Texas Death Penalty Case (Obama requests stay)

[The Sir]

Sad day for the US.

 

Wish that we could have done better, but hopefully one day we do.

 

Today, Texas executed a fairly convicted rapist and murderer. You can argue all day that he should have been allowed to speak with the consulate, but whatever the results of that debate, I fail to see any sadness in this. Burn in Hell, Mr. Leal.

[Soxbadger]

You fail to see any sadness in the fact that the US has an agreement with Mexico and the US failed to honor that agreement?

 

At the end of the day, I take my word seriously. If I tell you that we have an agreement, that means something. As an United States citizen I am ashamed that we told 170 countries that we would abide by a treaty and we failed to do it. Not only that, but after we were told we were in the wrong, we didnt even change our actions, we just went on our way acting like it doesnt matter, that somehow vengeance is more important then our word.

 

That makes me sad, it makes me sad because we are supposed to be a country where there is liberty and justice for all. And that means we treat the worst of society with the same respect and decency we treat the best of society.

 

I wonder what the people of the great state of Texas would say if an American civilian was denied rights in Mexico and executed. Would we merely say "Well Mexico has that right" or would we expect more? Would we expect that our citizen be given the rights and treatment that Mexico agreed to give them when they signed the treaty?

 

So today I am sad, not because of the death, but because we were so hellbent on killing this man that we had to break our word to do it. And unlike you, I dont believe Mr. Leal will be going to hell, I dont believe hes going anywhere. Dead is dead.

[StrangeSox]

NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY!!!!!

[Quin]

You fail to see any sadness in the fact that the US has an agreement with Mexico and the US failed to honor that agreement?

 

At the end of the day, I take my word seriously. If I tell you that we have an agreement, that means something. As an United States citizen I am ashamed that we told 170 countries that we would abide by a treaty and we failed to do it. Not only that, but after we were told we were in the wrong, we didnt even change our actions, we just went on our way acting like it doesnt matter, that somehow vengeance is more important then our word.

 

That makes me sad, it makes me sad because we are supposed to be a country where there is liberty and justice for all. And that means we treat the worst of society with the same respect and decency we treat the best of society.

 

I wonder what the people of the great state of Texas would say if an American civilian was denied rights in Mexico and executed. Would we merely say "Well Mexico has that right" or would we expect more? Would we expect that our citizen be given the rights and treatment that Mexico agreed to give them when they signed the treaty?

 

So today I am sad, not because of the death, but because we were so hellbent on killing this man that we had to break our word to do it. And unlike you, I dont believe Mr. Leal will be going to hell, I dont believe hes going anywhere. Dead is dead.

 

This post is masterful.

[The Sir]

You fail to see any sadness in the fact that the US has an agreement with Mexico and the US failed to honor that agreement?

 

At the end of the day, I take my word seriously. If I tell you that we have an agreement, that means something. As an United States citizen I am ashamed that we told 170 countries that we would abide by a treaty and we failed to do it. Not only that, but after we were told we were in the wrong, we didnt even change our actions, we just went on our way acting like it doesnt matter, that somehow vengeance is more important then our word.

 

That makes me sad, it makes me sad because we are supposed to be a country where there is liberty and justice for all. And that means we treat the worst of society with the same respect and decency we treat the best of society.

 

I wonder what the people of the great state of Texas would say if an American civilian was denied rights in Mexico and executed. Would we merely say "Well Mexico has that right" or would we expect more? Would we expect that our citizen be given the rights and treatment that Mexico agreed to give them when they signed the treaty?

 

So today I am sad, not because of the death, but because we were so hellbent on killing this man that we had to break our word to do it. And unlike you, I dont believe Mr. Leal will be going to hell, I dont believe hes going anywhere. Dead is dead.

 

How about the liberty and justice of Ms. Sauceda? Where were her rights? Oh, yeah, she didn't get any. She got raped and murdered. Mr. Leal got all the liberty and justice he was owed when he received a fair trial from the American justice system. That's the only "liberty and justice" a man of his nature deserves.

 

If an American rapist and murderer were arrested for his crimes in Mexico, I'd want him to get a fair trial. Once he got that, I would expect that Mexico carried out his assigned sentence. The only reason I would complain would be if that American was not honestly tried in a court of law. Mr. Leal got that. I don't know why everyone is acting as if he were summarily executed without a trial.

