The Bizarre Case Of The Kingston Honour Killing

[burn_this_city]

I'm pretty sure they bugged the family car after they were considered suspects.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I'm pretty sure they bugged the family car after they were considered suspects.

Right, thanks for clarifying - I didn't realize they hadn't been in custody the entire time.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I'm pretty sure they bugged the family car after they were considered suspects.

The evidence collected from bugging the car is probably what done them in. It proved the accused state of mind after the murder and without that I highly doubt the other circumstantial evidence was enough to convict the three accused.

The location where the car felt into the river was very remote, the victim must navigate pass fences, park benchers and picnic table to get there. No one would believe this was a mistake. But without the testimony of the three accused from the bugged van, the most the Crown can get is the son but not the mom and dad.

[darklord700]

“Sir, I did not drown my sisters anywhere.” — Hamed Shafia

Hamed, the son, made the above statement after hearing the verdict. Notice he didn't say "I did not kill" but "I did not drown".

[The Goon]

This article expertly describes just how stupid these murderers were:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2319036/

I feel awful that the young women were murdered, but I'm glad these people made it easy for the police.

[killer_carlson]

I think there is a good opportunity to really make some societal advances in Canada against this kind of honour killing crap. I hope this story continues for a few weeks and really gets dialogue established.

Lets hear from some religious leaders on the thought of honour killings here in Canada and see what they say... People of influence in sharia cultures have a real opportunity to seriously condemn this practice or the idealogue to communities here in Canada.

[killer_carlson]

well I was trying to be polite.

This case confirms the practice occurs here in Canada. THere needs to be a dialogue to ensure it is a single occurance.

[Jets4Life]

Originally Posted by Makarov

You'll note that HPLovecraft has explained the point exactly. Your comment was not rationally connected to the matter being discussed. Therefore, we are left to conclude that it was motivated by something irrational. Considering the facts of this case, the only reasonable conclusion is that your comments were motivated by an irrational fear of Afghan or Muslim culture. This is the definition of xenophobia.

Unless you have some other explanation?

[Just to be clear, I'm certainly not suggesting that you're racist or a bad person.]

Just Google Sharia Law and the father's name. Sorry if it came across as somehow xenophobic, but I was under the impression that they were fanatics, who somehow interpreted one piece of the Sharia Law out of context, and were convinced that killing his daughters would be acceptable. I have to admit I know little about Sharia Law, but I was basing my assumptions on other cases of people doing horrible things, and justifying it by some biblical scripture that was probably taken out of context.

It's not anti-Muslim or Afghan. In 1994, a Jewish soldier shot 30 Palestinians dead in the West Bank after an extremist Orthodox Rabbi suggested God would reward him for his actions. Ditto for the man who assassinated Yitzak Rabin. If you look at Christianity, there are too many examples to cite where fanatics have taken a verse of the Bible out of context, and used it for violent purposes.

So once again I apologize if I had assumed the family had taken a rule from Sharia Law out of context. That is what I initially heard.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by The Goon

This article expertly describes just how stupid these murderers were:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2319036/

I cannot believe how stupid the defendents are starting with them hiring their own Afghan investigator, Hadi.

Hadi's testimony actually did them more harm than good because no one would believe that the son would accidentally hit the death car and saw 4 people die. But he didn't call 911 and instead returned to Montreal right away to "take care of some business". How stupid do you think the jury are to believe that?

This article is bank on. It is hubris and arrognace that done them in.

[CaptainCrunch]

I don't believe that there's anything in Sharia that says that murder or honour killings are ok or justifiable.

Where there's a problem with Sharia law is with its treatment of the credibility of woman and their vale in society.

In a lot of ways its at odds with the overall interpretation of Woman's roles in Islam where they were given much higher standings then for example the ancient interpretations of Christianity before the liberalization of its treatment of woman.

And I don't want to get into an argument with you Jet's for Life, but your examples are exactly that fanatics creating their own interpretation of their religion. In the case of Islam, a lot of the radical beliefs such as the mis-interpretation of Jihad, the Burka, the use of suicide bombers and the slaughter came mostly out of tribal re-interpretations in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and other Pan-African areas where they literally bent the words of Mohammed to suit their political and territorial ambitions.

[killer_carlson]

I am not aware of any text supporting honour killings either.

However somewhere along the way some nut case read into the text an interpretation that supported the entire premise of honour killings. THis needs to be read out - and the sooner the better.

[Sr. Mints]

For the third time today I've logged on, scanned the thread titles, and clicked on this one mistaking it for "... The Klingon honour killing."

Anyway...

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I am not aware of any text supporting honour killings either.

However somewhere along the way some nut case read into the text an interpretation that supported the entire premise of honour killings. THis needs to be read out - and the sooner the better.

I don't know if you watch the Simpsons. But they had the one episode about Gay Marriage and Lisa confronted Rev Lovejoy about it and asked him to show her where it was in the bible and he responded. Somewhere in the back.

I don't believe that religion is the bad thing that people make it out to be, I do firmly believe that like everything else it gets fouled because the truly good con men work their way into power and then change things to their beliefs and profit.
.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

What about the non religious pain in the asses that don't fit into society well? They are allowed?

