No content to ignore specific scientific evidence and murder Mr. Willingham, he just allowed a Mexican national to be executed (Michael Graczyk, AP) after the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations treaty was violated.

And this guy is still in office?

Yes he is. And conservatives are cheering him on. They are encouraging Perry to run for Pres. There is going to be a big Revival in Texas Aug. 6th in Houston. Isn't everyone here going to attend the event?

Not to mention that SCOTUS allowed it, 5-4. Must be that Texas Sovereignty thang.

If I lived in Texas, there would probably be multiple reasons I wouldn't vote for Rick Perry to be Governor. This would not be one of them.

I don't know, I typically vote for people I think will follow all the laws and apply them all equally to everyone.

I know I wouldn't vote for someone who embarrasses the country by violating international treaties.

Imagine how America would react if Mexico executed one of our citizens after blatantly violating the Vienna Convention.

I agree, Loh. But I don't think Mexico has the death penalty.

Walk the streets of the War On Some Drugs down there.

The death penalty for being alive in those zones is quite in force.

Too bad we're exacerbating the problem, supplying all sides with guns and the necessity for drug trafficking.

It's not like anyone was asking for a pardon. All they wanted was to have them hold off for a month.

I hate to see how this could affect US citizens abroad.

Good point. So imagine your least favorite of the 173 signatories to the convention. There are some real hellholes.

Exactly.

What reason does any other signatory have to honor the treaty for American citizens when it is blatantly obvious we have no interest in honoring it.

All the civilized countries abolished the death penalty.

Isn't China civilized?

Not fully.

There's also the United States.

Yes, Loh. I was asking about civilized countries.

Hell, this country hasn't figured out that bare breasts on TV isn't the end of the farkin' world yet, let alone gotten past state murders.

The violation was the result of actions by a Texas police department, not Gov Perry. The determination if this omission would have changed either the verdict or sentence is the responsibility of the courts. Appellate courts, including SCOTUS, reviewed Leal Garcia's claims. Leal Garcia did not deserve any clemency by the Governor IMHO.

I don't care for Perry, but in this case I believe his decision to not prevent/postpone the execution from occurring was the right thing to do.

This is at least the second time he had the opportunity not to murder someone.

He failed, again. He is morally bankrupt by any sane measurement and unfit for public office.

I disagree. I do not think the result would ultimately have been different, but I despise Texas in its entirety for enhancing this country's reputation as a lawless nation which signs and then repudiates treaties, and which can't be trusted. The actions of Texas make the act of the United States signing a treaty a complete nullity. Why should any country bother signing a treaty with a lawless nation that just completely ignores its treaty obligations? It's as worthless as the paper that the United States pisses on as soon as we sign it.

If you are against the death penalty in all instances regardless of the crime, I'll just say I respectfully disagree. If your objection is to this one particular case because of the treaty violation, I'll continue to respond.

I'm both a) and b).

I am against the death penalty, although I can't say that it is as an absolute moral prohibition (although most executions actually practiced are IMO immoral), but because it lacks social utility and on a cost-benefit analysis, costs too much while providing at best equivocal social benefit.

However, my specific gripe is in Texas basically having free rein to put the United States in violation of a treaty, putting the lie to that nonsense in the Constitution about treaties (as well as the Constitution) supposedly being the "supreme law of the land." SCROTUS effectively amended the Constitution from the bench and removed that clause in Medellin v. Texas, a case involving a similar Vienna Convention violation by, unsurprisingly, Texas.

However, even though we have to live with that bad Supreme Court decision, and accept it as binding law, meaning that Perry is legally entitled to ignore the Convention and go ahead with an execution, it still remains lousy practice and is, basically, a dick move. It's not even as if it would result in the murderer being sprung.

Mexico is now probably entitled to refuse consular access to Americans in Mexico, although I would hope they would display some sense of proportionality if they took such a course of action, and simply do it to Texans. While such a reprisal would itself violate international law, I doubt Texas would get too much sympathy.

Maybe this is being over picky, but isn't the use of the word 'murder' in the title overdoing it? I read through the posts and is anyone implying that what Perry did is illegal? Of course, people use the word figuratively all the time as in 'He murdered the English language.' Here, it is not clear whether it is a figurative or literal use. I don't think misusing the word helps the argument even though it shows a level of passion in the belief we should not have a death penalty. Was this an unlawful killing or not?

I've admitted before that IANAL. That said, I can't blame Gov Perry for the treaty violation. The violation was caused by a Texas police department during their investigation process. Perry didn't have a role in this until years after the murder.

I haven't researched the case to determine if any of Leal Garcia's appeals claimed the conviction would never have occurred had the treaty violation not happened. What little I have read is that Leal Garcia's brother re-appeared at a party and claimed his brother had blood stained clothes and had claimed to have killed someone.

Appellate courts deal with police, prosecutor and/or trial courts mistakes (good faith or otherwise). If the conviction would likely not have occurred had Leal Garcia been notified of his right to contact the Mexican Consulate, then he deserved a new trial plus the opportunity to speak with them. If not, he didn't.