U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-10-2011, 10:00 PM
 
Location: Tempe, Az
1,421 posts, read 1,238,051 times
Reputation: 410

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by olecapt View Post
We have direct evidence of the actions in this particular case.

If the BP agents cause was just he simply goes to Mexico and proves it.

What could be simpler?

So the problem is a corrupt Mexican judiciary?

So the US should never send anyone to Mexico? We don't extradite and they don't get Americans? Sounds like a deal. But we can't ***** if the Mexicans won't send the bad guys back here can we?
That agent dont have to prove nothing to Mexico. The punk tossed rocks into the USA tryin to hit the BP. BP shot back. The kid bought it. Rocks can KILL.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-10-2011, 10:05 PM
 
Location: NW Las Vegas - Lone Mountain
15,756 posts, read 32,491,985 times
Reputation: 2661
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikCortez View Post
That agent dont have to prove nothing to Mexico. The punk tossed rocks into the USA tryin to hit the BP. BP shot back. The kid bought it. Rocks can KILL.
The killing occurred in Mexico. So if you don't wish to have the location of the killing rule you then cannot expect Mexico to extradite to the US.

That how you want it ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2011, 10:17 PM
 
358 posts, read 332,712 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by olecapt View Post
The killing occurred in Mexico. So if you don't wish to have the location of the killing rule you then cannot expect Mexico to extradite to the US.

That how you want it ?
From what I can see the initial crime occurred on U.S. soil, with the BP agent on American soil when shots were fired. I am not an attorney specializing in international law, but once again I don't see Mexico attempting to extradite an American murderer. Can you please show me which country would have jurisdiction? some kind of validation that it should legally be tried in Mexico would be very nice, and please cite source(s).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2011, 10:30 PM
 
Location: NW Las Vegas - Lone Mountain
15,756 posts, read 32,491,985 times
Reputation: 2661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iceman82 View Post
From what I can see the initial crime occurred on U.S. soil, with the BP agent on American soil when shots were fired. I am not an attorney specializing in international law, but once again I don't see Mexico attempting to extradite an American murderer. Can you please show me which country would have jurisdiction? some kind of validation that it should legally be tried in Mexico would be very nice, and please cite source(s).

Here you go...


From Akehurst's Modern Introduction to International Law, Seventh Revised Edition (Peter Malanczuk), page 110:

Every state claims jurisdiction over crimes committed in its own territory, even by foreigners. Sometimes a criminal act may begin in one state and be completed in another; for instance, a man may shoot across a frontier and kill someone on the other side. In such circumstances both states have jurisdiction: the state where the act commenced has jurisdiction under the subjective territorial principle, and the state where the act is completed has jurisdiction under the objective territorial principle (also sometimes called the "effects doctrine", based on the fact that the injurious effect, although not the act or ommission itself, occurred on the territory of the state).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2011, 10:49 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,011,547 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iceman82 View Post
This kid "is a known juvenile smuggler," a source told Fox News. He was also on a "most wanted" list of juvenile smugglers compiled by U.S. authorities in the El Paso area, sources said...
What "sources" are speaking off the record?...

The FOX News link you posted is a year and a day before today, very soon after the incident:

Border Patrol Special Operations Supervisor Ramiro Cordero: "A thorough, multi-agency investigation is currently ongoing."

Hmm, has there been a result of that "multi-agency investigation" in the last year?...

"A U.S. official told the Associated Press that video of the incident shows the Border Patrol agent did not enter Mexico."

Note that this is before knowledge of the cell phone video. The only video source otherwise is cameras run by our border enforcement themselves. Why hasn't that video been released?

The limited statement is also interesting: Why say only that the video shows the agent didn't enter Mexico? If the video captured the boys throwing rocks, wouldn't they also report that?

Ramiro Cordero is quoted again that "preliminary reports indicate that U.S. officers on bicycle patrol were 'assaulted with rocks' by an unknown number of people before Herueka was shot"...

So it isn't on video, but "preliminary reports" (from interviewing witnesses) is what determines rocks have been thrown. It also misidentifies more than one agent being present. "Unknown number" also is consistent with interviewing witnesses instead of reviewing video.

"The unidentified official said the video also shows what seem to be four Mexican law enforcement officers driving to the edge of the muddy bed of the Rio Grande, walking across to the U.S. side, picking up an undetermined object and returning to Mexico near the area where the boy's body lay."

Again, this "video" isn't from the cell phone segment. Very descriptive of what happened for that portion of video, and the number of people involved. If that much detail is evident later from the same video source, it should be very easy to determine exactly what happened a short time before.

So where is that video, or a better description of what it captured earlier?...

That is the question...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2011, 11:03 PM
 
358 posts, read 332,712 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by olecapt View Post
Here you go...


From Akehurst's Modern Introduction to International Law, Seventh Revised Edition (Peter Malanczuk), page 110:

Every state claims jurisdiction over crimes committed in its own territory, even by foreigners. Sometimes a criminal act may begin in one state and be completed in another; for instance, a man may shoot across a frontier and kill someone on the other side. In such circumstances both states have jurisdiction: the state where the act commenced has jurisdiction under the subjective territorial principle, and the state where the act is completed has jurisdiction under the objective territorial principle (also sometimes called the "effects doctrine", based on the fact that the injurious effect, although not the act or ommission itself, occurred on the territory of the state).
Thank you for that clarification. Has Mexico formally requested extradition in this case? I don't understand how you feel justice is not being served with statements like this:

1)"Good point. The shooting occurred in Mexico. Normal protocol would be to allow Mexico to extradite the BP to stand trial. So are you for law and order or not?"
2)"YOur post is more of your standard garbage. The kid was well into Mexico and coming toward the US if anything.
Give it up. If the BP is clear he should simply go to Mexico and prove his self defense.
We both know that there is no way he will do that.
But let us understand we, the US in this case, have no intention of allowing the appropriate justice system to work when our agent is involved."
"So the US should never send anyone to Mexico? We don't extradite and they don't get Americans? Sounds like a deal. But we can't ***** if the Mexicans won't send the bad guys back here can we?"

