Obama tries to stop Texas execution

[revealyourself]

ITS ALL ABOUT A DAMN TREATY HIS RIGHTS WERE NOT VIOLATED THERE WERE NO WHITE PEOPLE INVOLVED HE WAS NOT RAILROADED .........ALL ABOUT A FRIKKEN TREATY THAT MEXICO DOESNT ABIDE BY ANYWAY
I HOPE HE IS IN A CELL WITH BIG BUBBA GET WHAT HE DISHED OUT ON A DAILY BASIS
AND FOR ALL YOU THAT "DONT BELIEVE IN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT" TOO BAD THIS I KNOW IT STOPS REPEAT OFFENDERS NOW DOESNT IT
MAY HE ROT IN THE BOWELS OF HELL

>"The Obama administration has asked the US Supreme Court to stop the state of Texas from executing a Mexican citizen convicted of the brutal rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl over concerns that the man was denied his right to consular access established under international treaty."

 

[edthecynic]

There is no fricken question about his guilt his bite marks were on her body...he neeeds to die die die

Bite marks are not considered acceptable forensic evidence because of the high number of false positives. It is actually called junk science in the forensic world. Now if DNA from saliva swabs taken from the bite marks was tested, that's a different story, but it was not done in this case. The fact that the bite mark evidence was not objected to and thrown out is a testament to the complete incompetence of his lawyer!!!!

According to a 2009 congressionally mandated study of bite mark evidence by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, there’s “no evidence of an existing scientific basis for identifying an individual to the exclusion of others.” The technique, the study also found, proved to have an alarmingly high rate of false-positive matches, and shouldn’t be considered valid forensic evidence.

 

[revealyourself]

Are you retarded of course they are

this is not a question of his guilt what dont you get about that

he needs to die

 

[edthecynic]

Are you retarded of course they are

this is not a question of his guilt what dont you get about that

he needs to die

Apparently your bloodthirsty desire to kill someone, anyone has blinded you to this part of my post.

According to a 2009 congressionally mandated study of bite mark evidence by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, there’s “no evidence of an existing scientific basis for identifying an individual to the exclusion of others.” The technique, the study also found, proved to have an alarmingly high rate of false-positive matches, and shouldn’t be considered valid forensic evidence.

 

[Iridescence]

And risk the possible misuse of civil rights once this loophole, this flaw be recognized as so?

I don't disagree with the fact that such a crime deserves to be top priority, however, the situation with civil rights being the issue it is already it seems to be more than 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'. It could be more detrimental in the long run.

The man in question may not even make it to his appointed by the system death as there are other powers that be as well.

 

[Momanohedhunter]

ITS ALL ABOUT A DAMN TREATY HIS RIGHTS WERE NOT VIOLATED THERE WERE NO WHITE PEOPLE INVOLVED HE WAS NOT RAILROADED .........ALL ABOUT A FRIKKEN TREATY THAT MEXICO DOESNT ABIDE BY ANYWAY
I HOPE HE IS IN A CELL WITH BIG BUBBA GET WHAT HE DISHED OUT ON A DAILY BASIS
AND FOR ALL YOU THAT "DONT BELIEVE IN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT" TOO BAD THIS I KNOW IT STOPS REPEAT OFFENDERS NOW DOESNT IT
MAY HE ROT IN THE BOWELS OF HELL

>"The Obama administration has asked the US Supreme Court to stop the state of Texas from executing a Mexican citizen convicted of the brutal rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl over concerns that the man was denied his right to consular access established under international treaty."

Guys on Death Row dont get raped. they are segregated until they die. They usually gain lots of weight to.

 

[Momanohedhunter]

And risk the possible misuse of civil rights once this loophole, this flaw be recognized as so?

I don't disagree with the fact that such a crime deserves to be top priority, however, the situation with civil rights being the issue it is already it seems to be more than 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'. It could be more detrimental in the long run.

The man in question may not even make it to his appointed by the system death as there are other powers that be as well.

Thats just it, no civil rights were abused or violated. I will say it again, all that a rep from the consulate would have done is make sure the guy was treated right and maybe get a message to family back in Mexico. This is not the first time this has happened. Matter of fact the illegals here use the same excuse for everything from shop lifting to DUI.

 

[Momanohedhunter]

There is no fricken question about his guilt his bite marks were on her body...he neeeds to die die die

Bite marks are not considered acceptable forensic evidence because of the high number of false positives. It is actually called junk science in the forensic world. Now if DNA from saliva swabs taken from the bite marks was tested, that's a different story, but it was not done in this case. The fact that the bite mark evidence was not objected to and thrown out is a testament to the complete incompetence of his lawyer!!!!

