Skip to comments.Tancredo Criticizes Bush Decision to Appeal Illegal Alien Murder Case
Posted on 10/11/2007 12:53:56 PM PDT by T.L.Sink
Rep. Tom Tancredo today criticized the decision by President Bush to allow an appeals case to move to the Supreme Court regarding an illegal alien who was convicted of gang-raping, sodomizing and murdering two 14 year old girls. "It's astonishing that this president would give into international pressure from the Mexican government and possibly set this convicted gang member free," Tancredo said. Jose Medellin confessed, along with a handful of other gang members, to gang raping, sodomizing and murdering two 14 year old girls. He even took a wristwatch from one of the girls as a souvenir. At issue is whether or not Medellin and the others were denied their right to contact the Mexican consulate prior to confessing their crimes. The International Court of Justice at the Hague ruled in favor of the Mexican government and asked the United States to reconsider their sentences. Concluded Tancredo, "If the decree of some international tribunal were to trump our judicial system it would be a national embarrassment."
(Excerpt) Read more at tancredo.house.gov ...
Thanks for all the drama.
The issue here is not sovereignty - the issue here is reciprocity.
If an American is arrested for a crime in Mexico, we want our citizens to have access to the US consulate.
That is what this case is about.
As he should. This perp committed a horrible crime against two innocent girls. He should fry.
Then why isn’t he talking to Mexico instead of the UN?
Itâs a farce Rudy Giuliani who, like President Bush, supports amnesty for illegal immigrants is perceived as one of the leading GOP candidates while Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter are not. It’s amazing anybody could actually consider voting under any circumstance for Giuliani giving his support of amnesty.
I haven't seen the 'setting free part before? How does this play in?
If a foreign national is arrested, law enforcement should allow them to contact a consular official as well as an attorney.
I don't care if he has a diplomat as well as a lawyer at his table when he is sentenced to death.
He is talking to neither.
..aounds like there is a lot more to this story than the knee jerk reaction we typically have?
That is what this case is about.
He wasn't denied access to the consulate. He never brought the issue up at trial.
Shrub is just like his father, GHWB, who always subordinated US sovereignty to the internationalists.
“The issue here is not sovereignty - the issue here is reciprocity.”
Comity: com·i·ty Pronunciation Key [kom-i-tee]
noun, plural -ties. 1. mutual courtesy; civility.
2. Also called comity of nations. courtesy between nations, as in respect shown by one country for the laws, judicial decisions, and institutions of another.
Yeah, you’re sure right on the money there, wideawake.
We certainly wouldn’t want to do anything to jeopardize our great working relationship with our neighbor to the south . . .
They might, Mexico, gee, I dunno—they might start flooding our country with tens of thousands of their undesirable, unemployable, grade school drop-outs.
Or they might start smuggling tons of illegal drugs into our country, while their mealy-mouthed president says things like, “Mexico is wherever you find Mexicans.”
Also, how are we ever to integrate into a North American Union if we don’t learn how to kow-tow to the dictates of a European kangaroo-court?
Overall, you’re flat wrong: the issue is sovereignty.
Mexico and the Euros can go pound sand.
You probably agree with me, but it disturbs me that FReepers accept spin so uncritically when it comes from a source perceived to be on "our side."
The US, with the concurrence of President Truman and the Senate, ratified the UN Charter on October 24, 1945.
Chapter XIV of the Charter established the International Court Of Justice which had compulsory jurisdiction in international disputes.
On April 24, 1963, President Kennedy and the US Senate adopted the Vienna Convention, which made immediate notice of consular consultation compulsory.
In 1986, President Reagan withdrew from compulsory ICJ jurisdiction and insitituted a policy whereby the US would consider ICJ verdicts but not implement if they conflicted with US national security.
In 2005, President Bush withdrew from compulsory Vienna Convention jurisdiction, because the administration was worried that if its military tribunals for terrorists were overruled and the terrorists were to become civilian defendants, the Convention would be used to end their incarceration - because the evidence against these individuals may not have complied with civilian standards.
We now have the case of this Medellin piece of dirt - the administration cannot designate him a terrorist without the term losing colourable meaning. Since he is not a terrorist but a common criminal, the US has an interest in upholding the ICJ's interpretation of the Vienna Convention and honoring his right to contact his consulate - just as the US hopes that US citizens arrested abroad will have their rights so honored.
This case has implications for all US citizens abroad as well as for the war against terrorism.
Medellin needs to be retried with consular assistance. Nothing in a retrial would prevent him from being convicted and executed.
Reciprocity? Never going to happen in Mexico. Their idea of 'fairness' is kidnapping 47 US citizens last year and never finding them!
He was supposed to be advised of his right to consult his consulate.
If a native-born criminal goes to trial without a state-provided or other attorney and is convicted without being represented in court, any conviction will be overturned, even if the police testify that "he never asked for an attorney."
Are you aware of any cases in which a US citizen was arrested in Mexico and not put in touch with the US consulate?
Also, the fact that he was never in touch with his consulate will constitute another set of potential grounds for his appeal - i.e. that he was incompetently represented by an attorney who never advised him of his right to contact his consulate.
“If a native-born criminal goes to trial without a state-provided or other attorney ...” and blah blah blah blah blah.
So what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
You’re straining at gnats.
I hope they use a solar-powered `lectric chair on this [expletive deleted] cholo; it takes longer-—6-7 hours-—but earns the great State of Texas carbon credits . . . .
And no amount of mealy mouthed crap from people who support this trash is going to change my mind about that.And that includes you and President Bush.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.