Mexican National Inmate on Death Row Creates International Stir

[red states rule]

Unlike in the Casey Anthony trial, it looks like the guilty will be punished in this case

Despite all the pleas for mercy from the usual sources






The execution of a Mexican national on U.S. ground scheduled for Thursday has become something of an international brouhaha.

President Obama, the State Department and Mexico, have all asked Texas for a last-minute reprieve of Humberto Leal, 38, who was convicted in 1995 in the brutal raping and murder of a teenage girl. Citing the U.N.-enforced 1963 Vienna Treaty, the officials believe Leal could have altered his penalty had he been given the chance.

The treaty requires foreign nationals who are arrested in foreign countries the right to access their consulates. Texas police would have been required to inform Leal that he has the legal right to contact the Mexican consular, which could have offered him legal advice.

Critics say Leal, who was raised in the U.S. since he was 2-years-old, was never given the option and in turn, watched a jury take 45 minutes to find him guilty of raping and murdering a16-year-old girl. Although evidence against Leal was strong, critics say he incriminated himself and had other legal difficulties.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/07/06/mexican-national-inmate-on-death-row-creates-international-stir/#ixzz1RPU76CQa

[Gaffer]

Doesn't the dream act apply to him now. He gets all the benefits of being a US citizen convicted of murder. Buh bye :thumb:

[DragonStryk72]

I don't know how many ways there are to say this: Don't fuck around in Texas- They Will kill you

[gabosaurus]

Too late dude. You're fried:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/About-to-die-Leal-apologizes-for-killing-S-A-1456909.php

[red states rule]

I don't know how many ways there are to say this: Don't fuck around in Texas- They Will kill you

More like they enforce the laws of Texas

and Texas did not cave to Obama who tried to meddle in the states affairs




HUNTSVILLE, Texas — Texas executed a Mexican citizen Thursday for the rape-slaying of a teenager after he and the White House pleaded in vain for a Supreme Court stay, saying he was denied help from his home country that could have helped him avoid the death penalty.

In his last minutes, Humberto Leal repeatedly said he was sorry and accepted responsibility.

“I have hurt a lot of people. ... I take full blame for everything. I am sorry for what I did,” he said in the death chamber.

“One more thing,” he said as the drugs began taking effect. Then he shouted twice, “Viva Mexico!”

“Ready warden,” he said. “Let’s get this show on the road.”

He grunted, snored several times and appeared to go to sleep, then stopped all breathing movement. The 38-year-old mechanic was pronounced dead at 6:21 p.m., 10 minutes after the lethal drugs began flowing into his arms.

After his execution, relatives of Leal who had gathered in Guadalupe, Mexico, burned a T-shirt with an image of the American flag in protest. Leal’s uncle Alberto Rodriguez criticized the U.S. justice system and the Mexican government and said, “There is a God who makes us all pay.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/mexican-man-hours-away-from-texas-execution-awaits-court-ruling-on-white-house-backed-appeal/2011/07/07/gIQAhfsl1H_story.html?hpid=z2

[Gaffer]

The dream act says he was entitled to what America has to offer. He got that.

[red states rule]

Had the Feds been enforcing immigration laws that teenage girl might still be alive,tand the piece of scum that killed her might be in a Mexican jail right now

[gabosaurus]

Had the Feds been enforcing immigration laws that teenage girl might still be alive,tand the piece of scum that killed her might be in a Mexican jail right now

Very true. The Feds refuse to crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Even Arizona, the center of public animosity toward illegals, has rejected such legislation as being "anti-business."
If you want to get rid of the ants, clean up the honey spills.

[red states rule]

Very true. The Feds refuse to crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Even Arizona, the center of public animosity toward illegals, has rejected such legislation as being "anti-business."
If you want to get rid of the ants, clean up the honey spills.

Again Gabby, Dems took E Verify out of the "stimulus" bill

However under Obamanomics perhaps they illegals will flee the nation as there are fewer and fewer jobs for anyone

[gabosaurus]

You didn't respond to my point. If you are against illegal immigration, you should be in favor of stiff penalties for businesses that hire illegals.
A donut company in Texas has been convicted several times of hiring illegals. Yet the state refuses to shut the company down. Arizona has done the same with a restaurant chain.