According to a 2009 congressionally mandated study of bite mark evidence by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, there’s “no evidence of an existing scientific basis for identifying an individual to the exclusion of others.” The technique, the study also found, proved to have an alarmingly high rate of false-positive matches, and shouldn’t be considered valid forensic evidence.

Bite marks are to. That was part of the evidence that convicted Ted Bundy. They are just as good as finger prints.

 

[Mr. President]

Lets be honest people. The real reason we should be upset is that we have been paying for 3 meals a day a shower and a place to sleep for a convicted murderer for 17 years. I say if you really want to stimulate the economy we need less meals and more needles.

 

[edthecynic]

There is no fricken question about his guilt his bite marks were on her body...he neeeds to die die die

Bite marks are not considered acceptable forensic evidence because of the high number of false positives. It is actually called junk science in the forensic world. Now if DNA from saliva swabs taken from the bite marks was tested, that's a different story, but it was not done in this case. The fact that the bite mark evidence was not objected to and thrown out is a testament to the complete incompetence of his lawyer!!!!

According to a 2009 congressionally mandated study of bite mark evidence by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, there’s “no evidence of an existing scientific basis for identifying an individual to the exclusion of others.” The technique, the study also found, proved to have an alarmingly high rate of false-positive matches, and shouldn’t be considered valid forensic evidence.

Bite marks are to. That was part of the evidence that convicted Ted Bundy. They are just as good as finger prints.

BULLSHIT!!!
Finger prints do not give a 63% false identification rate.

Bundy had a unique uneven bite pattern.

Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite Mark Evidence Controversy

According to New York Times Article (28.1.2007) Evidence From Bite Marks, It Turns Out, Is Not So Elementary the CSI Effect has exaggerated the effectiveness of bite mark evidence. A 1999 study by a member of the American Board of Forensic Odontology, a professional trade organization, found a 63 percent rate of false identifications. Many bite mark cases get overturned.

“If you say that this bite fits this person and nobody else in the world, and if you use the bite mark as the only piece of physical evidence linking an attacker to his victim, that’s not science — that’s junk,” said Dr. Richard Souviron, chief forensic odontologist at the Miami-Dade Medical Examiner’s Office.

Bite marks, however, can be helpful in excluding someone as a suspect, or determining that the suspect could be the one who inflicted the bite, many experts and defense lawyers agree.

Read more at Suite101: Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis – How Reliable is the Evidence? | Suite101.com Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

 

[Momanohedhunter]

Bite marks are not considered acceptable forensic evidence because of the high number of false positives. It is actually called junk science in the forensic world. Now if DNA from saliva swabs taken from the bite marks was tested, that's a different story, but it was not done in this case. The fact that the bite mark evidence was not objected to and thrown out is a testament to the complete incompetence of his lawyer!!!!

According to a 2009 congressionally mandated study of bite mark evidence by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, there’s “no evidence of an existing scientific basis for identifying an individual to the exclusion of others.” The technique, the study also found, proved to have an alarmingly high rate of false-positive matches, and shouldn’t be considered valid forensic evidence.

Bite marks are to. That was part of the evidence that convicted Ted Bundy. They are just as good as finger prints.

BULLSHIT!!!
Finger prints do not give a 63% false identification rate.

Bundy had a unique uneven bite pattern.

Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite Mark Evidence Controversy

According to New York Times Article (28.1.2007) Evidence From Bite Marks, It Turns Out, Is Not So Elementary the CSI Effect has exaggerated the effectiveness of bite mark evidence. A 1999 study by a member of the American Board of Forensic Odontology, a professional trade organization, found a 63 percent rate of false identifications. Many bite mark cases get overturned.

“If you say that this bite fits this person and nobody else in the world, and if you use the bite mark as the only piece of physical evidence linking an attacker to his victim, that’s not science — that’s junk,” said Dr. Richard Souviron, chief forensic odontologist at the Miami-Dade Medical Examiner’s Office.

Bite marks, however, can be helpful in excluding someone as a suspect, or determining that the suspect could be the one who inflicted the bite, many experts and defense lawyers agree.

Read more at Suite101: Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis – How Reliable is the Evidence? | Suite101.com Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite mark identification, on the other hand is legally admissible in courts of law, although over the past 30 years this branch of forensics has endured a number of legal challenges, most centered on the scientific efficiency of the field.

You are wrong, or not telling the truth.

NCJRS Abstract - National Criminal Justice Reference Service

And they were used to help convict Ted Bundy.

