their Consulate, which is their right. And this could be good for the United States as well because the Consulates could end up paying for the defense, and jail bills, rather than the American taxpayer.
I'm somewhat torn on this .. The state's concern would be to follow the laws of the state . . prosecute the person based on the evidence. It would seem to me that it's up to the defense to bring this up during the trial .. while some here keep blaming the state saying they should have known, why is it that they aren't asking why this killer didn't inform his attorney, or for that matter the police when they were questioning him? What makes it the responsibility of the state, more then of the individual or his defense team?
As for concerns over this effecting our citizens going to another country, I'm not sure I could feel sorry for them if they waited two years to tell anyone that they were American. Just taking a guess here .. but I'm pretty sure that 99% of them that are arrested in another country, that is probably one of the first things they tell everyone ..
Another thing that I'm confused about … it's being said that we broke some sort of international law... yet our very own SC said we didn't .. While I agree we are a nation that should obey our laws, I'm confused as to where we are suppose to go beyond the Supreme Court to find out if we are. They refused to deny the execution, so by their judgment we did in fact obey all the laws.