Does International Law trump US Criminal Law?

[Fash]

By Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D.

Almost unbelievably, President Bush has argued at the U.S. Supreme Court that a Mexican murder on death row should be given a new trial at the demand of the UN's International Court of Justice in the Hague, all because this illegal alien killer was not allowed to first call the Mexican consulate when he was arrested.

At issue is the death penalty verdict for Jose Medellin, who confessed in 1993 to participating in the rape and murder of two Houston teenagers, Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena. Both were sodomized and raped for over an hour by Medellin and eight of his Mexican illegal alien gang members.

The girls made a fatal mistake. After a pool party that ended late, they decided to take a shortcut home by the railroad tracks, trying to make one of the girl's midnight curfew.

In their hour-long torture, one of the girls was hit so hard teeth were kicked out of her head. Medellin and his gang buddies strangled the girls to death with their belts. Medellin then boasted of keeping one girl's Mickey Mouse watch for his girlfriend as a souvenir of the crime.

Medellin and four others were convicted of capital murder and sent to Texas' death row. One of these criminals has already been executed for the crime.

Now, the Bush administration is arguing that Medellin's confession should be thrown out because years after the crime Medellin complained that his civil rights were violated because the Mexican consulate was not invited to take on his defense.

The Supreme Court has already rejected Medellin's complaint once and the Texas appellate court has properly instructed President Bush that under the Constitutional separation of powers the chief executive has no authority to tell Texas criminal courts how to conduct their business.

Medellin has now appealed the Texas court decision and the case is back at the Supreme Court a second time. This time, President Bush sent the Solicitor General to argue alongside Medellin's attorneys that international law has supremacy over U.S. criminal law, such that U.S. treaty obligations under the Vienna Convention trump Texas criminal law.

If Bush prevails and Medellin's confession is thrown out by the Supreme Court, there may not be enough evidence to retry Medellin, meaning he would have to be released despite his confession to the heinous crime.

What is at stake is the very foundation of U.S. judicial sovereignty.

Truly, the UN's World Court in the Hague hates the death penalty, just as Mexico is loathe to see even their worst criminals in the United States be put to death for their capital offenses.

The case, shocking to most Americans, provides further evidence that the Bush administration under the Security and Prosperity Partnership is doing everything possible to open our borders and placate Mexico.

If Medellin's appeal is successful, will our law enforcement officers be required to call the Mexican consulate every time a Mexican illegal alien is arrested?

Even worse, with so many sanctuary cities in place, the police dare not ask arrested Mexicans if they are legally here or not. So, if Medellin's appeal is successful, the police will have to call the Mexican consulate every time any Mexican, legal or illegal, is arrested.

Yet even this will not be enough.

Since the police cannot racially profile, maybe we should just call the Mexican consulate every time anybody is arrested.
That way we can be sure we do not violate the civil rights of any Mexicans who commit violent capital crimes while they are illegally here in what used to be our country.

This guy better not get off... I'll blame Bush for the murders if that happens.

[Zaelath]

God forbid Americans act like they're part of the human race and thereby beholden to a larger superset of priniciples than those set down in the US.

I know how confusing that is when you spend most of your time forcing your values on other countries under the banner of liberation....

[VariaVespasa]

So other countries CAN try american soldiers for war crimes now? Because thats where that leads if they let that idea go through. Well ok, thats where it *should* lead if you follow the logic, not where they'll let it lead, but still... Bush may wanna think that one through some more.

[Boogahz]

Would Mexico take this person back?

[Trek]

Would Mexico take this person back?

Sure, he'll be back in the US soon enough.

[Trek]

God forbid Americans act like they're part of the human race and thereby beholden to a larger superset of priniciples than those set down in the US.

I know how confusing that is when you spend most of your time forcing your values on other countries under the banner of liberation....

What is that supposed to mean? Rape and murder is ok as long as you do it to Americans? Or that its ok to commit crimes in countries other than your own especially in the US because we are evil? What country are you in? I obviously havent spent enough time forcing my values on you.

[Arborealus]

I'm not sure he is legally entitled to defense by his home consulate if he isn't in the country on a legal visa but certainly foreign nationals legally in the US are entitled to request legal assistance from their consulate/embassy. I'm also not certain where the obligation for the request's origination lies though...it may be incumbent upon the individual to request the assistance of their consulate. The guy was given Miranda I'm sure and allowed a phone call he certainly could have made that call to the Mexican consulate or had his counsel contact the consulate. Its not clear to me what the process for notification must look like by Vienna convention.

