Father of Guatemalan girl who died in US custody has 'no complaints' about her treatment, consul say

a comprehensive plan of working with Central American countries address the issues.

It is good to know that the individuals in our government on the front lines were humane and caring but they did not have the tools they needed to address this specific situation. Those tools need to be deployed by the highest levels of our government.

These crises we are told will increase due to climate change. Our current administration is totally unprepared.

this father was terrified of saying anything to offend, he is terrified of the US authorities and terrified of going back to a country that is too horrific to even imagine, and after days and days of walking, hunger and thirst he is not going to offend the US.

Otherwise it has as much legs as Santa Claus.

Something happened under circumstances 100% controlled under our President's deadly fix for a non existent problem.

Its a crying shame when the death of a seven year old has to bring it home and yet will not even slow it down.

If I were her father, an extremely unsophisticated to US culture but used to military/police/political violence in my own country sort of man - I'd consider closely what I'd say against an authority that has me in jail and has had my daughter "die" alone already. Not speaking or understanding English, of course.

Humans are not rational creatures and will believe what fits their world view. Your post, while there is no evidence at this time that proves it, does give you comfort as it supports your world view.

Guatemala has a lower homicide rate then the Bahamas or Jamaica or the Virgin Islands, I have driven across it and it is not "too horrific to even imagine" but a beautiful country with common 3rd World problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

You might be thinking of El Salvador which has almost 3 times the murder rate of Guatemala.

not in itself make Guatemala a safe place to raise a child. A 27.26 homicide rate is awful.

That's a .027% chance of being killed in a year.

As stated in the article itself:



So obviously, contrary to the consul's statement, the father does have complaints about the way CBP treated them and wants an investigation. The consul may have misunderstood the father, since the father speaks an indigenous language.

No one is disputing the girl had a 105.7 fever.

CBP should have checked her health when they took her into custody. Sure seems, based on the facts, there was a delay in calling EMTs. The EMTs were not called when the father alerted CBP that his daughter was vomiting, before they loaded them on the bus.

From the article:



There is no indication CBP actually checked her temperature nor offered her food or water upon apprehension. Instead, CBP made the father sign a statement that she was in good health, a statement written in a language he could not understand.

So please explain, Jedi Guy, why you feel compelled to defend the CBP and mock the rest of us who are raising legitimate criticisms by accusing us of playing the "blame game."

He stated to the consul that he has no complaints about the way they were treated, and thanked everyone involved for trying to save his daughter. You, though, apparently know better than he does what he thinks and how he feels, despite what he apparently told the consul. Have you been in touch with Mr. Caal, then?

And by the way, it states in the article that Spanish in his second language, so I should think he can communicate with the consul just fine. After all, he somehow communicated with his lawyers as well, didn't he?

She had a fever of 105.7 around 6:30 am, when they arrived at Lordsburg. There's nothing to indicate that she had that high of a fever when they took her into custody. Her father told CBP that Jakelin was sick and vomiting, and they advised the station that they were coming in with a child who was ill. Should they have immediately loaded her onto a life flight because she was vomiting? When it later became apparently how ill she truly was, they put her on a life flight and sent her to a hospital.

There's no indication that they didn't give her food and water upon apprehension, it's simply your assumption that they didn't.

And "legitimate criticisms" are not, in fact, legitimate when you don't know the facts. No one who commented on that thread knew the facts of the matter, they just simply assumed that CBP were sadists who let a little girl die for funsies.

Criticisms will be legitimate after an investigation has determined the full set of facts, so it can weighed and judged whether anyone made a mistake or acted improperly. If someone screwed up, then I fully believe they should be held to account. Until that's determined, however, all your "legitimate criticisms" are pure conjecture and surmise, otherwise known as the Blame Game.

If the CBP had given her water and food and checked her upon apprehension, they would have said so. Instead, they made up a story that she hadn't had food or water "for days" so they could blame her death on her dad. His lawyers statement pushed back on that, saying that was false. That is a complaint, along with the others I mentioned, that you're ignoring, Jedi Guy. The headline is inaccurate.