If only there was a simple test!

mind you we ban the ones with a criminal record or to stupid to get a decent education.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Kinda goes against everything this country was founded on and agrees with.

But them dudes from Jamaica seem to be causing problems maybe we need to start restricting based on nationality.

I thought this country was founded on the principle that a railway would get built to the west if everyone signed on?

[REDVAN]

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

You are reading way too much into my statement. Do you dispute this was a so-called "honor killing?" I have nothing whatsoever against immigrants if they contribute positively to Canadian society. However, if they violate or have no respect for our laws, they should be deported.

I don't want to open up another can of worms, but I can't let this part go.

I am not sure of the immigration statuses of these murderers, I will assume they are Canadian since I want to make a few points. Why would we deport them? They broke our law, they will be punished by what is prescribed in our laws.

We have found them guilty, and they will be punished by the laws of their country: Canada.

If you think we should deport Canadian citizens for committing crimes in their country of nationality (again, ie/ Canada), then you are being xenophobic. Why they should be sent away? What makes one citizen less worthy of rights than another? Please read the charter and let me know where it says there is more than one legal type of citizen.

No matter how much I disagree with these murderers reasonings, be they religious or not, I can not under any circumstance, agree that we should deport Canadian citizens for breaking the law. To me, using religion as an excuse is no different from saying "I was drunk" or "It just happened"- this does not excuse you from breaking the law, although it might give some normal people an insight into why you did what you did.

As a umpteenth generation Canadian (with a generous mixing of various immigrants over the centuries my family has been in North America), I would say that we need to snuff out thoughts like yours just as much as we need to stop these sort of crimes from being committed. Don't forget, your ancestors were once immigrants with strange beliefs. The only difference is that they followed the law (presumably), whereas these new citizens did not.

[Super Nintendo Chalmers]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

I don't want to open up another can of worms, but I can't let this part go.

I am not sure of the immigration statuses of these murderers, I will assume they are Canadian since I want to make a few points. Why would we deport them? They broke our law, they will be punished by what is prescribed in our laws.

We have found them guilty, and they will be punished by the laws of their country: Canada.

They were granted landed immigrant status in 2007. They're not Canadian citizens.

[REDVAN]

Originally Posted by Super Nintendo Chalmers

They were granted landed immigrant status in 2007. They're not Canadian citizens.

Ok, kick them out then.

Seriously.

That changes everything.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

Just Google Sharia Law and the father's name. Sorry if it came across as somehow xenophobic, but I was under the impression that they were fanatics, who somehow interpreted one piece of the Sharia Law out of context, and were convinced that killing his daughters would be acceptable. I have to admit I know little about Sharia Law, but I was basing my assumptions on other cases of people doing horrible things, and justifying it by some biblical scripture that was probably taken out of context.

It's not anti-Muslim or Afghan. In 1994, a Jewish soldier shot 30 Palestinians dead in the West Bank after an extremist Orthodox Rabbi suggested God would reward him for his actions. Ditto for the man who assassinated Yitzak Rabin. If you look at Christianity, there are too many examples to cite where fanatics have taken a verse of the Bible out of context, and used it for violent purposes.

So once again I apologize if I had assumed the family had taken a rule from Sharia Law out of context. That is what I initially heard.

I googled "Shafia AND sharia law" as you suggested and the first two results were from the following totally illegitimate websites:

www.shariafreeusa.com
www.nosharia.ca

There were a few results from legitimate media sources on the first page however. I think that you raise a good point though: it largely is the media to blame for the sort of hysteria over "sharia law" that has resulted in several US states enacting legislation prohibiting sharia law from being enforced by their courts.

In any event, the Shafias may well have found some justifiication for their actions in some extreme interpretation of sharia law (although the Shafias have never admitted to actually killing their daughters, so have never themselves made this sort of justification for their actions.) However, its worth noting that the Shafias are Pashtuns, a society with a deeply held patriarchic tribal culture. Any interpretations of "sharia law" held by the Shafias were more a product of this culture, in combination with some sort of socoiopathy, than anything else.

To me, the real issue is just this idea that sharia law (and muslim culture in general) is some threat to Canadian society and the Canadian justice system. Its not. Sharia law was never an issue at this trial. Even Pashtun culture was never an issue at this trial. The only issue was whether or not the Shafias committed an offence pursuant to the Criminal Code of Canada. The jury decided that they did and they have been punished to the fullest extent possible in Canadian law. The system worked just as it should.

Anyway, thank you for your thoughts. I apologize if I came across as an #######. I've done work with Calgary's muslim community in the past so this is a bit of a sensitive topic for me.

Incidentally, I know one of the two Crown Prosecutors who had carriage of this file in Kingston. I would just like to say that this case was a tremendous amount of work, with 7 weeks worth of evidence, and I would like to thank the Crowns, the OPP members who investigated, the trial judge, the witnesses, and the jury members for all of their hard work in ensuring that the justice system did in fact work as it should and these brought these murderers to justice.

[CaramonLS]

Aren't you kind of saying one thing and doing another? Basically inferring that these beliefs are probably part of the Pashtun culture, but then saying that the culture shouldn't be held on trial?

Isn't that kind of dancing around the issue?

I don't really have anything invested in this thread, just found your deduction kind of curious.