LA NACION 

Fue sentenciado por asesinar a un comerciante

Ratifican la pena de muerte al cordob�s preso en EE.UU.

A�n no hay fecha para la ejecuci�n; creen poder evitarla

 V�ctor Salda�o fue condenado por secuestrar y asesinar a un comerciante de Houston en 1995

La Corte norteamericana hab�a anulado el fallo por discriminaci�n racial

CORDOBA.- La Corte de Apelaciones del Estado de Texas ratific� la sentencia de muerte que pesa sobre el cordob�s V�ctor Salda�o. Sin embargo, no est� fijada la fecha para la ejecuci�n y es el dato que otorga esperanzas a familiares y abogados defensores para seguir batallando por un nuevo fallo que excluya la pena capital y la cambie por otra de c�rcel por el resto de su vida.

 "Contrariamente a lo que se pueda inferirse r�pidamente, la determinaci�n de esa corte no lo coloca m�s cerca de la inyecci�n letal sino que, en nuestra convicci�n, va a aumentar sus posibilidades de salvarse de la muerte", afirm� a LA NACION, en C�rdoba, Carlos Hairabedian, uno de los letrados que asistieron a Lidia Guerrero, la madre del joven que recal� en Estados Unidos despu�s de un periplo por varias regiones del continente. All� emprendi� caminos marginales que lo condujeron, el 25 de noviembre de 1995, junto con un amigo mexicano, a secuestrar a un comerciante de Houston, Paul King, a quien luego asesinaron. Fue detenido y, en 1996, condenado a muerte por un jurado del condado de Collins.

 Se inici� entonces un arduo bregar de la familia y de abogados para impedir la ejecuci�n, que debi� haberse efectuado el 18 de abril de 2000. Antes de que se concretara se logr� que prosperaran recursos de apelaci�n que llegaron a la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos, la cual, finalmente, anul� la fecha y orden� un nuevo fallo.

 Los abogados estadounidenses del cordob�s, Stanley Schneider y Thomas Moran, hab�an atacado la sentencia porque -sostuvieron- durante el juicio hab�a sido ostensible la discriminaci�n racial con que se evalu� la conducta del acusado.

 Se�alaron, por caso, que un psic�logo que hizo el peritaje psiqui�trico, Walter Quijano, declar� que Salda�o era peligroso para la sociedad norteamericana por su condici�n de hispano.

 Pero, ahora, la Corte de Apelaciones de Texas hizo caso omiso de la resoluci�n del supremo tribunal de Estados Unidos, y en una sentencia de cuatro decenas de carillas desautoriz� al procurador general, John Cornyn, por haber apelado a la m�xima autoridad judicial del pa�s reconociendo que en la sentencia hab�a influido el prejuicio racial.

 "La confesi�n de error por el Estado ante la Corte Suprema es contraria a la ley procesal (de la propia Texas) para presentar una demanda en apelaci�n", sostuvo el tribunal estatal.

 Despu�s de conocer la resoluci�n, Cornyn se�al� que "fue claramente equivocada, no elimina el hedor de la injusticia" sino que, por el contrario, "apesta a injusticia".

 Argument� que la cuesti�n fundamental por discernir es "si se seguir� permitiendo que la raza o el origen �tnico sean introducidos en un caso de pena de muerte y si �se es un sistema justo de pena capital".

 Hairabedian dijo a LA NACION que el fallo de la Corte de Apelaciones de Texas no quita chances a la lucha por conseguir que Salda�o no sea ejecutado. La defensa procura que la condena finalmente sea transformada en una pena de prisi�n perpetua. Estima que "tiene chances muy claras de car�cter jur�dico y de car�cter institucional" para ello.

 Por un lado, toma en cuenta que Texas se encuentra en campa�a electoral de gobernador. El Partido Dem�crata lleva un candidato hispano, Tony S�nchez, que compite con el republicano Rick Perry.

 En elecciones anteriores fue el propio Estado de Texas -a trav�s del procurador general- el que propici� la anulaci�n de la pena de muerte de Salda�o por el prejuicio racial.