We are allowed to make criticisms based on the facts we have, like that CBP appears to have only made the father sign a statement his daughter was healthy (in a language he couldn't understand) rather than actually checking her out. If her temp was 105.7 at 6:30 am, it stands to reason it was elevated 8 hours earlier at 10 pm upon apprehension as well. A simple temperature check would have taken less than a minute but they did not call EMTs until they were loading the bus, and instead of having the EMTs come to where they were loading the bus, they had them meet them 90 minutes from then to the spot they were travelling to. Those are facts we know that are undisputed. Based on those facts, the CBP acted negligently, at best.

No one is saying the CBP let her die "for funsies." People are saying it was the result of neglect at best, racist hate at worst--a misguided attempt to "deter" migrants.

Seems to me YOU are the one making up facts.

And while I'm here, I'll continue to point out when people rush to judgment absent the facts, which they do quite frequently. People on that thread jumped the gun and assumed CBP was at fault through negligence or hatred, with absolutely nothing to support those assertions. One would think that a reality-based community would wait until an investigation had taken place, but apparently not.

If the child's father feels that CBP acted appropriately, that goes a long way towards assuaging my concerns on the matter. Let the investigation play out, and then let the results take place. Until then, any assertions of negligence or malice are conjecture and surmise, and I'll point that out to my heart's content. If you dislike that, that's not my problem. You're more than welcome to skip my posts or put me on ignore, if you don't like what I have to say.

Your post is not not part of the "reality based" community. You are ignoring the evidence of CBP negiligence, which I list. Trump and his officials have said their actions are motivated by wanting to deter the migrants from coming. That was the whole point of the truly evil child separation policy.

The father has NOT said CBP acted appropriately. You are making shit up.

Saying "Hey, how about we wait until the investigation before coming to a conclusion" is a "rightwing pro-Trump line" to you? Really?

You are the one accusing people of "playing the Blame Game," getting their "undies in a twist" and suggesting DUers aren't part of "a reality-based community," all for expressing concerns about CBP actions based on troubling facts we know. That is what right wing trolls on this site do to us. That is why people are commenting that your posts sound like right wing talking points.

And you do this while asserting in your OP that in your estimation the CBP did "the best they could."

So, you shouldn't get angry when people think you are pushing the right wing pro-Trump line.

Your shtick was funny at first, because ordinarily one must pay for comedy of that caliber. Unfortunately, like hearing the same joke over and over again, it has long since become boring. But I'm sure you're doing your very best, bless your heart.

I was entertained there for a bit, since I enjoy a spirited discussion, but now I'm just bored. All you do, over and over, is twist words, misrepresent what was said, and sling baseless personal attacks. It's kind of sad that you think doing so is a good thing.

Here I sit, brimming with rage over your masterful performance, grinding my teeth in impotent fury and nearing a stroke as my blood pressure spikes!

I'm not really sure which is more pitiful, honestly. Your juvenile behavior, your delusions of rhetorical skill, or your delusions of your own importance? It's a tough call.

In my experience, when one resorts to trolling, it's because one's arguments are garbage. But carry on, if you wish.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=2224617

If you want to call them feces, you'll get no argument from me!

Until then, I'm reserving judgment. If you don't like that, tough rocks. Have fun on your bandwagon, I want no part of it.

The father told the consular official he had, quote, "no complaints about her treatment," unquote. If they had acted inappropriately, it stands to reason that he would indeed have had complaints, no? That's my interpretation. If you don't like that, see what I said above about tough rocks.

And no, it does not stand to reason that he would have complaints even if CBP did not treat her properly. He is in their custody. He is still trying to get asylum so he can support the rest of his family. He does not want to attack the CBP. That is why the family is asking for an investigation.

No investigation has taken place, and the facts are nebulous. I'm stating that in my opinion, forming conclusions without the full facts to hand is a mistake. If you dislike that, waaaaaaaaaait for it... tough rocks.

According to the article, he's staying at a shelter for migrants, so it may not be accurate to say he's in CBP custody. For someone who gets so worked up about people supposedly making up facts, perhaps you ought to avoid doing so yourself, hm?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=2224253


But you hypocritically insist any comment we make is "premature."

If the little girl's father has "no complaints" about her treatment, then it stands to reason that they indeed did the best they could, based on his opinion of the matter. And I didn't say that "any comment" is premature, I said that condemnation of CBP is premature.

