Should these Mexicans be executed or retried?

[yojimbo]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3584539.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2727905.stm

The Vienna Convention says that

(b) if he so requests, the competent authorities of the receiving State

shall, without delay, inform the consular post of the sending State

if, within its consular district, a national of that State is

arrested or committed to prison or to custody pending trial or is

detained in any other manner. Any communication addressed to the

consular post by the person arrested, in prison, custody or detention

shall also be forwarded by the said authorities without delay. **The

said authorities shall inform the person concerned without delay of

his rights under this sub-paragraph; **

© consular officers shall have the right to visit a national of the

sending State who is in prison, custody or detention, to converse and

correspond with him and to arrange for his legal representation. They

shall also have the right to visit any national of the sending State

who is in prison, custody or detention in their district in pursuance

of a judgment. Nevertheless, consular officers shall refrain from

taking action on behalf of a national who is in prison, custody or

detention if he expressly opposes such action.

Bolding mine. http://www.un.org/law/ilc/texts/consul.htm

So it seems that the US didn’t carry out it’s obligations under the convention and so has left itself open to these criticisms. Even if this is a anti-death publicity stunt does Mexico still have a legit point none the less?

[Neurotik]

I think it’s pretty open and shut from what I read. If the Mexicans were actually denied some rights that are guaranteed in a treaty the US is a signatory to then it would seem that they should get a retrial.

Of course, I don’t know the specifics of the case and the media (not just the BBC, but everyone) often misinterprets some information in legal proceedings. So I’ll be interested to hear from the legal beagles on the board.

[Voodoochile]

@Neurotik

I think it’s pretty open and shut from what I read. If the Mexicans were actually denied some rights that are guaranteed in a treaty the US is a signatory to then it would seem that they should get a retrial.

Of course, I don’t know the specifics of the case and the media (not just the BBC, but everyone) often misinterprets some information in legal proceedings. So I’ll be interested to hear from the legal beagles on the board.

Im not a legal beagle, and I dont have cites at hand, but Ive read about this before and if I remember correctly there is a bit of legal wrangling/power plays about this on this side of the pond as well; many or all of these guys were convicted at the state level of state crimes, and there is some dispute between State govts and the Fed Govt about some of the techicalities. Id like to hear some legal beagles info as well, especially regarding what it would take for the Fed govt to override (commute a death penalty) verdict arrived at by a state.

[yojimbo]

Open and shut? Maybe maybe not. As you say it’s all in the details of the actual cases but this from one of the BBC links

But in a similar case, the court ordered the US to stay the execution of a German national in 1999 - he was put to death nevertheless.

doesn’t bode well assuming that this case is actually similar(rights under The Vienna Convention I mean).

[Neurotik]

@yojimbo

Open and shut? Maybe maybe not. As you say it’s all in the details of the actual cases but this from one of the BBC links doesn’t bode well assuming that this case is actually similar(rights under The Vienna Convention I mean).

Open and shut as to what should happen, not what will happen.

Actually, I think it’s pretty safe to say that the gubmint will ignore the International Court in this case, too.

[Zagadka]

First of all, I think they are “people,” not that second-class case of “foreigners” or even the third class case of “Mexicans.”

Second of all, I take it that this means that the US won’t b*tch and moan when some American goes overseas, breaks a law, and gets a harsh sentence to be carried out on foreign soil?

[Neurotik]

@Zagadka

First of all, I think they are “people,” not that second-class case of “foreigners” or even the third class case of “Mexicans.”

That’s nice, but that has nothing to do with this case since the entire thing hinges on the fact that they are foreigners and have an extra right not granted to US citizens in US courts (the right for consular notification).

But I congratulate you on your universalism.

Second of all, I take it that this means that the US won’t b*tch and moan when some American goes overseas, breaks a law, and gets a harsh sentence to be carried out on foreign soil?

No, why would it? Governments always try to set a double standard. It’s SOP in the international affairs scene.

[Zagadka]

@Neurotik

That’s nice, but that has nothing to do with this case since the entire thing hinges on the fact that they are foreigners and have an extra right not granted to US citizens in US courts (the right for consular notification).

But I congratulate you on your universalism.

Thanks.

No, why would it? Governments always try to set a double standard. It’s SOP in the international affairs scene.

Just fighting ignorance, willful and otherwise. Don’t mind me.

[Neurotik]

Fair enough.