 

Strange tries to mock me with the whole "national sovereignty" thing, but it's true. I don't agree with any treaty that surrenders our national sovereignty to foreign elements. This treaty needs to be revoked immediately. Mexico and the ICJ have no place intervening in our criminal justice system. Get this silly agreement off the books right away.

 

And you're an atheist. That's pleasant. You're free to face God with any reputation you like; it's not my place to change you or convert you or anything like that. So good luck.

[EvilMonkey]

I wonder what the people of the great state of Texas would say if an American civilian was denied rights in Mexico and executed. Would we merely say "Well Mexico has that right" or would we expect more? Would we expect that our citizen be given the rights and treatment that Mexico agreed to give them when they signed the treaty?

If the American raped and killed a 16 year old girl i would say thanks for saving us the 20 years of court cases and doing it for us. And fyi, this guy was guilty from everything I read, as clear a case as can be, no doubt. He got a fairer trial here than he could have got anywhere else in the world, and all the FREE expert case reviews to boot. Only difference here is Texas kills some of its murderers.

[Quin]

And you're an atheist. That's pleasant. You're free to face God with any reputation you like; it's not my place to change you or convert you or anything like that. So good luck.

 

Wow.

 

That was thinly veiled spite.

[The Sir]

Wow.

 

That was thinly veiled spite.

 

Translate it any way you like. I'm not here to judge, but it is my belief that we will all stand before God one day. If you want to go before Him having never believed in Him, then I sincerely wish you the best of luck. I'm not big into the whole "force the infidels to convert" idea; it's kind of stupid, violent and intolerant if you ask me. So, you're free to believe whatever you want to believe. Doesn't change my personal belief that we will all be judged eventually.

[Soxbadger]

Flysox,

 

How about the liberty and justice of Ms. Sauceda? Where were her rights? Oh, yeah, she didn't get any. She got raped and murdered. Mr. Leal got all the liberty and justice he was owed when he received a fair trial from the American justice system. That's the only "liberty and justice" a man of his nature deserves.

 

Im not sure how its relevant what happened to Ms. Sauceda, Im not sure there is any law that states we suspend certain rights "if the crimes are bad enough".

 

 

What I do know is that there is a question of whether the Defendant received a fair trail. Pursuant to US treaty he as a citizen of Mexico had the right to contact his consulate. The state of Texas denied the Defendant that right. After that point the entire process is tainted. If you cheat at the beginning of the game to win or cheat at the end of the game to win, its still the same. If we are going to hold the high ground in terms of "fair", we need to be fair. We cant withhold information from Defendants so that we can convict them easier. Thats not fair, it just isnt.

 

Fair is letting the Defendant contact his consulate and then convict him. If he is so guilty, why did the state of Texas need to cheat?

 

If an American rapist and murderer were arrested for his crimes in Mexico, I'd want him to get a fair trial. Once he got that, I would expect that Mexico carried out his assigned sentence. The only reason I would complain would be if that American was not honestly tried in a court of law. Mr. Leal got that. I don't know why everyone is acting as if he were summarily executed without a trial.

 

How do you know he is a murderer before he is convicted? In the US you are innocent until proven guilty. When the state of Texas denied the Defendant his rights he was innocent. It doesnt matter if the American is tried fairly if his rights are denied from the beginning. You cant use hindsight to say that the original action is okay. You have to look at the original action and ask, was it okay. The ends do not justify the means.

 

Strange tries to mock me with the whole "national sovereignty" thing, but it's true. I don't agree with any treaty that surrenders our national sovereignty to foreign elements. This treaty needs to be revoked immediately. Mexico and the ICJ have no place intervening in our criminal justice system. Get this silly agreement off the books right away.

 

That is fine, I think that the US is free to sign those type of treaties and agree with this treaty. I think that foreign nationals should have the right to contact their consulate. I think thats a good policy for US citizens abroad, just as much as I think its a good policy for other nationals. I believe that all people have the right to counsel and fair trails, I think for a foreign national the first step is to get in contact with your consulate to see what services they can provide. It works both ways.

