| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
And he justified his actions based on Islamic law, including beating his wives (Qur'an 4:34), and forbidding them to leave the house, which Muhammad endorsed according to a hadith quoted in the jurisprudence manual 'Umdat al-Salik (The Reliance of the Traveler):
The husband may forbid his wife to leave the home because of the hadith related by Bayhaqi that the Prophet ... said: "It is not permissible for a woman who believes in Allah and the Last Day to allow someone into her husband's house if he is opposed, or to go out if he is averse" (m10.4).
But many unanswered questions remain. Someone had to know about Mansa Musa Muhummed's activities; why did they not report him for abusing his wives and children, and for welfare fraud? And why didn't anyone take him to task for, as some will certainly allege, misunderstanding his religion so terribly?
"Long-awaited trial begins in case of man accused of imprisoning 3 spouses, 19 children," from SignOnSanDiego, May 5:
MURRIETA – A man starved the 19 children under his roof, beat some of them and their mothers and made the youngsters and two of his three so-called wives virtual prisoners in their own home, a prosecutor told jurors Monday as the defendant's long-delayed trial got under way.
Mansa Musa Muhummed, who was arrested in 1999, faces eight counts of torture – each of which carries a potential life sentence – 11 counts of willful injury to a child, five counts of inflicting corporal injury on a spouse and two counts of false imprisonment.
Marva Boddie, the woman who was legally married to Muhummed under state law – the other two were not – was arrested along with him nine years ago and pleaded guilty in 2000 to one count of willful injury to a child. [...]
Muhummed allegedly kept two of his three so-called wives and 19 children – his and theirs – prisoner in their home, torturing seven of them, prosecutor Julie Baldwin told jurors in her opening statement.
“He would beat their feet ... to the point where they could hardly stand or walk,” she said.
When authorities went into the home in the 49000 block of Sweepstakes Lane on April 6, 1999 – they were alerted by someone who managed to escape and go for help – some of the children were underweight, undernourished and stunted because of lack of food, the prosecutor said.[...]
One of Muhummed's so-called wives, Laura Cowan, testified that in 1995, Muhummed and his 13 children and Boddie moved into the San Bernardino condominium where she lived with her infant daughter and toddler son. Her husband had just recently gone to prison.
She tried, but failed to keep her family's restaurant and bookstore businesses going, and everyone moved to a house in Perris, Cowan said.
“In the beginning, it was still good,” she said.
But soon, she said, she saw a different side of the defendant.
“His temperament, the way he treated the children, his demeanor started to change,” Cowan testified.
Boddie, the defendant's legal wife, was already on welfare and Cowan said she had to go on public assistance, as well. The defendant did not work or contribute to the combined family's finances, she said.
He convinced Cowan that they could wed, under Islamic law, because her own husband was away, she said. The moment she married the defendant, he forced her to close all her bank accounts and credit cards and assumed control of her finances and her life, she testified.
“He said I no longer had outside affairs,” Cowan said. “I was told that nothing else I would do alone.”
The defendant also forbade Cowan to work outside the home or go to school, she said, and refused her money for the children's clothing, personal items such as toothbrushes and hair products. He bought everything for the household himself, ruling the home with an iron hand, Cowan said. [...]
“I wanted to take my children and move,” said Cowan, who said she was Muslim when she became involved with the defendant but had never heard of some of the rules he imposed on her, in the name of Islam and Sharia. Cowan said she became an object of his physical abuse.
Posted by Marisol at May 6, 2008 1:29 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Well, isn't that special. He and that guy from Austria can set up a little colony together.
Posted by: carpediadem![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 6, 2008 2:46 AM
"Cowan, who said she was Muslim when she became involved with the defendant but had never heard of some of the rules he imposed on her, in the name of Islam and Sharia"
Duh!
Posted by: Lili at May 6, 2008 3:59 AM
One wonders whether the mass media will report this--and whether these people are legal immigrants. Where is the outrage?
Posted by: lonewolf at May 6, 2008 5:35 AM
"Cowan, who said she was Muslim when she became involved with the defendant but had never heard of some of the rules he imposed on her, in the name of Islam and Sharia."
I guess this "muslim" never actually read the koran. Big mistake on her part.
Posted by: Tapper at May 6, 2008 6:44 AM
As has been noted on this site many times, any western woman who voluntarily "marries" a muslim man needs her head read.
And why has this case been dragging on since 1999?
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at May 6, 2008 6:58 AM
Before you marry that Muslim man of your dreams, read the Qur'an.
All those suras are used as the basis for Sharia Law. (along with the Hadith and Sira) If the Qur'an is too hard to read, just pick up a newspaper. Although all the bureaucrats in DC are trying as hard as they can, not everything has a warning label on it.
Posted by: tanstaafl at May 6, 2008 8:24 AM
So many useful idiots, so many non islamic ignoramaces ready to be taken for a ride by sweet talking muslim. these women are have gone through our education system without being taught the real islam, the islam of intolerance inequality and deceit.