[red states rule]

You didn't respond to my point. If you are against illegal immigration, you should be in favor of stiff penalties for businesses that hire illegals.
A donut company in Texas has been convicted several times of hiring illegals. Yet the state refuses to shut the company down. Arizona has done the same with a restaurant chain.

and Dems continue to openly encourage illegals to come here and enjoy all the handouts

Dems made it HARDER for employers to verfiy the immigration status of the applicants then they blame them for hiring them

Sounds like something you would do Gabby

[gabosaurus]

You STILL haven't addressed my point. E-verify is still out there. Companies ignore it. They want to spend less money on workers willing to accept lower wages.
If companies employing illegals were shut down, others would get the message. With no jobs, there would be no illegals.

[red states rule]

You STILL haven't addressed my point. E-verify is still out there. Companies ignore it. They want to spend less money on workers willing to accept lower wages.
If companies employing illegals were shut down, others would get the message. With no jobs, there would be no illegals.

Eh Gabby, Dems pulled E Veirfy from the "stimulus" bill.

As I said, Dems made it harder for companies to verfiy who they are hiring - but you do not seem to care about that

[fj1200]

You STILL haven't addressed my point.

Why do you blame business for the failure of government?

[DragonStryk72]

Eh Gabby, Dems pulled E Veirfy from the "stimulus" bill.

As I said, Dems made it harder for companies to verfiy who they are hiring - but you do not seem to care about that

E-verify is out there, whether or not it was yanked from the stimulus. I know because Chipotle Mexican Grill uses it for hiring. I know this because it was part of my new hire paperwork, and it's also used by Adecco Temporary agency.

On this point, Gabs is correct. Businesses are the ones who create the opportunity that is being sought, but they are not being stopped by the law, no matter how many times they get caught. They pay a fine that is way less than the money they're saving/making off the illegals, and have a finger shaken at them, but that's about it. Until employers start getting their business licenses suspended or revoked for this, they're pretty much gonna keep doing it.

[LuvRPgrl]

You STILL haven't addressed my point. E-verify is still out there. Companies ignore it. They want to spend less money on workers willing to accept lower wages.
If companies employing illegals were shut down, others would get the message. With no jobs, there would be no illegals.

Many companies have to hire illegals in order to keep up with the competetion. Unless the obamament could insure that all companies wouldnt hire illegals and not only the ones willing to comply, it would be disasterous for some.

To simply blame the businesses of America is pure BS. Many of these companies werent even in business 10/20/30 years ago while the problem was going on.

Plus, a business is only a tiny, tiny fraction of the overall problem. For that to be effective, almost all busiinesses would have to comply, but problem is, who is gonna be first, cuz whoever is, might go OUT OF BUSINESS.

But the govt has the ability to stop all illegal immigration, not just a small percentage. That is where their responsability lies, but hey, they are too busy trying to keep a Mex national who raped and murdered a teen girl, alive.

[Gunny]

Very true. The Feds refuse to crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Even Arizona, the center of public animosity toward illegals, has rejected such legislation as being "anti-business."
If you want to get rid of the ants, clean up the honey spills.

Backwards logic, as usual. The "usual suspects" are as unwilling to crack down on employers as they are the illegals. Bleeding hearts who "care so much" about the poor downtrodden illegals need their corporate funding for their political campaigns just like everyone else.

[Gunny]

You didn't respond to my point. If you are against illegal immigration, you should be in favor of stiff penalties for businesses that hire illegals.
A donut company in Texas has been convicted several times of hiring illegals. Yet the state refuses to shut the company down. Arizona has done the same with a restaurant chain.

I addressed your point directly. You really don't have one. The same can be said in reverse.

Enforce illegal immigration laws and unscrupulous employers don't have anyone to hire but US citizens.

[LuvRPgrl]

I don't know how many ways there are to say this: Don't fuck around in Texas- They Will kill you

Actually, what they say is "Don't mess with Texas".

[fj1200]

Actually, what they say is "Don't mess with Texas".

But that's just paraphrasing and the PC version. :laugh:

[Gunny]

Actually, what they say is "Don't mess with Texas".

Sort of. "Don't Mess with Texas" it's actually the states anti-littering campaign. Fines are steep, but it's cleaned up a lot of the highways.