 Interpreta Hairabedian que ese contexto puede resultar favorable al objetivo y espera que sea el procurador "el mayor defensor de lo que hab�a resuelto la Corte Suprema", que es contra lo que se ha expedido el tribunal de apelaciones de Texas. "No s� qu� har� ahora, pero es la misma persona y creo que ser� consecuente con su posici�n", a�adi�. Anticip� que igualmente va a intentar una reposici�n ante la Corte de Apelaciones del Estado; se descuenta que no lo rechazar�, pero eso deja abierta la v�a para recurrir otra vez a la Suprema Corte de Justicia de los Estados Unidos.

Juan Carlos Vaca

Papa

El abogado Carlos Hairabedian record� que las batallas por una pena de muerte llevaron entre 10 y 20 a�os y aqu� reci�n van seis. Explic� que si los recursos judiciales no prosperan, a�n pueden intentar un pedido de clemencia, pero los antecedentes no sugieren que el comit� encargado de evaluarla sea muy inclinado a la indulgencia, pues rechaz� hasta peticiones del propio Papa.

Court rebuffs Cornyn over ethnicity issue

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday refused for the 2nd time to order a new punishment hearing for an Argentine man whose ethnicity became an issue in his capital murder trial.

 The court rebuffed Texas Attorney General John Cornyn for confessing error in Victor Saldano's case when it went to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 The majority, in an opinion by Judge Paul Womack, said the attorney general has no legal authority to attack a criminal conviction. Cornyn's position put him at odds with the Collin County District Attorney's Office, which argued that Saldano's conviction and death sentence should be upheld.

 Saldano is on death row for the abduction, robbery and shooting death of Paul King in 1995.

 During Saldano's capital murder trial, prosecutors presented testimony from psychologist Walter Quijano of Conroe. Quijano, a former chief psychologist for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, testified that Saldano's Hispanic ethnicity could be a factor in making him a future danger to society, citing the overrepresentation of blacks and Hispanics in the prison system.

 "Testimony inviting the jury to consider the race of the defendant should play no part in a fair system of criminal justice," said Cornyn at a news conference. "The Court of Criminal Appeals has bowed its neck rather than correcting this injustice."

 The court said that it would not reach the issue of whether the jury should have heard Quijano's testimony because Saldano's defense attorney did not object to it during the trial.

 Judge Tom Price and Cheryl Johnson dissented from the ruling. "If a skunk is allowed into the jury box, nothing will remove its stench," wrote Price.

 Saldano was 1 of 7 death row inmates identified as victims of unfair racial references by Quijano.

 Saldano's lawyer, Stanley Schneider of Houston, said he will ask the court for a rehearing. If that fails, he will again go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 In May 2000, the high court vacated an earlier opinion by the Court of Criminal Appeals upholding Saldano's conviction and sent the case back for review of the racial issue.

 Schneider praised Cornyn for "taking a very courageous position."

 "He's speaking out for the rights of all people, no matter the color of their skin," Schneider said.

 Cornyn said Saldano may deserve the death penalty but that it should only be assessed after a fair punishment hearing.

 State Prosecuting Attorney Matthew Paul, who argued to uphold Saldano's conviction, said courts have always held that a lawyer must "preserve error" by objecting to the introduction of evidence during the trial. He said Saldano's attorney attacked Quijano's credibility on cross- examination.

 "Of course this is ridiculous testimony," Paul said. "The question is, `Are we going to make the trial judge become a defense attorney and start objecting to evidence or let the defense attorney decide how he's going to handle it?'"

 The Legislature last year passed a law barring racial testimony like that offered by Quijano.

14.03.02

TEXAS: Texas court refuses order to resentence Argentine death row inmate

 The Texas attorney general's office was wrong when it told the U.S. Supreme Court an Argentine man sent to death row should be resentenced because ethnicity was factored when he was condemned for a 1995 murder in suburban Dallas, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled Wednesday.

