Illegal immigrant executed for murder of Arlington store manager

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
He was only here to make a better life for himself.

If your talking about the executed Honduran, I call BS!

He never denied murder, ya know how mant tim es I murdered someone?

-0-, nada, no, nein never! because I want a life better than prison or guilt offers

How can murder, premeditated, parellel the life of one trying to make it in the U S?

I am sorry he was executed in that a tragedy we as Americans are forced to execute.

However, I have no problem doing so in these cases.

It is not "ethnic cleansing", nor racially motivated, it is because of the severity of the crime.

If we say no execution put in prison for life then we have to have yet more prisons, pay for their life in medical and housing/food and clothing plus the personnel to implement those guidelines.

I understand folks wanting to not execute guilty people, its indeed a choice of opinion you are entitled to.

I am just so against persons being allowed in theses United States, me as a citizen having to support them and clean up after them.

Maybe if we said "ok, Gramps and all with same mindset dont have to contribute any taxes or anything PERIOD for upkeep, wont have to, but we will set aside a certain area for those bleeding heart liberals who want to take on the ills of the world and only them fork over their monies.

For those that arent working but attending school, stop your education studies, go get a job and pay for the illegals who are circumventing our laws and also, be assigned a designated area, distribute literature to all who are to poor or iggnorant to have checked with their own govt before departing and ask if they are in trouble, how do I get assistance?

"Because" I am a poor foreigner, please help me get a pass and please help me get a start in America, I want to be American, I dun speak this language, but please teach me at your expense, oh and my teeth ache so please fix my teeth and I have this pain so pleadse help me, financially."


Well, everyone has opinions, thank you TEXAS for taking out the trash and while it wont bring back the dead family member, we wont be concerned with him doing this again

Gramps

[Zkribbler]

I'm reading between the lines here, so this could be totally wrong but:

I'm guessing that the reason the World Court's order didn't mention him and the reason the Supreme Court unianimously turned him down, was because he failed to raise this issue at the proper time. That is, maybe he's required to raise this objection: (a) at trial; (b) in his original appeal, or (c) as soon as he learns of his rights. Something like that.

If he had an opportunity to raise this defense earlier, didn't, but instead waited until he took his case to the Supreme Court, I can understand why the Court would hold that he'd waived this defense.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
What you seem to be saying is that if one wants to murder, come over illegally.

You appear to be unable to grasp simple concepts that 10 year olds could handle.

Again: The murderer's guilt isn't the issue. I don't even care that Texas fried him. I do care that Texas ignored treaty obligations in the process.

-Arrian

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Arrian


You appear to be unable to grasp simple concepts that 10 year olds could handle.

Again: The murderer's guilt isn't the issue. I don't even care that Texas fried him. I do care that Texas ignored treaty obligations in the process.

-Arrian

So is this an anti-Texas issue?

I have no problem people having a firm committment to right and wrong

What I am seeing here is an acceptance of murder but not the acceptance that this murder was given some treaty right?

I wonder how you folks who feel soooo bad his rights were so called mishandled/denied would feel if it were your family or friends that were killed?


Truly amazing, almost surreal that not many feel he got what he deserved but that yes, not worried he killed a man in cold blood but that some treaty was violated?

[Arrian]

What I am seeing here is an acceptance of murder

Then you apparently cannot read (or rather you cannot comprehend basic concepts).

I am not defending the murderer. I want states to uphold treaty obligations. I sometimes travel abroad. While I won't be murdering anyone, should I ever find myself the victim of a misunderstanding with the law enforcement of a foreign land, I'd rather they not have cause for revenge.

-Arrian

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Arrian


Then you apparently cannot read (or rather you cannot comprehend basic concepts).

I am not defending the murderer. I want states to uphold treaty obligations. I sometimes travel abroad. While I won't be murdering anyone, should I ever find myself the victim of a misunderstanding with the law enforcement of a foreign land, I'd rather they not have cause for revenge.

-Arrian

I can read fine sir

Basic concepts, yes thats my problem in addition to implementing arrogance into my heart, must be an Old USA DUDE type thingey


Now, lets try Arrian, to refocus if you will, what does this treaty exactly say in respect to rights of foreign citizens within U S territories when committing heinous law violations, oh and to be explicit in my question so YOU dont mis-understand BASIC concepts or in case you dont read so well, I am not asking what you THINK it says but exactly what does it say?

Now, I am not overreacting merely responding to your smart-@$$ remark

[Arrian]

I'm going off the description of the treaty in the article, and I cannot find the text of the treaty online. What the article says is that that, pursuant to the treaty, the guy had a right to legal counsel from his home country's consulate.

Note: he doesn't get to get away with murder. He gets to get legal advice/help from the Honduran (sp?) consulate. IF the article has explained the treaty properly.

The reason I was rude to you is that you, exactly like Sloww, misconstrued my post as supportive of the murderer. I'm tired of that ****, and I think you did it quite deliberately. Given that, I was an ass to you.

-Arrian

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Arrian
I'm going off the description of the treaty in the article, and I cannot find the text of the treaty online. What the article says is that that, pursuant to the treaty, the guy had a right to legal counsel from his home country's consulate.

Note: he doesn't get to get away with murder. He gets to get legal advice/help from the Honduran (sp?) consulate. IF the article has explained the treaty properly.

The reason I was rude to you is that you, exactly like Sloww, misconstrued my post as supportive of the murderer. I'm tired of that ****, and I think you did it quite deliberately. Given that, I was an ass to you.

-Arrian

Well Arrian, I will take a slighty different approach, trust me, it was not intended toward you as "deliberate" in fact, you do seem a fairly intelligent poster, try ASKING NEXT TIME because I dont usually float a buoy next to anyones ship to get a rise.

I am sorry you were offended but I did not send any offensive remarks from my heart.

Anyhoo, I am not an expert in these things.

Rumor has it and not in a position to defend it, that this treaty may have little implication in regards to State cases, more so in Federal cases.

Now, you and me should be back even, You got snippy with me because you thought I was with you, which, I have shared I was not.

Now, back to regular scheduled debate

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Arrian


The reason I was rude to you is that you, exactly like Sloww, misconstrued my post as supportive of the murderer. I'm tired of that ****, and I think you did it quite deliberately. Given that, I was an ass to you.

-Arrian

HEY! I didn't day anything to you so don't go slamming my ass around!

[SpencerH]

Anyone want to guestimate what it would cost for every illegal to have legal representation from his home consulate?

Here's an idea, lets pass the cost onto the respective governments. Maybe they would be more likely to restrict their citizens illegal invasion of the USA if they were given a bill for a few billion dollars.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Anyone want to guestimate what it would cost for every illegal to have legal representation from his home consulate?

Here's an idea, lets pass the cost onto the respective governments. Maybe they would be more likely to restrict their citizens illegal invasion of the USA if they were given a bill for a few billion dollars.

C'mon, furriners, speak up, and bring US DOLLARS AS WELL!

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Grandpa Troll

Truly amazing, almost surreal that not many feel he got what he deserved but that yes, not worried he killed a man in cold blood but that some treaty was violated?

The remedy would be to re-try him (correctly this time), convict him again, and then fry him. That way, everyone's happy.

[David Floyd]

I do care that Texas ignored treaty obligations in the process.

Are you sure? I mean, in the other similar issue, SCOTUS ruled that Texas had the right to execute the inmate inspite of what both the World Court and federal government claimed. In other words, the treaty might exist, but it might not be binding on the State of Texas.

[SlowwHand]

Thank you, David. I've been trying to tell them that no one tells Texas what to do.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
no one tells Texas what to do.

False:

Lawrence v. Texas