What we say in instances such as the above is ..." You kill us and we'll kill you back".

It never has ceased to amaze me the number of people who want to commit capital crimes in Texas and FL, OK ... why pick a state you KNOW is going to execute you for your crime(s)?

[fj1200]

It never has ceased to amaze me the number of people who want to commit capital crimes in Texas and FL, OK ... why pick a state you KNOW is going to execute you for your crime(s)?

Then one should wonder about the deterrent effect of the death penalty. Is the costly automatic appeal process worth it over the cost of just slapping them in jail for 40 years?

[Gunny]

Then one should wonder about the deterrent effect of the death penalty. Is the costly automatic appeal process worth it over the cost of just slapping them in jail for 40 years?

The deterrent effect is just fine. This dude will not commit capital murder again in the State of Texas.

Forty years as opposed to an average 15 on death row? The whole argument doesn't work with me. Death obviously, by definition, far more a deterrent than 40 years.

Not to mention 40 years means eligible for parole in 20, plus tack on time off for good behavior and they don't spend much more time in jail than they would on the appeal process.

[fj1200]

Deterrence is for those who haven't committed a capital crime not for those who have already been caught. There is no parole in "life without parole"... or shouldn't be.

[LuvRPgrl]

Then one should wonder about the deterrent effect of the death penalty. Is the costly automatic appeal process worth it over the cost of just slapping them in jail for 40 years?

The cost is more than offset by the number of murderers who avoid the death penalty and confess, hence not going to trial.

[Gunny]

Deterrence is for those who haven't committed a capital crime not for those who have already been caught. There is no parole in "life without parole"... or shouldn't be.

The timeless argument of death penalty opponents. Kind of hard to prove a deterrent when you don't have people saying they'd have committed a crime if it didn't exist.

Logic dictates that fear of punishment is a deterrent. Works great on military recruits.

Not all states have life without parole.

If you want to argue the judiciary in this nation is a joke, and laws are not applied equally, I agree. That however is a separate topic.

[Gunny]

The cost is more than offset by the number of murderers who avoid the death penalty and confess, hence not going to trial.

They rarely accept life without parole as part of a plea agreement. From my observation, they usually get some kind of reduced sentence with a chance at parole at some point.

I don't see life life without parole, even if that was a legit sentence across the board in all 50 states as an alternative to the death penalty. Our prisons are already overcrowded, and there's no money to build more.

[Gunny]

I will also point out that I only know of TWO Mexican nationals put to death in Texas in the past 20+ years. And Texas usually leads the nation in executions.

Talk about unfair? If you're a US citizen and commit a capital crime you can be executed, but if you are a foreign national you cannot be executed for the same capital crime?

Can't say I go for that argument.

[fj1200]

Our prisons are already overcrowded, and there's no money to build more.

So the 26 people executed so far this year are making a dent in the overcrowding?

[fj1200]

The cost is more than offset by the number of murderers who avoid the death penalty and confess, hence not going to trial.

That would be a point in favor of the death penalty.


The timeless argument of death penalty opponents. Kind of hard to prove a deterrent when you don't have people saying they'd have committed a crime if it didn't exist.

Logic dictates that fear of punishment is a deterrent. Works great on military recruits.

Are you assuming my stance again? BTW, there are plenty of people out there who actually do studies on such a thing.

Logic would dictate if criminals were rational.

[logroller]

So the 26 people executed so far this year are making a dent in the overcrowding?

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/ascii/fssc04.txt

By Matthew R. Durose
and Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D.
BJS Statisticians

In 2004 State courts convicted an estimated 1,079,000 adults
of a felony... About a third of convicted felons were drug offenders, and about 1 in 5 (18%) were violent offenders...

Less than 1% of convicted felons were sentenced to
life in prison...

Life sentences are rare among convicted felons in State courts,
whether measured as a percentage of all sentences(0.3%)or as
a percentage of prison sentences (0.8%). Among the estimated
8,400 persons convicted of murder or nonnegligent manslaughter
in 2004, 20.4% were sentenced to life in prison.