This isn't really a question of International Law trumping US Criminal law. The guy would have been tried in Texas for the charges regardless. The question is simply who must notify the consulate of the foreign national. I'm pretty sure SCOTUS will and probably already did rule or decide not to hear the case based on appropriate precedent.

I'm also not clear on why Texas would not have the same evidence if Medellin was retried...it is a capital crime that has been under appeal since the ruling...you don't ditch evidence in a case like that until the last appeals have been exhausted. It is certainly important that foreign nationals abroad be allowed be allowed to seek the counsel of their consulate in any criminal situation but what is required in that notification process.

If Texas failed in their responsibilities in that process then he does need to be retried, not I suspect that the result will be any different. The US Government's responsibilities under extant treaties certainly does take priority over state and local criminal statutory law. Those treaty obligations must be met in the execution of local law.

I certainly want to be able to contact the US consulate if I am accused of a crime in Mexico. It is pretty damn clear why we must reciprocate that here.

[Drolgin Steingrinder]

I'm not sure on the rules regarding Mexico, but I know that US has ratified a convention with a huge list of countries, obliging them to contact the consulate/embassy of any arrestant. For instance, if I were arrested in LA for rodent molesting, the local police force would be required to contact my consulate as soon as I'd stated my nationality - likewise with Arb should he decide to expose himself indecently to the Danish Queen while in Copenhagen, the Copenhagen police would be required by the terms fo the convention to contact the US Embassy.

[Sylvus]

For instance, if I were arrested in LA for rodent molesting, the local police force would be required to contact my consulate as soon as I'd stated my nationality - likewise with Arb should he decide to expose himself indecently to the Danish Queen while in Copenhagen, the Copenhagen police would be required by the terms fo the convention to contact the US Embassy.

What is this "if" you speak of? The only question is when you'll be in LA or Arb will be in Copenhagen.

[Boogahz]

For instance, if I were arrested in LA for rodent molesting, the local police force would be required to contact my consulate as soon as I'd stated my nationality - likewise with Arb should he decide to expose himself indecently to the Danish Queen while in Copenhagen, the Copenhagen police would be required by the terms fo the convention to contact the US Embassy.

What is this "if" you speak of? The only question is when you'll be in LA or Arb will be in Copenhagen.

If he has any sense, he will never go to LA...I don't think that Arb being in Copenhagen is much of a stretch though.

[Zaelath]

God forbid Americans act like they're part of the human race and thereby beholden to a larger superset of priniciples than those set down in the US.

I know how confusing that is when you spend most of your time forcing your values on other countries under the banner of liberation....

What is that supposed to mean? Rape and murder is ok as long as you do it to Americans? Or that its ok to commit crimes in countries other than your own especially in the US because we are evil? What country are you in? I obviously havent spent enough time forcing my values on you.

Two seperate but related thoughts; if you were in another country and denied access to your consulate you'd be screaming bloody murder. I say denied because, despite the author of the article clearly being against this ruling, he said "because this illegal alien killer was not allowed to first call the Mexican consulate when he was arrested."

Not that he wasn't led by the nose to request access to his consulate, but that he was not allowed.

Or do you think if you were arrested in Mexico on a rape and murder charge, you'd be happy to put yourself in the hands of the local wetback lawyer? Or is it OK to be denied reasonable access to legal advice because it's in the US where everyone is above reproach?

[Boogahz]

Does him not being allowed to do this really mean that he asked and they said no, or does it mean that they did not offer that to him as an option?

[Zaelath]

Does him not being allowed to do this really mean that he asked and they said no, or does it mean that they did not offer that to him as an option?

That is a big question, I agree.

[Boogahz]

Does him not being allowed to do this really mean that he asked and they said no, or does it mean that they did not offer that to him as an option?

That is a big question, I agree.

That is something that I have been wondering for a while. This has been a pretty big story around here ever since he was sentenced, but there has never been a firm answer as to which happened. My guess is that he just was not given the option, and this was discovered while preparing for the appeals.

[Trek]

God forbid Americans act like they're part of the human race and thereby beholden to a larger superset of priniciples than those set down in the US.

I know how confusing that is when you spend most of your time forcing your values on other countries under the banner of liberation....

What is that supposed to mean? Rape and murder is ok as long as you do it to Americans? Or that its ok to commit crimes in countries other than your own especially in the US because we are evil? What country are you in? I obviously havent spent enough time forcing my values on you.

Two seperate but related thoughts; if you were in another country and denied access to your consulate you'd be screaming bloody murder. I say denied because, despite the author of the article clearly being against this ruling, he said "because this illegal alien killer was not allowed to first call the Mexican consulate when he was arrested."

