Talk:Humberto Leal Garcia

NPOV

Description of Crime

I have concerns about the neutrality. Maybe because it is not much more than a stub, but it skimps over what he did, which was simply horrific. Don't have time to expand now, but might in a few hours when I come back home and Leal is executed (presumably).--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 22:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I think his crimes should be described, just not like they were here. ContinueWithCaution (talk) 00:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

That level of detail was excessive, but we do need to know thoroughly what he did to earn his conviction and execution.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 03:03, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure when it was last updated, but what the article shows as of 7/7/11 at 11:35pm(CT) seems like an acceptable description of the crime without being to graphic. It looks to be updated to describe it properly. --Loveless-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.152.138.44 (talk) 04:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I also have concerns about the neutrality. The article seems to assume that he was innocent, and that the court incorrectly found him guilty. My larger concern is that (as I understand) while he originally immigrated illegally as a child, he later gained US citizenship and was a dual citizen. The US government does not recognize dual citizenship...so in the eyes of the US legal system he was a US citizen. The right to consult the Mexican consulate would not apply to a "dual citizen" who isn't recognized as such by the US government...--160.133.1.228 (talk) 17:24, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Status as an Immigrant

I have not seen anything anywhere about just what his immigration status in the U. S. was, certainly nothing to indicate that he had become a naturalized citizen. The big question that every article I have seen on this case fails to address is: at what point did he reveal that he was a citizen of Mexico and not the United States? He had lived here since the age of two, in all probability illegally, so where did he claim to have been born when arrested? It is not part of the state's job in a murder case to investigate the citizenship of the defendant, and if he had claimed to have been born in the U. S. the defense would certainly have claimed it was evidence of bias if the prosecution disputed this. Perhaps someone who really knows this case can clear this up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.233.160.103 (talk) 19:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I disagree that the article assumes he was innocent, but can you suggest changes that could be made to correct that impression? as for his citizenship, that's definitely relevant if it's true, but we'd need a source that says so (I don't see anything that indicates this) and that discusses the issue. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

He confessed to the crime at his execution. Steve (talk) 16:18, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I found a reliable source for being illegal.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 02:51, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Neither one of the two articles quoted address possession of or lack of US citizenship. The BBC article says he was a Mexican National. The ABC article says he was a Mexican who lived in the US since he was two. The Wiki article says he never became a US citizen. By doing so, it is applying assumptions to the ABC and the BBC articles. These two cited sources do not say that he "never became a US citizen." They don't imply it, they don't hint at it, and they don't say he was illegal. --Lacarids (talk) 13:21, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Bedford found another source that says he was an illegal immigrant, which is cited. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:40, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:REDFLAG, exceptional claims require exception sources. This isn't an exceptional claim per say, but it certainly is a politically charged one. I do not agree that one article from the online edition of The Huntsville Item meets WP:BURDEN for the claim that Leal was an illegal immigrant. More reliable sources, such as the court proceedings and mainstream news organizations, are silent on this issue. I think the illegal immigrent claim should be removed until more reliable sources can be uncovered. To surmise that Leal was was an illegal immigrant because he was a Mexican citizen brought into the United States by his parents violates WP:NOR. This fact isn't for us to research, but to report on. And right now the only source we have for this rather significant claim is a community paper that only has a daily circulation of a few thousand copies. I just spent the last 20 minutes searching for an addition source and turned up nothing. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 17:10, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

You're right that with the amount of coverage this case has received, the claim should by right appear in national and international sources - that's a good point. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

There has been no movement on this issue over the past few days. I've posted on Bedford's talk page to ask him to weigh in again. As this article is politically charged in some circles, I think it's important to maintain the strictest standards of WP:NPOV and WP:V. I propose that if another reliable source cannot be located in the next few days that says Leal was an illegal immigrant, that statement be removed. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 05:22, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

