Tuesday, October 9, 2007

Fry Him!!!

Beware ... This Post Is Rated NC-17 for Language

This is something that really pisses me off. I think the reason it affects me so much is that I really don't know the right answer ... it just seems unfair.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear a case where the Bush administration will try to overturn the death penalty for a piece of shit Illegal Mexican Immigrant. He is doing this at the behest of the International Court Of Justice (now there's an oxymoron). The International Court found that Jose Medellin was not informed of his international right to contact the Mexican Consulate for legal assistance as proscribed by the Vienna Convention. This is just the first of many fights as Medellin was just one of 51 illegals on death row that the International court wants new trials for.

Jose Medellin and four others were convicted of capital murder and rape in the deaths of Jenifer Ertman (14 years old) and Elizabeth Pena (16 years old). Medellin's younger brother (14 at the time) is serving 40 years for participating in the rape and murder. After gang raping the two girls for an hour, the girls were strangled and killed with a belt. Medellin confessed to the rapes and murders. Two of the five that were tried as adults had their sentences commuted to life because they were only 17 at the time of the crime (though one of them was less than a month shy of his 18th birthday), two have already been executed, and Medellin is scheduled to be executed in the very near future (not soon enough I say).

Here is my conundrum: I believe in laws and international treaties. We signed the Vienna Convention ... and it does protect American citizens abroad who are accused of crimes. The thing is ... when an American is brought in by police overseas, he promptly informs them that he is an American Citizen and wants to speak to someone from the State Department. I seriously doubt that this illegal claimed his nationality until he thought it might save his ass from a lethal injection. But the fact is that this International Court Of Justice has jurisdiction in this matter, and the US signed this treaty. Now Texas (God Bless Its' Soul) is fighting this. They want this man executed for his crimes. While my mind understands why we may have to re-try him (and hopefully he gets the same sentence), my heart screams to kill this piece of garbage before SCOTUS (Supreme Court Of The United States) can stop the execution. The families of these little girls have waited long enough for justice.

In defence of the President, though he is doing an extremely unpopular thing here, he is doing what he feels is required under international law. After this International Court made this ruling last year, he withdrew this nation from the treaty, but we were still covered by it when the ruling came down.

What do you think, do we go with our heads and grant him a new trial ... or go with our guts and fry him?

Sphere: Related Content


snowelf said...

My opinion:
On high.

Why allow him the chance to do it again?

Now, as far as the law goes--it's unfair, but upholding it is what should be done until they change the law to something like: If you are illegal and don't tell, you shouldn't be allowed a retrial.

They had better find him guilty.


lime said...

ok, my concerns are these...

1. by withdrawing us from the treaty do we now have american citizens abroad at risk?

2. we have already squandered the good will of the world that swelled when 9/11 occured. i don't think we need to buttkiss the world but we do need to be responsible.

go with our heads and retry him. he's guilty he'll be found so. if he isn't then we deport his sorry ass back to mexico and ultimately his government is responsible for unleashing their own monster on their own people. not that i wish sadness on the family of some poor mexican child he may attack you know, but let their government be responsible.

lime said...

i will say however, that snow has a point, why is an illegal given the rights of a legal...

American Interests said...

C'mon there is - or should be - a distinction between the rights of legals and illegals. GUILTY! Am I being too harsh?

In_spired said...

All I have to say is that you have some highly intelligent, objective readers (and commenters) on your blog! I learn as much from snow and lime as I do from reading your posts...

Thought provoking post...as usual!

Blancodeviosa said...

he needs to be killed. i am tired of all the illegals sucking dry our system and getting all the benefits. our gov. needs to get it's priorities straight.

Paul Champagne said...

Snow ... agreed, if you are hiding your nationality, you should not be able to hide behind it later. The US is no longer part of this treaty ... so I guess you can say the law has changed, but as in any other law, we can't make it retroactive so that we can fry this waste of genetic material.

lime ... I don't know if Americans abroad are now at risk ... probably not. If the country you are in is a signatory of the treaty, they are still required to allow you to contact the US Consulate. Of course, if the country is not part of the treaty, you would not have had this protection anyway.

Would Mexico even want this scumbag back? While doing my research, I came across his blog that he wrote from prison. He writes about how proud he is to be A Mexican. I wonder how proud the Mexican government is of him?

Illegals are given the same rights as legal residents because some idiot wearing judicial robes decided that once they are in this country (regardless of how they got here), they must get due process.

american interests ... too harsh? I don't think so, you are just going with your gut/heart.

inspired ... I agree, I have the bestest, smartest readers in the world stopping by and commenting. I include you in that statement.

blanco ... remember when I said that Texas Democrats had common sense ... You've proven me right once again.

Paul Champagne said...

One thing I forgot to mention in my original post ...