 

You're free to face God with any reputation you like

 

I am, and if there is a god, I think hell be cool with the life I have lived. Im in no way perfect, but I help a ton of people, Im not greedy and I do my best to make sure that other people get treated as good or better than I do. That being said, its not just atheists who dont believe in hell, a variety of religions do not really recognize it. If there is a hell, hes going there anyway and its for eternity, so does killing him 100 years to early really mean anything? No. but if being killed is awesome and he gets a better life, we let him off the hook. I just cant rationalize that. Im just not willing to let a truly heinous criminal get out of jail free because Im so impatient that I cant wait for his death.

 

So for the record I dont believe in murder, I think we should treat others as one would like to treat oneself and I believe that humans are imperfect and capable of error and therefore do not believe they should condemn another man to death. If the court system convicts an innocent man and the state puts him to death, we are murderers.

 

If there is a god, I hope you will be able to explain why it was okay for an innocent human to die. I cant explain it, therefore I no longer believe in the death penalty.

 

Alpha,

 

He got a fairer trial here than he could have got anywhere else in the world

 

He would have received a fairer trial in potentially 169 other countries. Those are the countries (like the US) who have agreed to allow foreign nationals contact with a consulate. Id love to say the US was the fairest and most just system, but today it is not. But thats what Im fighting for, for the day I get to say that there is no other country that is as fair as the US. (We are close, but I just dont think most civilized countries would let this happen.)

 

Flysox,

 

Dont worry, Im not really concerned. If we all go before god, I cant really imagine that hes going to care if we believed in him or not. If I had to go in front of him I think my answer would be, I erred on the side of caution. I didnt see any evidence, so I tried to do good things just to make a better world for others, not because I was hoping to get into heaven or not go to hell. If thats not good enough, whoops.

 

[The Sir]

I never suggested suspending Mr. Leal's rights. I just pointed out that I'm also concerned with Ms. Sauceda's rights. And I also pointed out that I think this treaty is a ridiculous violation of our national sovereignty. I do not believe the right to meet with the consulate is a legitimate right. You want Mexican laws and punishments? Stay in Mexico. Come to America and you will answer to our laws. Americans who travel abroad should realize the same principle. And I do not believe the fact that Mr. Leal did not receive the opportunity to see the consulate prevented him from getting a fair trial. That seems to be the only reason his trial wasn't fair in your opinion, and I don't agree with that at all.

 

As for your religious beliefs, good for you. I'm not kidding, I really don't care what you believe. I'll care what you believe the day you try to stop me from believing what I believe. Until then, I believe fully in the freedom of religion and separation of church and state. My Christianity is a driving factor in my life but it shouldn't be a driving force in American government. It's a personal matter.

[Quin]

Translate it any way you like. I'm not here to judge, but it is my belief that we will all stand before God one day. If you want to go before Him having never believed in Him, then I sincerely wish you the best of luck. I'm not big into the whole "force the infidels to convert" idea; it's kind of stupid, violent and intolerant if you ask me. So, you're free to believe whatever you want to believe. Doesn't change my personal belief that we will all be judged eventually.

 

Good enough for me, it was that "that's pleasant" that sounded as if it dripped with sarcasm to me.

 

Now that there is a lengthy, thought out descriptor, then I'll retract that statement.

[southsider2k5]

You fail to see any sadness in the fact that the US has an agreement with Mexico and the US failed to honor that agreement?

 

At the end of the day, I take my word seriously. If I tell you that we have an agreement, that means something. As an United States citizen I am ashamed that we told 170 countries that we would abide by a treaty and we failed to do it. Not only that, but after we were told we were in the wrong, we didnt even change our actions, we just went on our way acting like it doesnt matter, that somehow vengeance is more important then our word.

 

That makes me sad, it makes me sad because we are supposed to be a country where there is liberty and justice for all. And that means we treat the worst of society with the same respect and decency we treat the best of society.

 

I wonder what the people of the great state of Texas would say if an American civilian was denied rights in Mexico and executed. Would we merely say "Well Mexico has that right" or would we expect more? Would we expect that our citizen be given the rights and treatment that Mexico agreed to give them when they signed the treaty?

 

So today I am sad, not because of the death, but because we were so hellbent on killing this man that we had to break our word to do it. And unlike you, I dont believe Mr. Leal will be going to hell, I dont believe hes going anywhere. Dead is dead.

 

Mexico violates our national sovereignty pretty much every day by aiding people who come to our country illegally. Most people have acted like it doesn't matter, and sure didn't change any actions.

[Cknolls]

You fail to see any sadness in the fact that the US has an agreement with Mexico and the US failed to honor that agreement?