In 2004, 29 States received 115 prisoners under sentence of
death.***Footnote: See Capital Punishment, 2004, NCJ 211349,
November 2005.***



What's 26 executed out of 115 sentenced? ~1 of 5

[Gunny]

So the 26 people executed so far this year are making a dent in the overcrowding?

Looks kind of mathematically factual, doesn't it?

[Gunny]

That would be a point in favor of the death penalty.



Are you assuming my stance again? BTW, there are plenty of people out there who actually do studies on such a thing.

Logic would dictate if criminals were rational.

Try again, and please refrain from using "you're assuming" as a deflective crutch.

Don't waste your time with polls or so-called "studies" on me. Both are skewed and reflect the desired outcome of those doing the poll/"study".

Are you saying there is a "study" on who would've committed crimes had not been a death penalty? With HONEST answers? I think not.

All in all, a pretty lame response to mine.

[jimnyc]

This chihuahua should have just been shot on the spot. Save the expensive jail time, trial and needle.

[Gunny]

This chihuahua should have just been shot on the spot. Save the expensive jail time, trial and needle.

Used to be, he'd just have been hanged from the nearest tree.

Nowadays, it's a wrongful death lawsuit.

[fj1200]

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/ascii/fssc04.txt

What's 26 executed out of 115 sentenced? ~1 of 5

Gee Wally, we don't have any kind of overcrowding in the US, thanks to the death penalty and all.
/sarcasm


Looks kind of mathematically factual, doesn't it?

26 out of 1.5 million... yup, that's a dent all right.

[fj1200]

Try again, and please refrain from using "you're assuming" as a deflective crutch.

Just trying to save you from yourself. I am pro-death penalty.


Don't waste your time with polls or so-called "studies" on me. Both are skewed and reflect the desired outcome of those doing the poll/"study".

Are you saying there is a "study" on who would've committed crimes had not been a death penalty? With HONEST answers? I think not.

All in all, a pretty lame response to mine.

You do understand how a study might work don't you? They might do something crazy like compare a non-DP state to a DP state and see what the results are. Someone might even do a non-biased study but if you're just going to reject them out of hand...

Nonetheless, I think there is little deterrent effect of the death penalty because it is used rarely and there is such a long time between conviction and execution.

And it may have been a lame response but I didn't have much to work with. :cool:

[Gunny]

Just trying to save you from yourself. I am pro-death penalty.



You do understand how a study might work don't you? They might do something crazy like compare a non-DP state to a DP state and see what the results are. Someone might even do a non-biased study but if you're just going to reject them out of hand...

Nonetheless, I think there is little deterrent effect of the death penalty because it is used rarely and there is such a long time between conviction and execution.

And it may have been a lame response but I didn't have much to work with. :cool:

I don't need to be saved from myself. Especially not by some wannabe-elitist.

I don't care what your stance is. It isn't assuming to respond directly to your comments.

I can see how people get all over political message boards on the internet quoting studies that are nothing but skewed propaganda. And no, that doesn't work for me.

I CAN see how it works for you though.

[fj1200]

I don't need to be saved from myself. Especially not by some wannabe-elitist.

I don't care what your stance is. It isn't assuming to respond directly to your comments.

I can see how people get all over political message boards on the internet quoting studies that are nothing but skewed propaganda. And no, that doesn't work for me.

I CAN see how it works for you though.

"Wannabe elitist." That's a new one. :slap:

What if there was a study or poll that agreed with your position, would that be skewed propaganda?

[Gunny]

"Wannabe elitist." That's a new one. :slap:

What if there was a study or poll that agreed with your position, would that be skewed propaganda?

I don't use them to support my arguments. The more polarized the issue and the bigger the government grant, the less willing I am to accept them.

There are studies and polls that support both sides of this issue. engaging in a cut-n-paste my study vs yours argument that never ends is about as much fun to me as a root canal.

I have yet to find a single study/poll/source of alleged information that exactly supports any of my positions.

[LuvRPgrl]

What's 26 executed out of 115 sentenced? ~1 of 5

You are asking the wrong question.

As for the death penalty being a deterrent, it certainly is. Im quite confident that there are times when a criminal would refrain from shooting someone, and especially a cop, know they probably will get death.
Also, it is quite common to use it as a bargaining chip, so deterrent is not its only benefit. And as to any downside, as long as they never execute someone who is innocent, I see no downside,

The Bible does NOT say "Thou shalt not kill"

It says "Thou shall not murder".