Not that he wasn't led by the nose to request access to his consulate, but that he was not allowed.

Or do you think if you were arrested in Mexico on a rape and murder charge, you'd be happy to put yourself in the hands of the local wetback lawyer? Or is it OK to be denied reasonable access to legal advice because it's in the US where everyone is above reproach?

Who said everyone in the US is above reproach? Your so consumed by your American hatred, your blanket statements about us are truely false.

I suppose I wouldnt sneak into his country and rape and murder a couple of people, so it is not a fair question. I can say if I went to a foriegn country and committed a crime I would know I am subject to their form of 'justice'. I have heard first hand stories of how well Mexican law enforcement works.

I suppose he was in this country supporting his starving family with his gang activities, good for him.

[Zaelath]

Two seperate but related thoughts; if you were in another country and denied access to your consulate you'd be screaming bloody murder. I say denied because, despite the author of the article clearly being against this ruling, he said "because this illegal alien killer was not allowed to first call the Mexican consulate when he was arrested."

Not that he wasn't led by the nose to request access to his consulate, but that he was not allowed.

Or do you think if you were arrested in Mexico on a rape and murder charge, you'd be happy to put yourself in the hands of the local wetback lawyer? Or is it OK to be denied reasonable access to legal advice because it's in the US where everyone is above reproach?

Who said everyone in the US is above reproach? Your so consumed by your American hatred, your blanket statements about us are truely false.

How is a question a statement?

I suppose I wouldnt sneak into his country and rape and murder a couple of people, so it is not a fair question. I can say if I went to a foriegn country and committed a crime I would know I am subject to their form of 'justice'. I have heard first hand stories of how well Mexican law enforcement works.

I suppose he was in this country supporting his starving family with his gang activities, good for him.

So much for presumption of innocence.

[Arborealus]

For instance, if I were arrested in LA for rodent molesting, the local police force would be required to contact my consulate as soon as I'd stated my nationality - likewise with Arb should he decide to expose himself indecently to the Danish Queen while in Copenhagen, the Copenhagen police would be required by the terms fo the convention to contact the US Embassy.

What is this "if" you speak of? The only question is when you'll be in LA or Arb will be in Copenhagen.

If he has any sense, he will never go to LA...I don't think that Arb being in Copenhagen is much of a stretch though.

He was here a year ago...but we were low on rodents at the time...

[Boogahz]

For instance, if I were arrested in LA for rodent molesting, the local police force would be required to contact my consulate as soon as I'd stated my nationality - likewise with Arb should he decide to expose himself indecently to the Danish Queen while in Copenhagen, the Copenhagen police would be required by the terms fo the convention to contact the US Embassy.

What is this "if" you speak of? The only question is when you'll be in LA or Arb will be in Copenhagen.

If he has any sense, he will never go to LA...I don't think that Arb being in Copenhagen is much of a stretch though.

He was here a year ago...but we were low on rodents at the time...

haha, I knew he was "there," but I was thinking Los Angeles instead of Louisiana

[Trek]

So much for presumption of innocence.

Having done much work with gangs I can say I have yet to come across an innocent one, I guess there is a chance that his is the one. I am probably wrong in assuming he is guilty just because he leads a known active gang, but I can live with that.....its not like he isnt getting a trial. I do have a huge problem spending time and money on every illegal that breaks the law in the US (heh illegal that breaks the law) and wants to contact their consulate.

I know many people are blind to the illegal gang population, but it is a pretty big problem and continuing to grow.

[Animale]

It's a two way street here, I guess. The horrific nature of the crime is covering up the real issue, which is that if we want other countries to treat out citizens in the manner we desire - we have to do it as well. That includes illegal aliens, etc. etc.

Now, I think that the innocence of this fellow is not really an issue - since he confessed, had 3 other accomplices convicted, and all that. The issue here, is whether or not the cops/lawyers followed the rules of law, which it appears they did not. Now, that doesn't mean he'll get off the hook, but he will be allowed to have the help of the consulate if he so desires (and if Mexico desires to help in his defense).

As for the money issue, again it's a two way street. I'm not sure the Mexican government would really love to pay for the defense of criminal citizens abroad in the U.S. (illegal or legal), but that's a can of worms that I don't know anything about.

Now, this "article" is obviously an opinion piece and takes things to an illogical conclusion. Basically, it adds 1 step to the Miranda warning/arrest/interrogation stuff etc. etc.... i.e. "if you are a citizen of another country you have the right to contact your consulate." I see similar arguments here as with Miranda, and that hasn't turned out to be the horrific thing it was portrayed to be. Not a huge burden on police.