I really don't understand why you continue to insist on twisting my words to mean things they clearly don't mean, but given that your "debate" tactics include ad hominem smears and putting words in my mouth, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.

Any comment is based on what things "seem like" to that person based on the facts; that is assumed with any comment. I cited you correctly. Your assertions are hypocritical.

Leaving out the words "sounds like" turns it from a supposition to an assertion. The two are not the same. Yet another example of how you're twisting the things I've actually said to make them mean what you want them to mean.

Typical.

Imagine my surprise.

And it's really rich that you're accusing me of sophistry when your posts are riddled with personal attacks, deliberate twisting of my words, and misquoting me.

I defy you to point to any statement of mine where I expressed approval of the way Trump is handling the situation on the border, or any situation at all, for that matter. I defy you to show your work on my post being filled with "rightwing talking points." I posted a story from a reputable news site that provided further information on a topic of discussion. If that updated information doesn't sit well with you, that's not my problem.

As you state in this thread:
"And while I'm here, I'll continue to point out when people rush to judgment absent the facts, which they do quite frequently."  https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=2224617

You falsely claim DUers made opinions on this matter "absent the facts," but then you proceed to ignore the facts we list upon we base our opinions, as is evident in this thread.

You deride DUers as "quite frequently" jumping to connclusions without facts. That is something a right winger would say.

Kindly provide the post where I describe myself as the "self-appointed opinion police." I'll wait.

I'm stating my opinion, which you don't like and are flailing wildly against, so which of us is the opinion police, hmm?

If I stated that DUers made opinions on the matter "absent the facts," then I misspoke. Allow me to clarify now (as I have already done, repeatedly) that I think it's a mistake to come to conclusions without the full facts to hand. I really don't understand why that gets your undies in a twist.

And if you think DUers don't frequently jump to conclusions with very few facts, then you clearly aren't reading threads about officer-involved shootings. When the information at hand is "a cop shot someone" some DUers have already decided that the cop is a racist murderer despite no evidence of that being the case.

Lastly, when one resorts to ad hominem smears like calling someone a right-winger, that just reinforces the notion that you're the one playing progressive gatekeeper, not me.

I hope you realize we will never have the full facts about anything. So, waiting until we have the full facts means we will never be able to comment about anything. We can and must express our opinions regarding facts as we get them, based on those facts. That is all we are doing, and that is the purpose of a discussion board like this. Like I said, if you don't like that, go elsewhere, rather than trying to attack DUers.

You posted an OP in LBN adding a gratuitous paragraph bashing DUers for expressing concerns at the death of a 7 year old in CBP custody. And now you are accusing me of having me of having my "panties in a twist" (adding sexism to your right wing talking points).

Spare me your "clarification." Your posts have shown who you are.

I said you had your "undies" in a twist. Undies is gender-neutral. Nice try, though!

We have very few facts about this matter, and I think forming a conclusion based on very few facts is a bad practice, as I have said over and over and over again. Why that hasn't penetrated your consciousness is, frankly, mystifying.

And if that's your threshold for "bashing" you must have extremely thin skin. It's my opinion, so once again, file it under "Rocks, Tough" if you don't like it.

It is you who can't seem to get something pretty basic through your conscienceness. We will never have all the facts.

And on top of that, it is you who has already concluded the CBP "did the best they could," stated right in your OP.

And it's "consciousness," not "conscienceness." Slow down, take a deep breath, and proofread. Your arguments will be much, much better for it.

It's a pretty lucrative gig, really, so thanks for the extra Christmas presents.

And I think DU readers can read what you said and I said and come to their own (correct) conclusion.

You gotta show your work, just like back in math class. If you assert something, then it's on you to back it up. Accusing someone of something and then refusing to provide any evidence when challenged is bullshit.

Again, I defy you to find any post from me that is pro-Trump or supportive of his policies. Put up or shut up.

A consistent pattern is easily observable to all but the irrational mind oblivious to creating that pattern. Whoever that may be.

Regardless of what you want up, be it puts or shuts.

The rightwing media was all over the CBP lines you are also pushing.
That is a fact.