[logroller]

You are asking the wrong question.

As for the death penalty being a deterrent, it certainly is. Im quite confident that there are times when a criminal would refrain from shooting someone, and especially a cop, know they probably will get death.
Also, it is quite common to use it as a bargaining chip, so deterrent is not its only benefit. And as to any downside, as long as they never execute someone who is innocent, I see no downside,

The Bible does NOT say "Thou shalt not kill"

It says "Thou shall not murder".

I don't think the courts are enforcing god's law anyways...So?

MURDER RAPE, yeah, Kill 'em. Not sure how much money it costs, don't really care! I more concerned with him commiting another crime. Just because one is jailed doesn't mean they won't commit crime; far from it, something like 50% recivitism rate, so half of felony releases, not only commit, but are convicted and sent back-- not very efficient, a downright pitiful rate of rehabilitation, "What we have here is, a failure to communicate!"

[LuvRPgrl]

I don't think the courts are enforcing god's law anyways...So?

MURDER RAPE, yeah, Kill 'em. Not sure how much money it costs, don't really care! I more concerned with him commiting another crime. Just because one is jailed doesn't mean they won't commit crime; far from it, something like 50% recivitism rate, so half of felony releases, not only commit, but are convicted and sent back-- not very efficient, a downright pitiful rate of rehabilitation, "What we have here is, a failure to communicate!"

Ohhh, the anit death penalty gurus never answer this one.

Even if a criminal is given life without paqrole, and in fact stays in prison til he dies, there is still plenty of time for him to commit crimes.
First, if the death penalty is off the table, and he is going to spend his entire life in prison anyways, whats to stop him from killing a guard or other inmate, maybe someone who isnt really a criminal, like someone who was busted for drugs, lets say, or even a car thief doesnt deseerve to get murdered

[fj1200]

I don't use them to support my arguments. The more polarized the issue and the bigger the government grant, the less willing I am to accept them.

There are studies and polls that support both sides of this issue. engaging in a cut-n-paste my study vs yours argument that never ends is about as much fun to me as a root canal.

I have yet to find a single study/poll/source of alleged information that exactly supports any of my positions.

Studies are generally a good start when looking to support your position, it lends some credence you know.

[logroller]

Ohhh, the anit death penalty gurus never answer this one.

Even if a criminal is given life without paqrole, and in fact stays in prison til he dies, there is still plenty of time for him to commit crimes.
First, if the death penalty is off the table, and he is going to spend his entire life in prison anyways, whats to stop him from killing a guard or other inmate, maybe someone who isnt really a criminal, like someone who was busted for drugs, lets say, or even a car thief doesnt deseerve to get murdered

I hear ya. Nothin wrong with a chaingang either, IMO. It's not cruel and unusual to receive the consequences from your actions. But as Gahndi said, "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." God's law simply doesn't belong in the hands of man.

[Gunny]

I don't think the courts are enforcing god's law anyways...So?

MURDER RAPE, yeah, Kill 'em. Not sure how much money it costs, don't really care! I more concerned with him commiting another crime. Just because one is jailed doesn't mean they won't commit crime; far from it, something like 50% recivitism rate, so half of felony releases, not only commit, but are convicted and sent back-- not very efficient, a downright pitiful rate of rehabilitation, "What we have here is, a failure to communicate!"

Man's laws are based on God's. Simple as that, like it or not.

[Gunny]

Studies are generally a good start when looking to support your position, it lends some credence you know.

Didn't say they weren't. I just said I don't use them to make my arguments.

Cutting and pasting a link and/or touting this study or that study doesn't lend credence to anything with me. Just tells me you know how to cut and paste. Not make a logical argument.

[Gunny]

I hear ya. Nothin wrong with a chaingang either, IMO. It's not cruel and unusual to receive the consequences from your actions. But as Gahndi said, "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." God's law simply doesn't belong in the hands of man.

IMO, doing hard time (chain gangs) would be as much if not more a deterrent than the death penalty. At least you have to die only once. Busting rocks for a couple of years you get to do over and over again.

Unfortunately, the bleeding hearts have removed that option from the table.