Basically the last half of this tripe is a huge scare piece trying to vilify immigrants into the U.S. based upon the actions of one evil evil dude. What a crock of shit, just deal with the issue dude instead of using a vile act and the suffering of those poor girls to prop up your own opinion of the state of immigration in the country. There are bigger issues here than this murder, why couldn't he directly talk about those instead of hiding behind the emotional arguments from this event.

Animale

[Zaelath]

So much for presumption of innocence.

Having done much work with gangs I can say I have yet to come across an innocent one, I guess there is a chance that his is the one. I am probably wrong in assuming he is guilty just because he leads a known active gang, but I can live with that.....its not like he isnt getting a trial. I do have a huge problem spending time and money on every illegal that breaks the law in the US (heh illegal that breaks the law) and wants to contact their consulate.

I know many people are blind to the illegal gang population, but it is a pretty big problem and continuing to grow.

I've yet to come across a person over 5 that was innocent...

I'm not sure what "time and money" you have to spend allowing any non-citizen to contact their consulate, perhaps 5 minutes and the cost of a phone call? Oh noz, the burden on the system!

I dunno that the illegal gang problem is any bigger than the gang problem. If you wanted to make it a capital offense to get a gang tatt though, and I was able, I'd vote for it.

[Boogahz]

I dunno that the illegal gang problem is any bigger than the gang problem. If you wanted to make it a capital offense to get a gang tatt though, and I was able, I'd vote for it.

They are a lot more focused on fighting the "illegal gangs" like MS13 which is why they may be seen as a bigger problem.

[Trek]

OK, give every illegal that is arrested for anything the time to make a phone call to their consulate, yeah it adds up to become quite a burden, go ahead and make 1 5 minute phone call to another country just every hour....I think it could be many more then once an hour tell me what you bill is. I would guess it would be up to the US to hire more operators and secretarys in foriegn countries to handle it?

[Boogahz]

OK, give every illegal that is arrested for anything the time to make a phone call to their consulate, yeah it adds up to become quite a burden. I would guess it would be up to the US to hire more operators and secretarys in foriegn countries to handle it?

eh? The Consul's offices are in the US.

[Trek]

OK, give every illegal that is arrested for anything the time to make a phone call to their consulate, yeah it adds up to become quite a burden. I would guess it would be up to the US to hire more operators and secretarys in foriegn countries to handle it?

eh? The Consul's offices are in the US.

ok fair enough, do we hire people to take the influx of calls? since its the US's problem that we arrested them?

[Zaelath]

OK, give every illegal that is arrested for anything the time to make a phone call to their consulate, yeah it adds up to become quite a burden. I would guess it would be up to the US to hire more operators and secretarys in foriegn countries to handle it?

eh? The Consul's offices are in the US.

ok fair enough, do we hire people to take the influx of calls? since its the US's problem that we arrested them?

Influx of calls? From the police station in the US to the consul (staffed by foreigners) in the US? I think you're reaching here...

[Trek]

Really? How many nationalities do you think will pop up in jails/prisons demanding a call to a consulate office? I dont think its much of a stretch to think anyone looking at jail time will use any excuse they can to delay their sentance.

Its not like their is question of this scumbags guilt, so really based on the crimes and his occupation I dont think he should be breathing let alone getting a phone call.

[Abelard]

I've done a couple international law courses and read up on it a fair bit on my own time. No comment on the case itself, but here is the technical knowledge I do know.

My understanding is that domestic law of states usually does trump international law. There are a few exceptions and they are genocide and custom law I do believe. Custom law is stuff like the 200 mile limit on territorial waters. Stuff that isn't neccesarily documented as law, but considered law since its been observed as the international norm for x amount of time.

[Trek]

I keep comming back to this because I think its pathetic that the outrage in the case is over this shitbags phonecall to a consulate. I understand the world needs to have the US under a microscope and find fault in everything that we do. We are still a very young country and we will make mistakes, while the rest of the world is a shining example of what we should aspire to be. Perhaps one day we will match the greatness that all of you older and greater nations have achieved morally, economically and socially, but untill then fuck this guy and his phone call.

[Nick]

I understand the world needs to have the US under a microscope and find fault in everything that we do. We are still a very young country and we will make mistakes, while the rest of the world is a shining example of what we should aspire to be.

