Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Aafia Siddiqui Loses Appeal on 86-Year Prison Sentence

Yet to this day, if you go to a Muslim parade or rally, you're likely to see posters, banners, or literature demanding Siddiqui's release.

NEW YORK: A US appeals court on Monday upheld the conviction and 86-year prison sentence of Pakistani neuroscientist Aafia Siddiqui for shooting at FBI agents and soldiers after her arrest in Afghanistan.

The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in New York said a lower court judge had not erred in allowing Siddiqui, 40, to testify in her own defense at trial and in allowing certain evidence against her.

Siddiqui, whose conviction was widely criticized in Pakistan, was sentenced by US District Judge Richard Berman in September 2010. She was convicted by a New York federal jury of attempted murder, armed assault and other charges.

She was arrested in July 2008 by Afghan police, who said she was carrying two pounds (900 grams) of sodium cyanide and crumpled notes referring to mass casualty attacks and New York landmarks.

The day after her arrest, she grabbed an M-4 rifle in her interrogation room and started shooting while yelling “death to America,” the trial jury heard.

No US agents or soldiers were hit, but Siddiqui was shot and wounded in response, according to US prosecutors.

Siddiqui’s defense lawyers, three of whom were paid by the Pakistani government, argued that their client had shot at the US officials in a panic and said the crime lacked any connection to terrorism. (Continue Reading.)


Kaffir_Kanuck said...

Oh David, don't you know all would be Jihadists who get caught are innocent due to some kind of mental defect?

Happy Election day!

Stormcrow_realoaded said...

I do not know the entire circumstances of this womans case, but I can tell you now without going into any explicit detail, that if she did get hold of a rifle in the interogation room, she is not directly responsible for doing so. The soldier whose weapon that was used, is at fault here, plus anybody in that room with her, was of such an incompetent nature, they all should face court martial, for allowing these circumstances to come to pass. Whether she got to the weapon and used it or not, is not the question. The question here is why did they allow for this eventuality to occur? We are dealing with the question of grown men against a woman. They are resposible for their weapons at all times and if they cannot keep in possession of them, then they do ot deserve to be entrusted with one in the first place. I think under the circumstances that she was fixed.