Statement one was not supported with any evidence, once again has Mexico formally requested extradition in this "crime"? and even IF they requested it, most likely it would not occur unless the agent committed a legitimate crime
Experts say extradition unlikely if Border Patrol agent charged - El Paso Times so how would extraditing a U.S. citizen cleared of any wrongdoing, and the United States being within it's full rights to deny extradition, be going against "Law and order"?
I really enjoyed reading this snippet: " Shortly after the shooting, Mexican federal police chased Border Patrol agents out of the riverbed with rifles trained on them while a crowd on the Mexican side taunted the U.S. officials and threw rocks and firecrackers." Mexican politicians urge Border Patrol agent's extradition for trial in shooting | cleveland.com I cannot believe you would even consider sending a U.S. agent to Mexico for political justice, shame on you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2011, 11:12 PM
 
358 posts, read 332,712 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
What "sources" are speaking off the record?...

The FOX News link you posted is a year and a day before today, very soon after the incident:

Border Patrol Special Operations Supervisor Ramiro Cordero: "A thorough, multi-agency investigation is currently ongoing."

Hmm, has there been a result of that "multi-agency investigation" in the last year?...

"A U.S. official told the Associated Press that video of the incident shows the Border Patrol agent did not enter Mexico."

Note that this is before knowledge of the cell phone video. The only video source otherwise is cameras run by our border enforcement themselves. Why hasn't that video been released?

The limited statement is also interesting: Why say only that the video shows the agent didn't enter Mexico? If the video captured the boys throwing rocks, wouldn't they also report that?

Ramiro Cordero is quoted again that "preliminary reports indicate that U.S. officers on bicycle patrol were 'assaulted with rocks' by an unknown number of people before Herueka was shot"...

So it isn't on video, but "preliminary reports" (from interviewing witnesses) is what determines rocks have been thrown. It also misidentifies more than one agent being present. "Unknown number" also is consistent with interviewing witnesses instead of reviewing video.

"The unidentified official said the video also shows what seem to be four Mexican law enforcement officers driving to the edge of the muddy bed of the Rio Grande, walking across to the U.S. side, picking up an undetermined object and returning to Mexico near the area where the boy's body lay."

Again, this "video" isn't from the cell phone segment. Very descriptive of what happened for that portion of video, and the number of people involved. If that much detail is evident later from the same video source, it should be very easy to determine exactly what happened a short time before.

So where is that video, or a better description of what it captured earlier?...

That is the question...
In my opinion this investigation will go on until it's a relic of the past. If it draws to a conclusion and is made public too early neither side will win political points. If the U.S. exonerates the agent then Mexican politicians take a hit for not being tough on BP "brutality". If the U.S. finds the agent guilty then it angers a lot of voters fed up with border issues.. We do know that rock throwing is common, BP agents are hurt frequently, and we can only go off of what witnesses and the BP agent say, along with the grainy cell phone video. see my later post about the additional rock throwing and federal police drawing weapons on BP agents, goes to show the mentality. As for the statement "What "sources" are speaking off the record?..." that was one of many news stations reporting similar, if not more detailed facts of his criminal history. There is newer mentions of his previous criminal activities and I have found no retractions to support the theory that it's false: http://vivirlatino.com/2011/01/18/pa...-file-suit.php
I guess 25 million will help the family sleep better at night..

Last edited by Iceman82; 06-10-2011 at 11:27 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2011, 11:40 PM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,711,508 times
Reputation: 22158
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeepgirl27 View Post
I sure damn hope they get any money they are asking for...sue the F out of them..and get all the money you deserve
No kid deserves to die..
Where he is from is no excuse to kill him
I support the parents and their lawsuit.
Do you have any clue how many "kids" of 14-16 years of age have been killed in the drug cartel battles going on in Mexico? These kids are about as far from innocence as anyone can get.

These kids were trying to murder a border patrol agent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2011, 11:46 PM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,711,508 times
Reputation: 22158
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1751texan View Post
trying to kill a border patrol agent is not right. But there is no indiction yet, that THIS KID" was trying to do that.

do you know how far the kid was from the agent? do you know how many rocks the agent said were thrown in his direction? Was the agent hit by any of the rocks? Do you know if the agent was injured?

Of course you dont...You heard Mexican kid shot throwing rocks...and thats all you need.
These aren't actually kids, they're thugs working for the cartels that control that portion of the border. Many of the sicarios are the same age, and the kidnappers, and the carjackers.

You apparently have absolutely no clue what's taking place in Juarez. Over 3000 murders a year, these young gang thugs are running the streets, but they're hired by the cartels.

Did you notice the lawsuit has now named the border agent? Maybe you just wanted to see him be killed because he's a hispanic? That seems rather racist to jump to the conclusion the border agent is guilty because he is hispanic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2011, 04:04 AM
 
Location: San Diego
32,799 posts, read 30,044,409 times
Reputation: 17688
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Do you have any clue how many "kids" of 14-16 years of age have been killed in the drug cartel battles going on in Mexico? These kids are about as far from innocence as anyone can get.

These kids were trying to murder a border patrol agent.
It's a very sad and frightening stat that kids are being used in these types of roles. Beheadings and smuggling are things we as a Society think only older adults are capable of. A child is quite capable of killing another person especially if the are brainwashed early on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top