[lLianneForbess]

I think you've already done that, Sloww. You even have the Supreme Court backing Texas up in thier telling Bush to go **** himself.

[Wymdqcvb]

You do realize that they got a gob smackingly large number of appeals, right?

[LoveTTatall]

"Kill 'em all, and let God sort 'em out!" Sort of a code of the west thing. Texas still subscribes to that code. Sure isn't going to let a bunch of "ferriners tell us" how to administer justice.

[Zoxeeoy]

Originally posted by Asher

Sounds to me like it's inadequately funded, right?

I do like how you favour skipping a review process to potentially save an innocent life just 'cause the backlog is long. He means the individuals being executed have already had their appeals heard many times over.

The appeals process for the death penalty is one of its drawbacks. It's often cheaper just to lock them up for life.

[bestonlinepharmasy2]

Let me point out again that Texas leads in exonerating due ro DNA tests.

You have to also recognize that Texas doesn't like to be told what to do. Period. As a Texan, if you ask me, maybe. You tell me, and I won't, just to be contrary.


World Council: Can't you do anything about Texas?
USA: Um, no, not really.
Texas: Texas vs. The World!

Eventually, the USA is going to have to learn some facts about Texas and how to communicate with Texans.
We flat don't care what the United Nations has to say.

[reiseebup]

Originally posted by Asher
Are appeals the same as reviews? Not sure what you mean. Appeals generally concern themselves with technicalities, and don't review the evidence per se. Would reviews involve reexamining evidence?

[Uvgsgssu]

Appeals reexamine evidence when the appeal is based on the validity of the evidence...

[RastusuadegeFrimoum]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Appeals reexamine evidence when the appeal is based on the validity of the evidence... I've heard of that happening, but my understanding is that most higher courts will defer to the lower court in terms of "whodunit" and generally concern themselves with "how well run was the trial."

Is that the case?

[CefGemYAffews]

The problem is that the World Court has found that Texas has been systematically violating the Vienna Treaty, of which the U.S. is a signatory:

Justices to rule
By David G. Savage
May 01, 2007

The Supreme Court agreed Monday to take up an unusual death penalty case that puts President Bush, the Mexican government and a rapist and murderer from Houston on the same team in a legal battle against the state of Texas.

At issue is whether Texas must abide by a ruling from the International Court of Justice in the Hague and reconsider a death sentence meted out to a convicted killer who is a native of Mexico.

The lead plaintiff, Jose Medellin, has been on death row since 1994 for raping and strangling two teenage girls in Houston.

The outcome also could affect the fate of 28 Mexican natives who are under death sentences in California.

Three years ago, the Mexican government won a ruling from the international court holding that U.S. officials had violated a treaty requiring that the consulate be notified when Mexican citizens were arrested and held for serious crimes.

American tourists and students studying abroad may be familiar with this treaty, known as the Vienna Convention. It protects the rights of Americans when they are abroad. But police and local prosecutors in this country did not routinely abide by the treaty when they arrested and detained suspects who were not U.S. citizens.

Mexico objected most strongly when the death penalty was at issue because it opposed capital punishment. In its suit before the international court, it cited 51 Mexican nationals who were on death row in the United States and said it had not been notified during their legal proceedings. The Mexican government said it would have, at minimum, supplied lawyers to argue against the imposition of a death sentence.

Two years ago, in something of a surprise, President Bush and the State Department told Texas officials they had to take steps to comply with the decision in the Hague.

Neither Bush nor the international court said what had to be done.

The decision said only that the United States had to “provide, by means of its own choosing, review and reconsideration of the convictions and sentences of the Mexican nationals.”

The Texans refused to comply, and the Texas courts ruled that Bush had no authority to interfere with the state’s handling of its criminal cases.

That prompted a new appeal to the Supreme Court, which on Monday agreed to hear the matter in the fall.

California prosecutors, like their counterparts in Texas, have refused to comply with the international court order.

Referring to the state’s 28 Mexican natives under death sentences, David Kravets, a spokesman for California Atty. Gen. Edmund G. Brown Jr., said: “Our position is that they do not deserve a new trial. They were adequately represented at the time of their trials.”

However, the California Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case on the issue.

The U.S. Supreme Court had first taken up the issue two years ago, but pulled back after Bush told Texas officials they had to comply with the ruling in the Hague.

Now, the justices said they would hear the case of Medellin vs. Texas and rule on whether the president had the authority to order state officials to comply with an international court order.

david.savage@latimes.com The ruling by the Texas Supreme Court that the feds have no standing violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, stating that U.S. laws and treaties are the supreme law of the land.

[QzVyZbTg]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
The ruling by the Texas Supreme Court that the feds have no standing violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, stating that U.S. laws and treaties are the supreme law of the land. Do you honestly think Texans give a damn?

[Trotoleterm]

Originally posted by Felch


Do you honestly think Texans give a damn? I thought I'd made this abundantly clear.
No, we don't. Is that clear?

[Xewksghy]

I'm saying that the court is not exactly asking for much here... i'm fairly sure you could look at them for five minutes each and make a fair and balanced ruling, right? For Justice?

[TainuibeFaimb]

If Texas refuses to comply with the Vienna Treaty, I fear for what may happen to Americans who are arrested in Mexico.

[Haremporblape]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
If Texas refuses to comply with the Vienna Treaty, I fear for what may happen to Americans who are arrested in Mexico. You mean like Dog the Bounty Hunter, or do you mean all the college students killed just the other side of the border, or do you mean the police fleeing drug cartels in Mexico? We need specifics.

[bubbachew14]

No, it didn't. I'm at work, or I'd do the research now, again, to present to doubters. Someone else can scurry off and go see.

[Eeaquzyh]

Originally posted by Asher


Did you do well in math class?

In what way does "subset of" mean the same as "equal to"? Back to Set Theory 101 for teh snoop. Umm, you probably need to go back yourself

The question would be "Has a review of his case been done". The answer is "Yes", because an appeal is a type of review...

If the question was about a more specific kind of review then we could revisit the question at a later date

[Hlennisal]

Spin it in the manner that makes you comfortable. Texas leads in both executions and in using DNA evidence to make sure. We've gone down this road many times.
This thread isn't about DNA, nor about the death penalty. It's about crank yanking United Nation members wringing their hands and thinking the U.S. holds sway over Texas. It doesn't. I think you know that.

[Opperioav]

I think my clarificationary 'sense' subphrase was adequately clear for the non-anal among us

[Sheefeadalfuh]

Again, if they are putting more people on death row, then they will use DNA testing more often.

[slarceSelia]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Spin it in the manner that makes you comfortable. Texas leads in both executions and in using DNA evidence to make sure. We've gone down this road many times.
This thread isn't about DNA, nor about the death penalty. It's about crank yanking United Nation members wringing their hands and thinking the U.S. holds sway over Texas. It doesn't. I think you know that. Eat it, Will. Since I was responding initially to Slowwy, his assertion is the one we are discussing. If you wish to make a different statement, an assertion that it isn't merely DP cases where Texas leads, but all cases, then you need to explicitly differentiate that.

However, all that would tell me is that Texas still gets it wrong more than it gets it right, and thank goodness DNA testing is there to stop Texas from running roughshod over its citizens.