 

At the end of the day, I take my word seriously. If I tell you that we have an agreement, that means something. As an United States citizen I am ashamed that we told 170 countries that we would abide by a treaty and we failed to do it. Not only that, but after we were told we were in the wrong, we didnt even change our actions, we just went on our way acting like it doesnt matter, that somehow vengeance is more important then our word.

 

That makes me sad, it makes me sad because we are supposed to be a country where there is liberty and justice for all. And that means we treat the worst of society with the same respect and decency we treat the best of society.

 

I wonder what the people of the great state of Texas would say if an American civilian was denied rights in Mexico and executed. Would we merely say "Well Mexico has that right" or would we expect more? Would we expect that our citizen be given the rights and treatment that Mexico agreed to give them when they signed the treaty?

 

So today I am sad, not because of the death, but because we were so hellbent on killing this man that we had to break our word to do it. And unlike you, I dont believe Mr. Leal will be going to hell, I dont believe hes going anywhere. Dead is dead.

 

 

Her 64 year old father probably feels like the system worked. And as far as an American committing murder in a foreign country; if you are dumb enough to commit such a heinous crime you deserve whatever consequences that are rendered.

[StrangeSox]

Her 64 year old father probably feels like the system worked. And as far as an American committing murder in a foreign country; if you are dumb enough to commit such a heinous crime you deserve whatever consequences that are rendered.

 

How about a case like Amanda Knox in Italy where by all appearances she was completely railroaded? Too bad?

[StrangeSox]

As for your religious beliefs, good for you. I'm not kidding, I really don't care what you believe. I'll care what you believe the day you try to stop me from believing what I believe. Until then, I believe fully in the freedom of religion and separation of church and state. My Christianity is a driving factor in my life but it shouldn't be a driving force in American government. It's a personal matter.

[The Sir]

How about a case like Amanda Knox in Italy where by all appearances she was completely railroaded? Too bad?

 

Haven't read anything about Amanda Knox in some time. Last I was reading, she was guilty as sin and was pretty much unveiled as a heartless psychopath to boot. Is there something more recent that I haven't paid attention to?

[StrangeSox]

The case was f***ed from the start

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/t...a-knox-20110627

[The Sir]

The case was f***ed from the start

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/t...a-knox-20110627

 

Well, I don't have time to read seven pages right now (I will later), but if you are being truthful, it seems her trial wasn't a fair one and she should have been acquitted. So I would have a problem with this, just like I would have had a problem if Mr. Leal were not given a fair trial. But that doesn't seem to be the case in the latter situation, and I continue to disagree with the idea that Mr. Leal's proceedings were unfair simply because he did not receive a consular visit.

[Jenksismyhero]

You fail to see any sadness in the fact that the US has an agreement with Mexico and the US failed to honor that agreement?

 

At the end of the day, I take my word seriously. If I tell you that we have an agreement, that means something. As an United States citizen I am ashamed that we told 170 countries that we would abide by a treaty and we failed to do it. Not only that, but after we were told we were in the wrong, we didnt even change our actions, we just went on our way acting like it doesnt matter, that somehow vengeance is more important then our word.

 

That makes me sad, it makes me sad because we are supposed to be a country where there is liberty and justice for all. And that means we treat the worst of society with the same respect and decency we treat the best of society.

 

I wonder what the people of the great state of Texas would say if an American civilian was denied rights in Mexico and executed. Would we merely say "Well Mexico has that right" or would we expect more? Would we expect that our citizen be given the rights and treatment that Mexico agreed to give them when they signed the treaty?

 

So today I am sad, not because of the death, but because we were so hellbent on killing this man that we had to break our word to do it. And unlike you, I dont believe Mr. Leal will be going to hell, I dont believe hes going anywhere. Dead is dead.

 

I've asked before but have yet to hear an answer. What's the end game here? Spend another 5-10 years with this guy retrying him? Re-sentencing him? Going through all the appeals, etc.? Over a missed phone call that wouldn't have made any difference?

[Texsox]

I've asked before but have yet to hear an answer. What's the end game here? Spend another 5-10 years with this guy retrying him? Re-sentencing him? Going through all the appeals, etc.? Over a missed phone call that wouldn't have made any difference?

 

Only if you believe our process is important.

[Jenksismyhero]

Only if you believe our process is important.

 

That's not an answer.