If you don’t like the facts, you can’t wish them out of existence. And trying to deflect by talking about Trump, while I repeatedly call you out on rightwing talking points, isn’t going to work.

You are echoing rightwing talking points about CBP and this poor father.

get shelter - like they should be doing with 99-44/99% of asylum seekers?

Jail treatment is nowhere as effective as 'free-world' medical treatment.

You took her into custody, so you are responsible. It doesn't matter if a child can advocate for themselves. If you don't want to do your job, then quit.

Until you do, you owe her family millions. It's on you. No different then when a cop puts cuffs on a suspect, who then kicks out the back window of the patrol car. Your going to do a pit stop to the emergency room first.

acted appropriately. Now, what could possibly be suspicious about that statement?

Fact: Whenever you take children who have been crossing a desert for a long time, you accept the responsibility of proper care for those children.

Fact: The first thing you do when confiscating children who have been crossing a desert for a long time, is give them water, at a minimum. A minimum. Otherwise, I would call it reckless endangerment or negligence.

At this point, the facts are nebulous and an investigation has yet to take place. If the child's father has no complaints about their treatment, that goes a long way towards mitigating my concerns here. The investigation will determine the rest, and if someone erred through negligence, callousness, or malice, they should be called to account for it.

Until then, any assertion beyond that is conjecture and surmise. Some people are just chomping at the bit to blame CBP with little to nothing to go on. The way people so quickly rush to judgment is, in my view, damaging and counterproductive. People seem to have forgotten that sometimes awful things happen and no one is at fault... but everyone wants someone to blame. That mindset is not helpful.

So it was the reporting. I believe, but can't be sure since I don't remember, the source of those facts. I thought it was the CPB itself.

I don't want to blame CPB, if they didn't do anything wrong. Unfair of you to characterize people's reactions to what was REPORTED. It's not as if they assumed the facts.

It was reported she died of dehydration and had been days crossing the desert without water. And that CPB had not given her water, when they picked her up. That is in and of itself negligence, on the face of things. No jumping to conclusions.

But now it's being reported that she had not been days crossing the desert, only 90 minutes after a dropoff in Mexico. Quite a difference.

The mindset that everyone wants someone innocent to hang for a tragedy is not helpful.

I said everyone wants someone to hang. I don't think most people care much for innocence or guilt, sadly. They just want someone to point at and say, "It's all their fault." People seem to have forgotten that sometimes bad things happen and they are beyond the power of mortals to change or stop.

If, after an investigation, it is determined that Officer So-And-So should have called for a life flight earlier than he did, then that's something that can be acted upon, and Officer So-And-So should answer for his conduct. If it's determined that nothing they did would have saved the child, then punishing people for something they couldn't change is the very definition of unfair.

As for the reporting, we all know that news outlets will stumble all over one another to be first in breaking the news, and accuracy is sometimes a casualty of that. The fellow who was pilloried in the media over the 1996 Olympics bombing, Richard Jewell, could tell you a bit about that, were he still alive.

I feel like people should know by now that initial reports are fluid, and only an investigation will get to the bottom of it. Rushing to judgment and parceling out blame when very little is known about an incident is a bad habit, and I feel no guilt for pointing that out.

Your headline jumps to worse conclusions than the posts you are attacking. The headline echoes what I have heard from several rightwing pro-Trump sites today.

Also, you're not even correct about him being imprisoned. Did you even read the article? Here:

The father has been staying at Annunciation House, a shelter for migrants in El Paso, since December 9, said Ruben Garcia, the Annunciation House director, at a news conference.

If you think CNN is a rightwing pro-Trump site, that's just laughably absurd.

It is your gratuitous commentary in your OP that echoes what right wingers are saying about this incident, not CNN.

You want us to reserve judgment until all the facts are in following an investigation, but there is no independent investigation going on. That is why the family has called for an independent investigation.

There are plenty of troubling facts that we know right now, and we have a right to make a judgment about them, just like you are making a judgment about them.

Ahhh, so my commentary is "gratuitous" but everyone else is free to have an opinion. I see. Who's playing opinion police again?

If there isn't an independent investigation, then that'll confirm that something nefarious, or at least negligent, went on, and I'll thoroughly condemn CBP for declining to allow such an investigation and engaging in a cover-up. As it is, any such condemnation would be premature, in my view.

