US Representative Tom Tancredo sent a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asking her to clarify whether the US has a legal obligation to expedite bounty hunters to Mexico based on an agreement that could be considered a "wink and nod" between governments.
“News reports have come to light showing that the extradition agreement between the U.S. and Mexico may be nothing more than a wink and a nod between governments,” said Congressman Tancredo. “I hope that Secretary Rice looks into whether this agreement has the legal force before extraditing a man who put away a serial rapist.”Tancredo pointed out that in 1992 for example, Justice William Rehnquist wrote that the treaty "says nothing about the obligations of United States and Mexico to reframe from forcible abductions of people from the territory of the other nation, or are the consequences under the treaty if such abduction occurs."
In a congressional testimony, Alan J. Kreczko, former deputy legal adviser to Secretary of State James Baker said that the US and Mexican governments had "exchange letters" classifying captures by bounty hunters as extraditable offenses.
Representative Tancredo said all of this new information begs the question, “If these changes were not formally ratified, that would raise a question about whether or not extradition proceedings should have been undertaken from the U.S. side in this case to begin with, and whether or not they should continue.”
it makes me wonder what other "exchange letters" between governments have occurred.
of course in the case of Dog Chapman, in my opinion, I think this is just Mexico's way of flexing their muscles and slapping the U. S. in the face and in a sense, advertising that Mexico really is a safe haven for criminals to run to.
1 comment:
Usually criminals cross the border because they know no one can come after them. I wasn't aware that it had changed. The sticking point that puzzles me is....Dog is not a criminal so the Mexican Gov't won't protect him? What's up with that?!
Post a Comment