[EvilMonkey]

What I do know is that there is a question of whether the Defendant received a fair trail.

For 16 years, Leal has exercised his right to file appeals and motions so extensively, one judge in federal district court called his case “one of the most procedurally convoluted and complex habeas corpus proceedings” he ever reviewed. How would having contacted the Mexican consulate have changed anything. There is no question he received a fair trial. And dozens of fair appeals and motions. He even admitted his guilt finally in the death chamber. To quote the Supremes regarding this case, “Our task,” the majority wrote, “is to rule on what the law is, not what it might eventually be.”

[Soxbadger]

Im busy today, so I cant really give all of your responses the time they deserve, but here goes nothing:

 

What's the end game here? Spend another 5-10 years with this guy retrying him? Re-sentencing him? Going through all the appeals, etc.? Over a missed phone call that wouldn't have made any difference?

 

The end game is that Leal deserves to be allowed to contact his consulate and then have a trial. If he is convicted in that trial, he then deserves all of the appeal processes. If after that point we is still guilty, Texas can execute him.

 

Imo, the state of Texas cut corners, and I dont think that is fair, at least not to me. So I think the state of Texas should bear the responsibility of fixing their error and going back to the beginning.

 

 

How would having contacted the Mexican consulate have changed anything

 

The point is, we dont know. Maybe it would have changed nothing, but if thats the case, why didnt the state of Texas give him the chance? When you look at the bigger picture, it seems to me that Texas is purposefully not allowing criminals to contact their consulate in an attempt to get easier convictions. To me that is wrong, its not like this is the only time Texas has done this. Leal allegedly had a learning disability and may have suffered brain damage. The state of Texas never made him aware of his right to contact the Mexican consulate. He only learned of that right from another prisoner.

 

Why should Texas get to brazenly disregard a US treaty?

 

Why is Texas more important then the rest of the US?

 

It isnt. We are bound to a treaty, we had the right to not sign the treaty, but we want our citizens to get the benefit of it. So we in turn must give the benefits to others.

 

What happened is wrong. The day we start changing the rules because its easier and takes less time, is the day our justice system loses its credibility. There is no need to rush here, doesnt make a difference if Leal died yesterday, tomorrow or 30 years in the future. I just dont think a mans life is worth Texas saving money because they didnt want to follow the rules.

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Im busy today, so I cant really give all of your responses the time they deserve, but here goes nothing:

 

 

 

The end game is that Leal deserves to be allowed to contact his consulate and then have a trial. If he is convicted in that trial, he then deserves all of the appeal processes. If after that point we is still guilty, Texas can execute him.

 

Imo, the state of Texas cut corners, and I dont think that is fair, at least not to me. So I think the state of Texas should bear the responsibility of fixing their error and going back to the beginning.

 

From what I understand, Texas didn't cut corners. YEARS ago the Supreme Court agreed and said no, Texas doesn't have to do that.

 

Moreover, you're a lawyer, when does any sentence of judgment get stayed to see what legislation MIGHT pass in the future? That's insane. The dude missed a phone call 16 years ago. The consulate couldn't have changed what happened. At most the consulate MIGHT have provided him a lawyer from Mexico he might have felt more comfortable with, but there's been ZERO evidence of ANY wrongdoings by his attorneys (who at some point were not just public defenders but attorneys from the various legal aid clinics)

 

The point is, we dont know. Maybe it would have changed nothing, but if thats the case, why didnt the state of Texas give him the chance? When you look at the bigger picture, it seems to me that Texas is purposefully not allowing criminals to contact their consulate in an attempt to get easier convictions. To me that is wrong, its not like this is the only time Texas has done this. Leal allegedly had a learning disability and may have suffered brain damage. The state of Texas never made him aware of his right to contact the Mexican consulate. He only learned of that right from another prisoner.

 

Why should Texas get to brazenly disregard a US treaty?

 

Why is Texas more important then the rest of the US?

 

It isnt. We are bound to a treaty, we had the right to not sign the treaty, but we want our citizens to get the benefit of it. So we in turn must give the benefits to others.

 

What happened is wrong. The day we start changing the rules because its easier and takes less time, is the day our justice system loses its credibility. There is no need to rush here, doesnt make a difference if Leal died yesterday, tomorrow or 30 years in the future. I just dont think a mans life is worth Texas saving money because they didnt want to follow the rules.