Home Physical Evidence Impression Evidence Bite Mark Analysis
Bite Mark Analysis
Sunday, 20 September 2009 11:41 Katherine Steck-Flynn Physical Evidence - Impression Evidence
E-mail Print PDF
Written by Katherine Steck-Flynn

Ted Bundy was a killer. Not only was he a killer but he was a serial killer. He rampaged through a large part of the United States killing and brutalizing women from 1974 until his eventually capture in 1978(Ramsland, 2004). He was captured twice and managed to escape twice. Under stress from life as a fugitive he made the fatal mistake which would lead to his conviction and eventual execution.

Bite Mark Analysis

 

[Momanohedhunter]

Bite marks are not considered acceptable forensic evidence because of the high number of false positives. It is actually called junk science in the forensic world. Now if DNA from saliva swabs taken from the bite marks was tested, that's a different story, but it was not done in this case. The fact that the bite mark evidence was not objected to and thrown out is a testament to the complete incompetence of his lawyer!!!!

According to a 2009 congressionally mandated study of bite mark evidence by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, there’s “no evidence of an existing scientific basis for identifying an individual to the exclusion of others.” The technique, the study also found, proved to have an alarmingly high rate of false-positive matches, and shouldn’t be considered valid forensic evidence.

Bite marks are to. That was part of the evidence that convicted Ted Bundy. They are just as good as finger prints.

BULLSHIT!!!
Finger prints do not give a 63% false identification rate.

Bundy had a unique uneven bite pattern.

Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite Mark Evidence Controversy

According to New York Times Article (28.1.2007) Evidence From Bite Marks, It Turns Out, Is Not So Elementary the CSI Effect has exaggerated the effectiveness of bite mark evidence. A 1999 study by a member of the American Board of Forensic Odontology, a professional trade organization, found a 63 percent rate of false identifications. Many bite mark cases get overturned.

“If you say that this bite fits this person and nobody else in the world, and if you use the bite mark as the only piece of physical evidence linking an attacker to his victim, that’s not science — that’s junk,” said Dr. Richard Souviron, chief forensic odontologist at the Miami-Dade Medical Examiner’s Office.

Bite marks, however, can be helpful in excluding someone as a suspect, or determining that the suspect could be the one who inflicted the bite, many experts and defense lawyers agree.

Read more at Suite101: Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis – How Reliable is the Evidence? | Suite101.com Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Try harder.

 

[edthecynic]

Bite marks are to. That was part of the evidence that convicted Ted Bundy. They are just as good as finger prints.

BULLSHIT!!!
Finger prints do not give a 63% false identification rate.

Bundy had a unique uneven bite pattern.

Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite Mark Evidence Controversy

According to New York Times Article (28.1.2007) Evidence From Bite Marks, It Turns Out, Is Not So Elementary the CSI Effect has exaggerated the effectiveness of bite mark evidence. A 1999 study by a member of the American Board of Forensic Odontology, a professional trade organization, found a 63 percent rate of false identifications. Many bite mark cases get overturned.

“If you say that this bite fits this person and nobody else in the world, and if you use the bite mark as the only piece of physical evidence linking an attacker to his victim, that’s not science — that’s junk,” said Dr. Richard Souviron, chief forensic odontologist at the Miami-Dade Medical Examiner’s Office.

Bite marks, however, can be helpful in excluding someone as a suspect, or determining that the suspect could be the one who inflicted the bite, many experts and defense lawyers agree.

Read more at Suite101: Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis – How Reliable is the Evidence? | Suite101.com Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite mark identification, on the other hand is legally admissible in courts of law, although over the past 30 years this branch of forensics has endured a number of legal challenges, most centered on the scientific efficiency of the field.

You are wrong, or not telling the truth.

NCJRS Abstract - National Criminal Justice Reference Service

Here's what you dishonestly left out from the highlighted part of your own link:

Bite mark identification, on the other hand is legally admissible in courts of law, although over the past 30 years this branch of forensics has endured a number of legal challenges, most centered on the scientific efficiency of the field. Several convictions based on bite mark evidence have been reversed on later DNA testing. Bite mark analysis is based on the assumptions that human teeth are unique and that sufficient detail of this uniqueness is rendered during the biting process to enable identification. These assumptions have been challenged in recent years.

 

[Momanohedhunter]

BULLSHIT!!!
Finger prints do not give a 63% false identification rate.

Bundy had a unique uneven bite pattern.

Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite Mark Evidence Controversy

According to New York Times Article (28.1.2007) Evidence From Bite Marks, It Turns Out, Is Not So Elementary the CSI Effect has exaggerated the effectiveness of bite mark evidence. A 1999 study by a member of the American Board of Forensic Odontology, a professional trade organization, found a 63 percent rate of false identifications. Many bite mark cases get overturned.

“If you say that this bite fits this person and nobody else in the world, and if you use the bite mark as the only piece of physical evidence linking an attacker to his victim, that’s not science — that’s junk,” said Dr. Richard Souviron, chief forensic odontologist at the Miami-Dade Medical Examiner’s Office.

