Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Khalid Adem Has Been Convicted

Khalid Adem was convicted today and sentenced to ten years in prison for performing a female genital mutilation on his little girl.

Khalid AdemA verdict was reached Wednesday afternoon in the case of a Gwinnett County man accused of mutilating his daughter.

After less than three hours of deliberations, a jury made up of seven women and five men decided that Khalid Adem is guilty on charges of cruelty to a child and aggravated battery.

Now that the trial is over, I can say that both Dymphna and I think this guy was railroaded. The most likely scenario is that he knew about the “circumcision”, and may even have suggested it, but did not perform it. Men in Ethiopia never perform this operation; it is always done by the women. This is a travesty.

See Dymphna’s earlier posts for more on this sad affair.

Update: Fausta has reminded me that Mr. Adem was not convicted under the female genital mutilation law, which was passed after his crime was committted, but under a previously existing child battery law.

Dymphna, of course already knew this — I should have run it by her first!

Thanks, Fausta.


heroyalwhyness said...

I cry no tears for this man. Now will the state go after the mom and grandma as well?

The mom, dad and maternal grandma all have blood on their hands and none should retain custody.

Castrate and deport them all.

Panday said...

In a patriarchal culture, wouldn'the have been the approving voice in his family? I doubt it was done without his knowledge, and I'm willing to bet that point was brought up in the trial.

No Apology said...

I agree. It sounded like the daughter was coached. And the mother never noticed the scarring? Not bloodly likely. The jury sent a message to Islamists that this behavior will not be tolerated in America. Good, but the defense was weak, and let this man down. Adem may be culpable, but don't think he performed the clitoridectomy. He will probably win on appeal. If it is appealed.

Baron Bodissey said...

I don't think this man is innocent; I doubt the act occurred without his knowledge and consent.

But justice was not served. At least half of the perpetrators have escaped scot-free.

His co-conspirator has become a darling of the feminist left, crusading against what she herself escaped punishment for colluding in.

As I said: a travesty.

Beach Girl said...

No apology - I'm not sure that is the message the jury sent. I think the jury sent the message that the women get off scot-free. Why didn't the prosecution charge the women? We are way behind on understanding the cultural incursion into our country and the primitive/barbaric nature of people like these women.

Simply put, American juries as well as judges will fall into the trap of siding against the man in cases involving a minor child no matter the charge whether he is black, white, pink, purple, Muslim, Christian, or Jew. I don't know if it is because we have been polluted by political correctness or not, but in domestic cases which this at its heart is - mutiliation is the only charge the prosecution thought it could win on - men don't have even the presumption of innocence. I've seen it and the damage that is caused.

The women should be charged as accomplices at the very least but that will never happen. Wouldn't hold my breath for him to win on appeal. This man is looking at a long jail term and maybe even longer than the 10 years when all is said and done - how? In some states they can argue that he's a danger to the community and cart him off to a mental institution for the rest of his life.

Had the prosecution sent the message to Islamists, the women would be in jail too. What the prosecution did was say that if you are a Muslim woman and you want to get out of the marriage, keep the children, and get the man's resources if he has any, if all else fails, try this ploy.

Frank said...

This is a classic case of feminism meeting and defering justice. A strong message was needed but the wrong message was sent.

It is doubly dangerous, in that western women have a virtually free ride in western courts, but are used to it. Islamic women are not used to it, and the sudden knowledge that an exculpatory lie is not only looked for but welcome will do far more damage.

Ultimately the backlash will do women more harm than good...on both sides of the veil.

Beach Girl said...

You have that right, ScottSA. It won't do Western men any good either. Remember the days when in ugly divorces the wife would scream "sexual child molestation" and everyone would go - gasp! Well, these women have just lowered the bar to include "sexual mutilation". These women probably wanted custody so that they could get all kinds of benefits (aka your and my tax dollars).

Our one-size-fits-all multiculturalism and cultural moral equivalency is sowing seeds that we cannot begin to imagine fully. But our elites cannot build communities with gates high enough to protect them from what they have wrought.

dick said...

If he's not guilty of mutilation, he's guilty of conspiracy to mutilate.

Let's hope they get the other perps too. But at least for this guy: justice served.

Fausta said...

One detail,
The law against FGM came into effect after the crime was committed. Adem was pronounced guilty of child abuse, specifically aggravated battery and cruelty to children

GraysonHill said...

I don't know about a lot of this. I've read a number of accounts where men perform the circumcision on their own daughters. Maybe they were all wrong. It's not the same as another man giving your wife or daughter a pap smear. They're your property, ergo, it's your right.

Mike, I don't think you've got all of your reasoning working together.

Let's imagine you're going on a vacation - not planning to live - but vacationing in Saudi Arabia. You - not the house of Saud - are responsible for recognizing the laws. That means you leave your Bible at home and you don't go looking for booze and hookers.

They aren't being dragged into this country. This isn't Greystoke: the Legend of Tarzan. They're coming here on their own volition. Which means they - not us - are ultimately responsible for knowing and obeying the laws. It's irrelevant what their cultures are or were. This is not a global village. It's not Rome at the time of Caesar. But, you know, even when in Rome, you do as the Romans do.

The law does not discriminate between genital mutilation for Islamics and genital mutilation for atheist sadists. How atheist? How sadist? How Islamic? These things are not even definitive labels, much less things we should - or should care - to incorporate into our laws. You cut off a girls clitoris, you go to jail. Personally, I think you should be hanged for that, but that's just me.

We expect EVERYONE who comes here to conform to our secular atheist society. Hell, we expect Native Americans and the Amish to conform to our secular atheist society. It's irrelevant if you're Jewish, Animist, Buddhist, Catholic or Unitarian. You still must conform to the laws, and they apply to all men and women equally.

Yes, multiculturalism created the problem by letting the barbarians in the gates. But that doesn't mean we should stick with a multiculturalist attitude in how we deal with the problem now that we see it.

There's an old story about when the British were in India. A constabulary happens upon the scene where a group of people are about to immolate the wife of a deceased man, as was the custom for some people. The officer calls out for them to put a halt to the situation.

"But this is how we do things in our country," they replied.
"Yes, well in my country," says the Briton, "we hang people for that."

Castrating a girl is evil regardless of where you live - and regardless of where you're from. It's evil in America. It's evil in Sudan. It's evil in Yemen. It's evil in Saud. It's evil in Denmark.

It's not just that we should punish the guy and whoever else is responsible for the heinous act, we should be announcing from the rooftops that countries and cultures that do these things are monstrous and vile. We should be saying, "Islamic cultures are hideous, foul, disgusting, inhuman and horrible." Because it's true.

Snouck said...

"We expect EVERYONE who comes here to conform to our secular atheist society. Hell, we expect Native Americans and the Amish to conform to our secular atheist society. It's irrelevant if you're Jewish, Animist, Buddhist, Catholic or Unitarian. You still must conform to the laws, and they apply to all men and women equally."

laws live in populations. Replace the population and the law will adapt to the population. Written laws are meaningless, unless it conforms to the habits and beliefs of the new population.

If you want to protect US laws, you got to protect and safeguard the population. Otherwise it is a lost battle.

And non-Westerners, all non-Westerners not just Muslims are utterly different from Westerners.

Itonly becomes a problem if you try to mix populations or impose a Western political system on a non-Western population.

Stephen Browne is right on the money.

Westerners have the idiotic idea that the world will conform to their expectations, but what we are seeing everywhere is that Western influence is waning, even in Western lands itself.

The Western self-confidence of Grayson is illusory. Prepare to grow sadder and wiser.