home

Jose Medellin Executed in Texas, No Reprieve from Supreme Court


Bump and Update: Jose Medellin was executed tonight just before 10:00 pm. The Supreme Court declined to intervene. His last words:

“I’m sorry my actions caused you pain,” he said to the witnesses present. “I hope this brings you the closure that you seek. Never harbor hate.”
R.I.P. Jose Medellin.

Bump and Update: Medellin was set for texecution at 6pm. No word yet from the Supreme Court which is considering his case. Stay tuned, will update further. [More....]

*****

World Eyes on Texecution Tonight

The Bush Administration, including Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice are asking Texas Governor Rick Perry to halt tonight's Texecution of Jose Medellin now that the Texas Board of Pardon and Paroles has refused. Perry is not inclined to go along.

Medellin, a Mexican national, has been on death row since his arrest in 1993 at age 19. He confessed to the crime shortly after arrest but was not provided access to the Mexcian consulate as provided for in Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (“VCCR”).

The Bush cabinet members said proceeding with the Medellín execution without an additional hearing on the consulate issue would be seen by the world as a rush to judgment and could endanger Americans abroad.

"The board's action is against the interests of the nation and risks the safety of thousands of Americans traveling and living abroad," said Donald Donovan, a lawyer representing Mr. Medellín.

The International Court of Justice determined violations of consulate rights could be remedied through special judicial hearings that would weigh whether the cases were hurt by the failure to provide consular help. The U.S. Supreme Court said that there is a legal obligation to abide by the ICJ decision but that it would have to be done through a new federal law yet to be enacted. The Supreme Court could still grant a stay in the case.

Mexico sued the U.S. in the Court of Imternational Justice (ICJ) charging it had violated the rights of Medellin and 53 other Mexican Nationals on death row. The Court ruled in Mexico's favor. A copy of the decision is here.

In particular, the ICJ held that in all 51 cases, the United States had breached its obligations under Article 36(1)(b) to inform detained Mexican nationals of their rights, and to notify the Mexican consular post of their detention. In 49 of these cases, including Medellin’s, the ICJ found that the United States had violated its obligations under Article 36(1)(a) to allow free communication and access between Mexican consular officers and Mexican detainees, as well as its obligation under Article 36(1)© concerning the right of consular officers to visit their detained nationals.

The Wall St. Journal has this article. More TalkLeft background here, here, here and here.

< Skimble Closes Blog, Election Doesn't Matter | Another Sign Obama Will Choose Bayh? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Am I reading this right? (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Valhalla on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:56:56 AM EST
    BUSH is asking for the execution to be delayed?  I think my head may explode.  What is Perry's rush?

    Obviously Just Thinking Of His Own A$$ (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 12:31:11 PM EST
    Some international law experts say Americans traveling abroad who are arrested may suffer if the U.S. does not abide by the treaty.


    Parent
    Ha! (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by CST on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 03:56:18 PM EST
    Bush has enough trouble in this country, there is a warrant out for his arrest in some town in VT for war crimes.

    Parent
    So many questions... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by lentinel on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 12:17:26 PM EST
    Why is Bush suddenly concerned with the consequences of the U.S. ignoring the Vienna convention when it has been so nonchalant about ignoring the Geneva convention?

    What is going on here?

    Also - is there any reason to believe that the confession might have been coerced? I am just asking whether this is a matter that has been decided one way or another. The articles don't say.

    I have a predisposition to be skeptical of the Texas system - especially since it seems they execute prisoners so often.
    And Perry's office seems real eager to add another notch to his belt as soon as possible.

    The precedent (5.00 / 4) (#31)
    by Steve M on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 06:42:36 AM EST
    What this is really about is the principle that YOU, a US citizen, should not be put on trial and executed in a foreign country without even having the right to talk to the US consulate.

    We entered into this treaty, and we should abide by it.  It doesn't mean the guy gets to go free.  The provision that protects him is the same provision that guarantees you the right to see the US consulate if you're ever charged with a crime abroad.

    If the Governor of Texas gets to ignore the treaty, then maybe the provincial governor wherever you're traveling gets to do so as well.  Great.  Enjoy your vacation.

    Why the pity? (3.66 / 3) (#26)
    by StevenT on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 04:34:33 AM EST
    He and his friends raped 2 teenage girls for an hour before they strangled them to death. Don't anyone thinks this justifies death? This seriusly of this crime is too much regardless of what nationality the perpetrator is and where the crime is committed. It is not that the facts of the case is in dispute. It is just that he did not have proper legal counsel. We should always take the seriusness of the crime into account. Some crimes are just meant to be prevented and raped with murder is on of them.