The younger brother (charged as a juvenile because he was 14 at the time), doing 40 years ... Because he was convicted in juvenile court, his case comes up for review every three years (sort of like a parole hearing). So the poor parents of these little girls have to drag themselves to court every three years and re-live the experience to make sure that their girls' killer doesn't get out. I can't imagine the experience but the parents are in my prayers.

Terri@SteelMagnolia said...


Terri@SteelMagnolia said...

I've been steaming over this since Sunday morning when I read about it on Gretawire.com

Anonymous said...

fry him!

Mike M said...

NC-17 because you said....."pissed"???

They say that in G rated movies nowadays.

I agree. Fry him. The treaty is to protect the innocent, not the confessed guilty.

buffalodickdy said...

If they retried him I'm certain he would be found guilty- again. Who picks up the tab for the retrial? Certainly not the buttinskis from the other countries! They write articles like this just to piss us off....

Superstar said...

This is even more irrational than frollicing in poison Ivy...
Why are tax dollars going to house, feed, provide him any legal rights...when he is ILLEGAL?!?!?! Did I miss the boat on Ellis Island to REALITY land?


Beyond finding him guilty, why is someone that is NOT a citizen entitled to SH*T let along due process???

~looks around~
Where is that e-mail to mcCain? I need my Sen. Pres candidate democrateAKA republican to explain this to me...(Not a big McCain fan...sorry)

Due process is for ALL citizens, don't even get me started on FOREIGN...get the firin' squad out and blast him...
~rolls eyes~
Due process for illegals...Well, we are already giving them AFDC, food stamps and medical treatment...FREE why not everything else?!?!?!
~throws hands up in the air~

Keshi said...

Legal or illegal, Guilty is Guilty.


Tapline said...

Excellent post....Well!! shortly the Supreme Court will weigh in on this awful situation. It's easy to say that if we commit a crime while in a foreigh country we are authorized to contact our consulate. We do. Not that it does any good, but we are still allowed to do it. Now.....Whether or not An international Court can legally, dictate to a United States, State and tell them to release that individual or retry him because he was not allowed to contact his consulate, Is really treading on thin ice. Can a foreign court dictate to a State in the United States ordering them to do anything????? It flies in the face of the U.S.Constitution...But, Now it is to be determined by the highest court in the land, the majority of whom are internationalist. Isn't it Justice Stevens who is always looking at international courts and their rulings. I believe I heard somewhere that 4 of the current justices are against the death penalty, If this ruling goes through where is the end.....It opens up multiple problems. Isn't it time for the strict adherence to our Constitution and what is religated to the states???? I ramble....stay well...

WomanHonorThyself said...

I couldnt agree more..well said my friend with emphasis!!!

Debbie said...


The sooner the better. This is crazy. We let this happen and it will be a pure shame. What about local laws, what about state rights? What about regional courts? What about the SUPREME COURT???

This cannot happen. I don't know what the Supreme Court decided, I've been gone all day. They need to stand up and be firm on this.

Texas says the criminal should be put to death and that should happen. Look how long these guys sit on death row as it is. Whatever happened to swift justice?

The government has to pay for all of these lawyers, court filings, hearings, etc. The PEOPLE are paying for this.

Anonymous said...

oh my! i cant believe such young girls were killed by young boys..
if it happens in my country, we will probably not execute him becoz of his age.

Paul Champagne said...

terri ... I haven't seen this blood-thirsty side of you before. I think I like it.

dd2 ... et tu dd2?

mike ... NC-17 because I said piece of shit. It probably should have been PG.

buffalo ... good point, I hadn't considered the additional cost of a re-trial. How much money have we spent on this waste of flesh already?

bambi ... The original intent of the treaty was to protect tourists and people working in other countries (legally) from being caught up in criminal procedings because they didn't know the local laws. You can thank liberal judges for expanding these protections to illegals.

keshi ... plain and simply put. Probably way to simple for governments to handle ... they seem to like complicated over simple ... it makes people think they are smart.

tapline ... One of the few things that the US Constitution set up for the Federal government to do is make International Treaties. The Executive Branch negotiates the treaties, the Legislative Branch approves the treaties and the Judicial Branch enforses the treaties. There are really no States Rights in play here.

angel ... thanks, and thanks for the e-mail about Ramadan being celebrated at the Empire State Building ... It flew completely under my radar.

debbie ... so I take it you vote to fry him? States rights are not in play. This is part of an international treaty which is a right reserved for the federal government exclusively ... But there is still hope with the Supremes.

niki ... at what age do they start executing viscous criminals in Japan? And if they are this viscious at a young age, won't they get even worse when the grow up and have some experience?

Keshi said...

true :)


Anonymous said...

oh i think maybe above 20..
there is a man who has been trying to execute a viscous criminal.
his wife was raped and killed, their baby was also strangled.
but the killer was 18 yrs old at that time, so the high court rejected the prosecutors' demand for handing down the death sentence.
so helpless(>_<) yes i think they could be worse!!

votenic said...



Results Posted Tuesday Evening.