I really don't understand why you are so desperately flailing around and attacking me simply because I'm not willing to condemn CBP on incomplete information and think others should show similar restraint.

I guess because I don't agree with you on this particular issue, I must be a secret right-winger, huh? If I deviate from your view even an iota, it must be because I'm insufficiently pure in my progressive credentials, is that it?

"Who's playing opinion police again? "

Most likely, the same one alleging the unsupported statement... "but of course, everyone just can't wait to play the Blame Game."




But I get it... holding others to a higher standard than we hold ourselves to is a really efficient way to feel more self-righteous. now, go for the twofer, and rationalize it as something else. Premature, indeed...

I've got to admit, I expected to see you long before now. And your contribution was, unsurprisingly, about as worthwhile as I expected it would be. Which is to say, worth about as much as a fart in a windstorm.

If you think there are not enough facts to make a comment about CBP actions, then just say that, instead of attacking DUers.

There is no independent investigation now and there is no indication CBP intends to have one, just an internal review. We have plenty of facts to comment on now and are justified in condemning CBP actions to date, based on the facts. We are not "flailing." We are expressing our opinions based on facts.

I have said exactly that, multiple times. And you just can't seem to accept that my opinion differs from yours, and so you continue to flail away, including ad hominem smears and attributing to me words which never passed my keys.

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnd once again, if there is not an investigation, then I'll condemn the obvious cover-up. Until then, I'm reserving judgment. If you choose not to do so, go nuts, but don't expect me to applaud you for making a conclusion based on incomplete data.

You are the one who thinks he knows when we have "all the facts." You are the one attacking DUers, accusing them of playing a "game" when all they are doing is expressing their sincere concerns based on the facts we know.

I think it's pretty evident that we have very few facts at this point in time, and until more facts are in hand, parceling out blame is premature. And if my use of the term "Blame Game" is getting under your skin, I can only imagine what other turns of phrase get you all worked up.

You even freak out over typos.

After all, I'm not the one resorting to personal attacks and smears, am I?

See your OP comment, and this: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=2224677

And generally your posts in this thread.

So, is there a reason why you echo rightwing talking points? Do you read Breitbart r the Daily Caller? If not, where did you get this elaborate and largely false information?

Also had no complaints.

It was meant to house 400 kids until they could be sent to sponsors. But Trump is having ICE arrest those sponors when they come forward. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/ice-arrested-170-immigrants-seeking-sponsor-migrant-children-n946621
This has denied sponsors to many of of these children, at the same time as Trump has vastly increased the number of children detained, to now over 2,300 kids in the Tornillo camp alone. And unlike Theredienstadt, the CBP won't let international humanitarian organizations in to inspect Tornillo, or even let workers there discuss conditions at the camp. https://www.texastribune.org/2018/11/28/tent-city-texas-migrant-children/

Maybe you are offended, but I get the poster's analogy:

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/theresienstadt

It's clearly rhetorical.

And how is it an entirely inapt analogy?

People under duress will say most anything.

So what is it that provokes this response from you?

Judging by its website, it doesn't seem to be a CBP facility, nor does it seem to be affiliated with the federal government. At a guess, I'd say he's staying there while his daughter's death is investigated and while his asylum claim is adjudicated. In any case, it doesn't sound like he's in direct CBP custody at this point, at least that's my reading of the situation.

ETA: Also per the article, he's been there since 9 December, the day after Jakelin died. So it seems like CBP released him to the shelter pretty much right away.

It wasn't any US official who said he had no complaints, it was someone from the Guatemalan consulate. I'd turn a jaundiced eye on a US official claiming to speak for him, for obvious reasons. Someone from his own consulate, who is at least in theory supposed to be his advocate, has no reason to misquote or misrepresent what he said.

Time will tell, I suppose. As I've made abundantly (and repeatedly) clear elsewhere on the thread, I'm withholding judgment on who's to blame for this tragedy, if anyone is, until more facts have come to light.

Nm

have stuff to learn about governance and the security of people in their care. And they are responsible for the wellfare of everyone that crosses the border. Water has been bad at the border site for years. Let us hope it is clean now.