 "We conclude that the state's confession of error in the Supreme Court is contrary to our state's procedural law for presenting a claim on appeal, as well as the Supreme Court's enforcement of such procedural law when it is presented with equal-protection claims," the appeals court said in the case of Victor Hugo Saldano, sent to death row nearly 6 years ago by a jury in Collin County.

 Wednesday's ruling is the 2nd time the state's highest criminal appeals court has upheld Saldano's conviction and death sentence for abducting Paul King from a Plano market, then robbing and fatally shooting him.

 The court's decision was "plainly wrong," Attorney General John Cornyn said.

 "Lawyers and judges often say that if a skunk is allowed in the jury box nothing will remove its stench," he said. "Today's decision by the Court of Criminal Appeals does nothing to remove the odor of injustice. Indeed, it reeks with injustice."

 "They don't care about justice and fairness," Saldano's appeals attorney, Stan Schneider of Houston, said. "I'm more disappointed than surprised."

 He and Cornyn believed the case would return to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 "The fundamental issue is: Is race or ethnicity going to be allowed to be injected in a death penalty case and is that a just system of capital punishment?" Cornyn said. "It is not."

 Saldano, 29, says he is the only Argentine on death row in the United States. At the time of his trial, he said he did not speak English, learning it in recent years from other death row inmates. His case has drawn attention in Argentina, which does not have the death penalty.

 A psychologist, Walter Quijano, testified at Saldano's trial that the Argentine laborer's Hispanic background was among 24 reasons why he was a future danger to society. Since blacks and Hispanics are over- represented in prison, which he called "one of those unfortunate realities," the fact that Saldano is Hispanic "was a factor weighing in favor of future dangerousness," Quijano said.

 In Texas, the question of future dangerousness is one of the elements for a jury to consider before deciding whether a capital murder convict should be put to death.

 Cornyn later acknowledged before the U.S. Supreme Court, which had been asked by Saldano's lawyers to review the case, that trial testimony about Saldano's Hispanic background was inappropriate and that another sentencing trial should be held without the psychologist's reference to his ethnicity.

 Given that admission, the Supreme Court asked Saldano's punishment be reconsidered.

 Quijano offered similar testimony in other cases, prompting a review of more than a half dozen other capital murder cases that resulted in death sentences.

 In arguments before the appeals court a year ago, Schneider contended Saldano was entitled to another sentencing hearing because jurors should not consider color or country of origin when they decide on punishment. Cornyn also agreed then, putting him at odds with county prosecutors who contended he didn't have the authority to make the claim to the U.S. Supreme Court and Saldano's sentence should stand.

 The appeals court Wednesday said the role of the attorney general's office in the case was proper but noted defense attorneys at Saldano's trial never objected to Quijano's testimony "as our law has always required."

 "We held that the question was not before us because the appellant made no objection to the testimony of which he complained on appeal," the court said. "Our rules require defendants to object at trial in order to preserve an error for review on appeal."

The court also said Saldano's trial lawyers provided their own expert who "made clear that race is not a 'causative' factor in recidivism," and that on appeal, Saldano's lawyers never have raised claims that his defense attorneys were derelict in failing to object.

 "This is the sort of fundamental error that should not be allowed, even if there is some technical reason like the failure of a defense lawyer to object," Cornyn said Wednesday.

 Schneider said the appeals court could have stepped in under procedures that allow it to act "in the interest of justice."

 In a dissenting opinion, Judge Cheryl Johnson said allowing the testimony "violates one of the most fundamental principles of our legal system: a citizen must be found guilty and given appropriate punishment because of what he did, not who he is."

 Judge Tom Price agreed with her, saying the only inference to be drawn by the jury was an impermissible one.

 "The analogy of a skunk in the jury box is instructive," Price said.

 But Sharon Keller, the presiding judge of the court, said in a concurring opinion joined by 3 other judges that dissenters made no attempt to defend Saldano's actual legal position, "preferring instead to rely upon the persuasive power of catchy phrases."