You can call the consequences of breaking any law 'revenge' though I suspect the word is intended more to encourage an emotional reaction. as though justice isn't also being served. All punishments for breaking the law could be called revenge, just as that simple parking ticket.
The possibility of the death penalty being available says that societies and cultures value human life and if you take the life of another human being, the most heinous of all crimes, you are possibly going to forfeit your own life. You don't get a do over and promise not to do it again. It must be established in everyone's mind from cradle to grave that murder is the most serious offense imaginable, it is not a cartoon or TV program or a video game. It is murder and you will probably lose your life if you commit one. , Maybe this guy didn't know that when he murdered this young girl, but he should have.
Ludahai, you said earlier that
and I askedIt was the State of Texas holding him and it was their responsibility to tell the SUSPECT of his rights under the treaty in accordance with Article 36 of the treaty.
Does this mean that everyone who has been a suspect on a crime since the early 1990's should have been asked their citizenship, much like the Miranda Rights?Are all States of the Union now required to ask a person their citizenship whenever they are a suspect in a crime?
As you know, there is a great deal of controversy going around that people should not be asked that question whereas this treaty, as you explain it, makes it the the law to ask if a suspect is a citizen of the United States or not.
It therefore follows that the law is already on the side of those who want to ask possible suspects their nationality in order to protect their rights and call the (in the case anyway) the Mexican Consulate. Should it be made mandatory to ask any suspects their nationality or is that already the case?
Last edited by Grant; 07-09-11 at 09:31 AM.
Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
Jon Huntsman for President
This treaty and it's necessary enforcement strongly underlines the need for a National Identity card in order that all people not having such a card are guaranteed the rights to call their consulate if they are suspects in a crime.
The fact that this man was a Mexican is not really relevant when put in full context. The law was not followed when the question of his nationality was not asked. It would appear then that all the individual States have to do now is point out their responsibilities under this treaty and ask every suspect in a crime their nationality. This would, of course, be also used as a tool to help clean up the illegal immigrant problem.
What would that review have unearthed?
Why postpone the execution to review what you already know? Why not review it after you execute him?
Originally Posted by Josie
I agree with Sgt Rock. This guy had it coming.
he would have been executed if complete due process had been afforded
governor perry used this as a launching pad to the republican candidacy
but the significance of our failure to provide due process to an alien is the precedent it sets for when Americans need access to American counsel when in legal difficulty outside the USA
of course, from reading this thread, you already knew that