    Prevention and (none / 0) (#27)
    by JamesTX on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:27:44 AM EST
    "justifying death" are two different things. Believing that this is not right does not imply that I don't care about those girls. Believe me, I do. I have daughters. It is easy to get angry at Jose Medellin. That doesn't mean it is right to execute him, though.

    I noticed in searches on the net that a lot of freedom of communication was allowed for Jose, probably for the purpose of making much ado of the fact that he could write. He also made much of the fact that he was "intelligent" in his writings, almost as if he were taught or told to make that specific claim using that specific term. I don't think "intelligence" is something street gang members typically use for bragging fodder. Mean? Yes. Bad? Totally. Dangerous? You bet. Crazy? You better believe it! Connected? I can get you anything. Intelligent? What's wrong with you, man?

    I do know the very relevant issue of the definition of mental retardation is based on a deficit in "intelligence". His writing is full of grammatical errors and bizarre transpositions characteristic of brain damage, and show poorly developed metaphorical skills. I know I am a totally uninformed observer, but this kid's face has Fetal Alcohol Syndrome written all over it. Examples of the important features are this, this, this, and this. A major part of the problem with FAS kids is usually impulse control, and it is likely to be the most salient symptom before other deficits are even noticeable. More than 60% get in trouble with the law.

    I have been unable to find anything on the net regarding his competence. Obviously procedings in that area were not important enough to discuss. The face and the narratives still bother me, though. If it went unquestioned, I guess it wouldn't be that odd for Texas, though.

    Parent
    Sick or disable (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by StevenT on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:53:14 AM EST
    Being sick or having some disability does not excuse a person from committing horrendous crimes. The only way we could enforce laws against crimes like murder with rape is to show that public the consequences of committing those crimes. And therefore crimes like these justifies death.

    My only problem with death sentences is the what if factor. But if the evidence is clear such as for this case, the perpetrator should be quickly sentence to death. Putting him to prison for decades with the tax payers subsidizing his rehabilitation is not the way to go. Can you imagine what the victims' families and the community has to go through? It's cost & benefit analysis and if the cost is too high, then swift action has to be taken.

    Family plays a role in the upbringing of a child and no parent would want to lose their child. If families can see the swift effect of severe criminal actions and its repercussions, a family will try their very best to educate the child what that should not be done. We cannot prevent teenagers from joining gangs due to many reasons, but we can prevent the worst of the crimes from being committed.

    Parent

    Our society's (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by JamesTX on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:34:59 PM EST
    reluctance to hold incompetent people responsible for their actions is not the same as "excusing". That is the problem with the conservative movement's attempt to return to simple and prejudicial language in all of our social reasoning. Realizing that a mentally incompetent person, who cannot comprehend that what they have done is wrong, is not responsible in the same way as a person who can comprehend it and does it anyway, is not "excusing". Using the word "excusing" is conservative framing technique, and it activates the wrong metaphors for thinking about this problem. Nobody suggests that Medellin be "excused". It is just that he probably has a neurological condition that should have had him supervised and confined to begin with. When a natural disaster kills a loved one, we do not summon the police to attack and execute the disaster. We simply realize that the event was inevitable under the circumstances, and we don't focus anger in childish ways on inanimate objects. We do not "excuse" tornados, but we realize the futility of trying them for murder and executing them.

    And I completely empathize with the victims. This is always the first conservative trick -- try to make death penalty opponents out as not caring about victims. I said before that I have daughters and I understand. He is easy to hate. Please don't suggest otherwise.

    Parent

    Did he deserve to die? (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:15:54 AM EST
    Probably...and if the loved ones of the victims wanted vengeance I wouldn't fault them one iota.

    I just cannot support murder by beuracracy...innocent people will be killed, and it will not be instituted equally and fairly.

    If the loved ones need justice, no one can stop them from getting it.  And no jury would convict them.  I can stomach an individual killing an individual...I cannot stomach killing by a faceless souless bueracracy.

    Parent

    Because they are still human beings (none / 0) (#35)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:17:56 AM EST
    and are being executed by the state.  Their crimes are heinous and the families of the victims lives will never be the same.  I cannot imagine the pain they are goin