Bite marks, however, can be helpful in excluding someone as a suspect, or determining that the suspect could be the one who inflicted the bite, many experts and defense lawyers agree.

Read more at Suite101: Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis – How Reliable is the Evidence? | Suite101.com Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite mark identification, on the other hand is legally admissible in courts of law, although over the past 30 years this branch of forensics has endured a number of legal challenges, most centered on the scientific efficiency of the field.

You are wrong, or not telling the truth.

NCJRS Abstract - National Criminal Justice Reference Service

Here's what you dishonestly left out from the highlighted part of your own link:

Bite mark identification, on the other hand is legally admissible in courts of law, although over the past 30 years this branch of forensics has endured a number of legal challenges, most centered on the scientific efficiency of the field. Several convictions based on bite mark evidence have been reversed on later DNA testing. Bite mark analysis is based on the assumptions that human teeth are unique and that sufficient detail of this uniqueness is rendered during the biting process to enable identification. These assumptions have been challenged in recent years.

that's why I linked to it. Doesn't matter, he was tried, he was convicted, and he will be executed.

 

[edthecynic]

Bite marks are to. That was part of the evidence that convicted Ted Bundy. They are just as good as finger prints.

BULLSHIT!!!
Finger prints do not give a 63% false identification rate.

Bundy had a unique uneven bite pattern.

Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

Bite Mark Evidence Controversy

According to New York Times Article (28.1.2007) Evidence From Bite Marks, It Turns Out, Is Not So Elementary the CSI Effect has exaggerated the effectiveness of bite mark evidence. A 1999 study by a member of the American Board of Forensic Odontology, a professional trade organization, found a 63 percent rate of false identifications. Many bite mark cases get overturned.

“If you say that this bite fits this person and nobody else in the world, and if you use the bite mark as the only piece of physical evidence linking an attacker to his victim, that’s not science — that’s junk,” said Dr. Richard Souviron, chief forensic odontologist at the Miami-Dade Medical Examiner’s Office.

Bite marks, however, can be helpful in excluding someone as a suspect, or determining that the suspect could be the one who inflicted the bite, many experts and defense lawyers agree.

Read more at Suite101: Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis – How Reliable is the Evidence? | Suite101.com Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis

And they were used to help convict Ted Bundy.

Home Physical Evidence Impression Evidence Bite Mark Analysis
Bite Mark Analysis
Sunday, 20 September 2009 11:41 Katherine Steck-Flynn Physical Evidence - Impression Evidence
E-mail Print PDF
Written by Katherine Steck-Flynn

Ted Bundy was a killer. Not only was he a killer but he was a serial killer. He rampaged through a large part of the United States killing and brutalizing women from 1974 until his eventually capture in 1978(Ramsland, 2004). He was captured twice and managed to escape twice. Under stress from life as a fugitive he made the fatal mistake which would lead to his conviction and eventual execution.

Bite Mark Analysis

And this from your own link on Bundy's bite marks, which BTW is the same site I quoted above.

Forensic bite mark analysis revealed Bundy’s highly irregular teeth left the impressions.

Read more at Suite101: Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis – How Reliable is the Evidence? | Suite101.com Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks: Forensic Bite Mark Analysis
​

 

[Momanohedhunter]

Dont matter. It worked and in three weeks he is going to be strapped to a table, they will start an IV, they will give him tranquilizer, and then poison. he will crap his pants and beg for his life, and he will due. that's how it go's when you kill people in Texas. he dead.

 

[percysunshine]

In all fairness, there is a reasoned response here:

WH intervenes in Texas execution « Hot Air

"Garcia seems a poor poster boy for this effort, given his nearly lifelong residence in the US and the nature of his crime. However, for those Americans who do travel abroad, reciprocity in consular access is no small matter, and neither the Obama or Bush administrations can be much blamed for taking an interest in protecting it. "

I wonder what will happen tomorrow.

 

[Avatar4321]

The Supreme Court has previously ruled that states can't be forced to comply with the provisions of treaties without some intervening federal legislation."

WHAT?!?!

If they did that, the SCOTUS has lost its collective mind.

Treaties are the law of the LAND.

The states do not get to parce out what parts of a treaty they like.

Depends on the type of treaty

 

[Avatar4321]

And Texas has no reason to listen to the Administration on a State issue. Obama needs to stop overreaching.

 

[percysunshine]

And Texas has no reason to listen to the Administration on a State issue. Obama needs to stop overreaching.

He is politically safe on this one. He can say he tried, but those dastardly Texans just want to kill innocent people and there is nothing he can do about it...wait...that won't work....he can do anything....