The other day, jury selection took place for the trial of Noor Salman (widow of Omar Mateen, who carried out a terrorist attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando on June 12, 2016). Salman is charged with aiding her husband in support of a terrorist organization (Matten had pledged his allegiance to ISIS) and obstruction of justice.
Potential jurors were questioned on a series of topics, including guns, the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, and 9/11.
One juror was asked if he felt that Islam played a role in the Orlando shooting, to which he replied, “I don’t look at it as a Muslim thing.”
Really, he does not see it as religiously motivated? What does he see it as then? A hate crime? A random act of violence? An act of a mentally ill individual? Apparently he is not aware that Islam condemns homosexuality, including the fact that homosexuals in Muslim countries who hanged or thrown from the rooftops of buildings. And apparently he is not aware that Mateen pledged his allegiance to ISIS.
Another potential juror, after learning that Salman had been to a gun range, stated, “I don’t like shooting. I don’t like guns. I don’t see why people even go there.” She then asked, “Why would she want to do that from the beginning?” and, “What is the purpose of learning to shoot?”
Seriously, she does not know the purpose of gun ranges and learning to shoot? Has she not ever heard of self-defense? Does she not know that some people like to hunt? And, like the other potential juror previously mentioned, she seems unaware that homosexuality is prohibited in Islam, or of Mateen’s pledging allegiance to ISIS.
Both potential jurors are also probably unaware that Salman was trying to be a good Muslim wife by helping her husband, since Islam dictates total obedience from wives towards their husbands, which would include carrying out jihad.
Thus, it seems as though political correctness is taking shape for this trial.
Perhaps the potential juror who does not like guns should take note of this clip from the television series Last Man Standing:
Meanwhile, Michelle Carter (the Massachusetts woman convicted of involuntary manslaughter last year for persuading her boyfriend to commit suicide back in 2014), has appealed her conviction on the grounds that Massachusetts law does not make it clear if the circumstances of the case constitute involuntary manslaughter (i.e., encouraging someone to commit suicide by words alone). In addition, Carter has a new defense team, which includes a lawyer who defended Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnev.
Time will tell how the judicial proceedings will turn out for both women.
image: Excerpted from: https://pixabay.com/en/confused-woman-doubt-female-girl-2385799/