 

You can keep saying Texas did something wrong, but it's not going to suddenly turn true. That's just factually incorrect. They had no obligation to follow that treaty. This was explained by the SC in 2008. This guy was given a fair trial and all the appeals possible. It's ridiculous to condemn Texas when they probably spent more time and money on this case than this guy was worth. Instead of worrying about the one telephone call this guy missed, which wouldn't have changed ANYTHING, why not think about the fact that he brutally raped and murdered a 16 year old girl. I find it odd that you have these incredibly strong opinions about prisoners and the death penalty, yet there's not a mention of the most important person here, and that's the girl that was killed.

 

[Soxbadger]

Jenks,

 

And the Supreme Court also said that Separate but equal was okay and the Supreme Court ruled Dred Scott, and I can name countless other decisions that were flat out incorrect by the Supreme Court. I dont believe that I have ever stated what Texas did was in violation of US law? I said what Texas did was wrong. It was one time okay for a state to say different races couldnt marry, just because that was "legal" didnt mean it was "right". At one time a slave owner could kill his slave, that didnt mean it wasnt wrong.

 

Why was it wrong? Because the US (which Texas to the best of my knowledge is still a part of) has an agreement with Mexico, that the US will grant Mexican citizens access to the consulate. Texas is part of the US, therefore Texas should have to follow the treaties the US signs.

 

The dude missed a phone call 16 years ago. The consulate couldn't have changed what happened. At most the consulate MIGHT have provided him a lawyer from Mexico he might have felt more comfortable with, but there's been ZERO evidence of ANY wrongdoings by his attorneys (who at some point were not just public defenders but attorneys from the various legal aid clinics)

 

Thats your opinion. I feel that if it wasnt a big deal, if it made no difference, why not let him contact the consulate?

 

The obvious answer to me, is that it would have given him more rights and made it more difficult to convict.

 

You can keep saying Texas did something wrong, but it's not going to suddenly turn true. That's just factually incorrect. They had no obligation to follow that treaty. This was explained by the SC in 2008.

 

As explained before, it has nothing to do with the SC ruling, it has nothing to do with the law, the law can be wrong. Its as simple as that. I never said Texas had an obligation, I said that Texas should have done it anyways.

 

Some times doing the right thing, means you do more than you are obligated to do.

 

Moreover, you're a lawyer, when does any sentence of judgment get stayed to see what legislation MIGHT pass in the future? That's insane.

 

Where have I ever raised that argument? In fact I explicitly stated that what in this discussion it really didnt matter what the SC ruled, because the SC rule is clearly the law Disregarding the arguments of whether or not a state is bound by the treaty before Congress passes the treaty, what do you think the best course of action is?. The question was, WHAT DO YOU (NOT THE SUPREME COURT) think the best course of action is.

 

If the question was under the law, what does Texas have to do, the answer is simple. But this question isnt about that, its about do we think what Texas did is right. It should be pretty simple to discuss, instead of simply relying on "The Supreme Court ruled this way, so it must be right!"

 

 

It's ridiculous to condemn Texas when they probably spent more time and money on this case than this guy was worth.

 

To me human life is worth more than money. No price tag is worth cutting corners.

 

why not think about the fact that he brutally raped and murdered a 16 year old girl. I find it odd that you have these incredibly strong opinions about prisoners and the death penalty, yet there's not a mention of the most important person here, and that's the girl that was killed.

 

Why?

 

Because she is dead, and no amount of killing will bring her back. Its a terrible tragedy that someone was murdered. In my opinion its a terrible tragedy when anyone is killed, but that is besides the point. I cant go back in time and save her, I cant jump in my TARDIS and stop the events. I can do nothing to help her. What I can do, is I can protect those who are alive.

 

Are more people safe because Texas doesnt give foreign civilians the opportunity to contact their consulate?

 

No

 

Are people less likely to be murdered because Texas doesnt give foreign civilians the opportunity to contact their consulate?

 

No

 

Is there any connection between the victim and what Texas did?

 

No

 

Thats why I dont discuss the victim, because its not germane to this discussion. Because we all know what happened to the victim is beyond words, that it is a terrible tragedy, that it is something I would hope would never happen in civilized society.

 

But 2 wrongs dont make a right.

 

And contrary to your belief, you can follow the law and be wrong, its happened before and it will happen again.

Edited July 8, 2011 by Soxbadger