[Boogahz]

I believe the whole thing was extended for years since they tried to appeal the decisions in Federal court instead of the State court. That is why the Supreme Court denied the appeal.

A little more looking shows that he just wasn't told of his right to contact the consulate, not that he was denied that right. He was in contact with the Mexican consulate starting in April 1997, around three years after found guilty.

[Wulfran]

I keep comming back to this because I think its pathetic that the outrage in the case is over this shitbags phonecall to a consulate. I understand the world needs to have the US under a microscope and find fault in everything that we do. We are still a very young country and we will make mistakes, while the rest of the world is a shining example of what we should aspire to be. Perhaps one day we will match the greatness that all of you older and greater nations have achieved morally, economically and socially, but untill then fuck this guy and his phone call.

Well, unless I'm mistaken, isn't everyone arrested entitled to one phone call? It will be up to the foreign consulate (whether it belongs to Mexico, Canada, Ireland, Burundi or anywhere else) in question to hire their own staff (be they local or imports, but mostly local if they follow the pattern I've seen up here: a consulate doesn't have the same staff level or prestige as an embassy but can advise a national on his rights) to handle their incoming calls. Most probably have 1-800 numbers so it won't cost US tax payers anything there either. Really when cops arrest someone and read em their rights, there's no reason not to ask if they are a foreign national and if they want their consul/embassy contacted. This is something that seems like a procedural fuck up more than anything else and easily avoided with a slight revision to the way (some) cops book people they arrest.

[Ashur]

I think it is an important issue. People need to be advised of their rights, even people who aren't supposed to be here.

Give the fucking scumbag a new trial and add the legal blurb to the Miranda Card the cops have to read to you from.

He'll still be guilty, will probably get life in prison rather than a death sentence (which in the end, is probably cheaper than killing him because of all the death penalty appeals, but isn't a wash because we have to pay for yet another trial).

All this is doing is ADVISING people of their rights. Whether foreign embassies choose not to staff or support thier citizens (whether here legally or not) is entirely up to them. It has nothing to do with us.

We're not being asked to staff a fucking call center at the UN or anything. We're just saying "Since you're under arrest, you should know that if you're not from here, you might want to contact the folks from your contry so they can offer advice or other legal protections you may be ignorant of."

[Boogahz]

People are already pissed off about cops asking people if they are illegals or not. What would the respose be to adding it to the Miranda Rights? If the person says they are illegal: They call the consulate; they go on trial; if found innocent, they are deported; if found guilty, they are sentenced; the ACLU then sues the dept responsible for asking the question.

[Arborealus]

People are already pissed off about cops asking people if they are illegals or not. What would the respose be to adding it to the Miranda Rights? If the person says they are illegal: They call the consulate; they go on trial; if found innocent, they are deported; if found guilty, they are sentenced; the ACLU then sues the dept responsible for asking the question.

Just add it as a statement not a question: "If you are not a native of the US you have the right to contact your consulate."

[Ashur]

Exactamundo Arb! Very easy.

[Somali]

People are already pissed off about cops asking people if they are illegals or not. What would the respose be to adding it to the Miranda Rights? If the person says they are illegal: They call the consulate; they go on trial; if found innocent, they are deported; if found guilty, they are sentenced; the ACLU then sues the dept responsible for asking the question.

Just add it as a statement not a question: "If you are not a native of the US you have the right to contact your consulate."

I agree, adding it to the Miranda Act would be a simple solution, but Boogahz is probably right too. Some organization would get their panties in a wad and say it would be used as entrapment to determine the legal status of the aforementioned parties.

[Sylvus]

It wouldn't be entrapment in that case though, as the police aren't "inducing an otherwise unwilling person to commit a crime". The "crime" (not the crime that the person was arrested for, in this case it's that the person is in the US illegally) has already been committed.

[Arborealus]

People are already pissed off about cops asking people if they are illegals or not. What would the respose be to adding it to the Miranda Rights? If the person says they are illegal: They call the consulate; they go on trial; if found innocent, they are deported; if found guilty, they are sentenced; the ACLU then sues the dept responsible for asking the question.

Just add it as a statement not a question: "If you are not a native of the US you have the right to contact your consulate."

I agree, adding it to the Miranda Act would be a simple solution, but Boogahz is probably right too. Some organization would get their panties in a wad and say it would be used as entrapment to determine the legal status of the aforementioned parties.

Immigration status has nothing to do with a criminal offense. Calling a consulate would have no bearing on a criminal case local police should have no cause to note who is called therefore it would be inadmissable as irrelevant.

[Nick]

Does International Law trump US Criminal Law?

Yes