No comment on this issue at all over the last 5 days addressing these concerns. I've gone ahead and removed this claim from the article until more reliable sources can be provided.Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 13:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

July 19

Is everyone satisfied with the neutrality now? Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I am tentatively satisfied. The description of the crime seems a little graphic, but I don't think it violates WP:NPOV. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 17:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I am still convinced there was suitable cause to say he was illegal, so I won't remove the tag.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 18:10, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Could you explain why you believe this affects the article's neutrality? Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:11, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I've looked extensively through every single source I can find on the subject and not a single one besides the paper from Huntsville calls him an illegal immigrant (I created the article on the Supreme Court decision so I've read quite a bit of material on this individual). A local paper from Texas with a small circulation is not enough to meet WP:REDFLAG. I would want to see an additional source before I would be in favor of including the claim in the article. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 21:35, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Tacos

Is the fact that he ate tacos before his death in any way relevant to the points made in the rest of the article? It seems rather silly. ItCanHappen (talk) 02:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

It might be of interest to enough people, although it should be within a paragraph and not its own paragraph. I'd keep it.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 02:35, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

It's unencyclopedic and should be removed. We don't need to include every piece of trivia that could be "of interest." Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:20, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

"of interest"... What else could be of interest to some people? That's an open-ened qualification that could mean anything. ItCanHappen (talk) 04:07, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

All im asking is, were is the harm in having the information. Almost all death sentence articles here have the last meal which infact is a part of the execution process and is often mentioned in the aftermath of an american execution. just get over it,--BabbaQ (talk) 20:08, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

It's completely untrue that almost all death sentence articles here have it, but even if it were, so what? I'd support removing all of them. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

And I have to ask again, Where is the harm in having those small lines of information? Just asking.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:09, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia even have a Last meal article. So to say that it is irrelevant for Wikipedia is simply not true.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Leal wasn't charged in the gang rape

The fact that the subject is dead exempts us from WP:BLP but not from WP:V. We must not include the statement that Leal was charged for Sauceda's gang rape. The cited source does not indicate this. The court documents don't indicate this. No source indicates this. In fact, sources specifically state that he didn't show up until later. Why, then, is Bedford insisting that we say he was charged in the gang rape? Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

The cited source says "There's little question Leal killed her, either intentionally or unintentionally. But there was no DNA evidence that he raped her, and the evidence that he kidnapped her appeared even thinner. And despite witnesses who said that Salceda had been gang-raped at the party, no one else was charged, just Leal." This is the sentence which Bedford is using to justify his claim that Leal was charged in the gang rape, despite the fact that it's obviously saying Leal was charged in the kidnapping/murder/rape by the side of the road and that no one was charged in the gang rape. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

After reading the source, it implies that he was convicted for the rape as well. He couldn't have received the death sentence just for the murder.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 03:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I sourced the fact he raped the girl.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 03:54, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

He was definitely convicted of the rape, but what we're referring to as "the rape" and "the gang rape" are two separate events. The latter took place at the party and, according to sources, did not involve Leal, while the former took place at the side of the road after Leal and Sauceda left the party. Does that clear things up? Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:57, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Supreme Court Case

Hi, I've been working on the article for the Supreme Court case Leal Garcia v. Texas. I've added a link to the article under the Legal Controversy section. Please let me know if there are any comments or objections! Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 20:35, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

nice work!--BabbaQ (talk) 22:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Commutation?

The current version of this article makes it clear that President Obama was opposed to Garcia being executed. What isn't clear is why the president didn't commute the sentence. Isn't he capable of doing so? Is there any (news) coverage explaining why the president chose not to commute the sentence? --MZMcBride (talk) 11:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Humberto Leal Garcia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120319024924/http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/07/08/38009.htm to http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/07/08/38009.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090706004625/http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/statistics/deathrow/drowlist/leal.jpg to http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/statistics/deathrow/drowlist/leal.jpg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:59, 8 November 2017 (UTC)