re: "A Death in Texas"

DiploMad at The DiploMad 2.0 ("Wracked with angst over the fate of our beloved Republic, now in the hands of Morons who (mis)govern it, the DiploMad has returned to do battle on the world wide web, swearing death to political correctness, and pulling no punches.") shed some light on the Leal execution and the issue of consular notification/access.

Money quote(s):

"Just reading that last night the State of Texas put to death "Mexican" national Humberto Leal Garcia for the 1994 rape and murder of a sixteen-year-old girl. This execution took place despite efforts by the White House, the Government of Mexico, the UN, the OAS, a host of NGOs, and others to halt the execution because Leal had not been notified at the time of his arrest that he had the right to consult the Mexican consulate. He reportedly died yelling, "Viva Mexico!"

I agree that the execution of Leal last night is an outrage. He should have been executed about fifteen years ago.

In the course of my career I have had to deal with stories such as the Leal case. Almost always they involve somebody here illegally who commits a heinous crime, and is not even particularly aware that he has the right to contact his consul. In many cases, the Leal case seems to be one, the criminal is not even aware that he is the national of another country, as he has been in the US for many, many years."

On the one hand, you have arrestees who are unaware of (or actively concealing) their (illegal) alien status from law enforcement officers.

On the other hand you have law enforcement officers who are actively investigating a rape/murder case and who (justifiably) might view an inquiry into a suspect's nationality and/or immigration status to be either/both an investigative dead-end or a waste of limited manpower.

"The access to the consul issue only arises late in the process when slick appeals attorneys, looking for anything to save a murdering scum client, discover the matter of the consular access. This is a bogus issue. Some Texas sheriff does not have the obligation to advise a detainee that he has the right to his nation's consul. That is something for which the detainee needs to ask: IF he asks, then the police have the obligation to pass along the request to the appropriate embassy or consulate. There is no evidence that Leal asked, and, of course, none that Texas law enforcement denied his request to see a Mexican official. Should the police notify the German, Irish, or Italian Embassy every time somebody with a German, Irish, or Italian name is arrested? Should they automatically assume that anybody arrested who "looks" Mexican is a Mexican? Anybody with a Jewish name should have the Israeli Embassy notified? Can you see the law suits over racial profiling? Lawyers would get rich (er)!"

In our border states, where the otherwise (deliberately) misleading "we didn't cross the border, the border crossed us!" slogan actually might have some validity, dialing up the local Mexican consulate every time someone who might have Mexican nationality is a non-starter. As industrious as the Mexican consular officials of my own acquaintance have been, there's a lot more Texas (and Arizona, and New Mexico, and California) cops than there are of them.

(7/8)

re: "Nuke the News: The Only Thing Obama Stimulated Was… MURDER!"

Frank J. at IMAO ("Unfair. Unbalanced. Unmedicated.") commented on consular notification.

Money quote(s):

"Didn’t really get this whole Humberto Leal thing. If one of our citizens went to another country and raped and murdered someone, could you see America making a big stink about the guy’s rights? I mean, no one is saying the guy is innocent, but we’re supposed to care after what he’s done that he didn’t get to talk to a consulate? What was the consulate going to say to him? I hope it would be, “DON’T RAPE AND MURDER PEOPLE!” And when we see the Mexican government doing all they can to help rapists and murderers, it’s not really great PR for the country. They really want to spend more time highlighting the non-rapists and non-murderers. Still, just before dying from lethal injection, Leal shouted, “Viva Mexico!” So they won over one guy." (Bold typeface added for emphasis. - CAA.)

We have Americans in the jails of every country to which I've been posted as a foreign service officer. And, in every one of them, at least one of them was in jail for murder (if not rape).

We check on them as per the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and we do so at least quarterly as per our own laws and regulations.

re: "Supreme Court Denies Stay for Mexican Convict In Texas"

TSB at The Skeptical Bureaucrat ("Giving my fellow Americans the view from my cubicle") covered some consular notification news.

Money quote(s):

"The U.S. Supreme Court tonight denied a stay of execution for that Mexican citizen who had been sitting on death row in Texas for 16 years. The court's vote was 5-4 (the usual suspects) and the majority opinion is full of strong statements"

SCOTUS, like consular officers, deals with the laws as they're written, not as they'd like them to be written. Except, of course, when they don't. But consular officers have considerably less, er, interpretive discretion.

"Nothing in the record shows that Leal ever asked for consular access, or even told the police that he was a Mexican citizen (he had lived in the U.S. - illegally - since he was two years old and represented himself as a U.S. citizen). And in any case, he made his incriminating admissions to the police before they arrested him, and therefore before they had any obligation to inform him of his right to consular assistance.

Even if Leal had had the benefit of Mexican consular access before his trial, that would not have changed the fact that he had incriminated himself, nor change any of the other evidence against him. The lack of consular access, then, was not relevant to his conviction and death sentence." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

The facts as cited above make me wonder how/why this case ever made it to the SCOTUS. Who/what was pushing it upwards through the court system and to what end?

"The matter of reciprocity or Mexican retaliation against U.S. citizens is a real concern, but it is much less important than the interest Texas has in carrying out its state laws and punishing murder. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled two years ago that when adherence to a treaty such as the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations is contrary to a state statute, the President cannot override the statute unilaterally, but legislation is required. And as the Supreme Court noted tonight, Congress has not provided that legislation. The Vienna Convention, therefore, has no bearing on the case of Humberto Leal, and Texas was completely free to execute him."

Federalism rears its ugly head. Again. Federal laws don't trump state laws unless Congress specifically authorizes them to do so. So Congress has such power, but must definitely and discretely exercise it in each instance of legislation.

Good to know.

As for reciprocity, the suggestion of official Mexican retaliation against U.S. citizens is a real concern, but pre-supposes that the Mexican government actually does, or will continue to in the future, have some control over events and activities within its borders.