Posted by: desidude at May 6, 2008 8:34 AM
"Cowan, who said she was Muslim when she became involved with the defendant but had never heard of some of the rules he imposed on her, in the name of Islam and Sharia."I guess this "muslim" never actually read the koran. Big mistake on her part. -Posted by: Tapper
She tried, but failed to keep her family's restaurant and bookstore businesses
It's even worse, SHE had a bookstore . . .AND DID NOT READ THE ENTIRE KORAN.
I have no sympathy for this woman as she simply suffers the consequences of her poor life choices. The children should be spared any further fallout from those choices.
Throw the book at Marva and Muhummed and the other two so called 'wives'.
Posted by: miira at May 6, 2008 8:37 AM
"“In the beginning, it was still good,” she said.
But soon, she said, she saw a different side of the defendant."
how long did this take? two weeks? and just why would a would take up with a man who already has a wife and 13 rugrats. Did she not take a look at this mans living conditions or notice the condition of the other children? Did she not consult her husband in prison (oops, He too, is probably a Muslim). She says she was already a Muslim but then she says she was unaware of those Muslim rules dictated by the new husband..Oh I see, an uneducated Muslim woman...just the kind of woman a Muslim man likes.
It appears the Muslim man turned this woman (who had two businesses) into a slave..it is the Islamic way, don't ya know! Total domination of the woman..It is in the Qur'an. You would think A Muslim woman would already know this.
People make bad decisions all the time, marrying a Muslim man rates near the top.
and I agree, Why has this case been dragging on since 1999? Oh, I forgot this is in California, probably within the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court..one of the worst courts in the US. (one with a history of terrible, terrible rulings).
for those single women out there--Do not marry Muslim Men. If you are a Muslim woman, do yourself a favor..when your slavemaster is not at home - read the Qur'an.
at May 6, 2008 8:53 AM
Why has it taken 9 years to go to trial?
Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at May 6, 2008 8:54 AM
Hopefully the prosecution will be robust and this POS will be convicted, setting or affirming precedent for similar cases, which will surely come, so that it's easier for future prosecutions to proceed more quickly. I imagine that had something to do with the delay... trying to make a way through the legal mine fields so a conviction isn't overturned on appeal.
This miserable excuse for a man will soon be, pray God, handed over to his own torturers in the deep, dark belly of the beast where his hands-on counseling will commence without interruption.
May his screams of pain be heard... and ignored. Forever.
Posted by: undaunted at May 6, 2008 9:10 AM
Marry into Islam and give up your natural freedoms and human rights as a 'slave of Allah', ie., to the Muslim man who rules the house with fear and violence. Bad choice, and ignorance is no excuse. Pathetic women, now they are the real victims. Not a religion, but a cult.
Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at May 6, 2008 9:57 AM
Isn't there a clause in the Qur'an that states a man isn't supposed to marry more wives than he can support?
Perhaps he's never read the rulebook, either.
Posted by: Abscedere at May 6, 2008 10:00 AM
Just evil.
To say a "god" has approved of torture, and keeping 19 children imprisoned is evil.
These "men" should try ,one time, to put themselves in the shoes of their family.
But, all in all, I really do not care what they do to one another if they are in their own land....have a ball...but if they are in the West, put him in jail, for a long time.
Posted by: interestinconundrum at May 6, 2008 10:57 AM
"Isn't there a clause in the Qur'an that states a man isn't supposed to marry more wives than he can support?"
Of course there is (see Q4:3). But this is a judgment call to be made solely by the male and therein lies the problem.
The lack of oversight on state assistance to such families is the second part of the story here. One hears quite a bit recently concerning the prosecution of Mormon-style polygamists for alleged child abuse. Moslem polygamists should also come under focused scrutiny, as polygamous marriages seem to be fertile ground for child and spousal abuse as well as welfare fraud. And unlike the Mormons, the Moslem agenda includes a conscious effort to change society through demographics.
Posted by: Chatillon at May 6, 2008 11:02 AM
"Boddie, the defendant's legal wife, was already on welfare and Cowan said she had to go on public assistance, as well. The defendant did not work or contribute to the combined family's finances, she said."
Living off the jizya provided by the kufaar. This is the way Sharia works....the ruling class (moslems) is parasitical on the slave class (us).
Posted by: interestinconundrum at May 6, 2008 11:17 AM
What. A. Dozy Bint. Let's give this woman a two fisted fisking:
One of Muhummed's so-called wives, Laura Cowan, testified that in 1995, Muhummed and his 13 children and Boddie moved into the San Bernardino condominium where she lived with her infant daughter and toddler son. Her husband had just recently gone to prison. Sweet! I can just imagine this conversation: Is it alright if I bring my 13 OTHER kids and other wife to live...in our spacious Amrikan pandominium?
Why am I asking you, shut up and get me some hummus! Three wives, you would think is punishment enough, but nooooooo, he had to spawn! And here is the kicker: they lived on the 49000 block of SWEEPSTAKES LANE! And she closed all her bank accounts, lost her businesses, and went broke and hungry.
Too rich, or not. But thankfully, the muslims have made staying at home a completely portable thing, with tents women can wear all the time! You can leave home without leaving home, now.
This cautionary tale should be whispered into the ears of little girls and young ladies every night before they say their prayers. A stark warning, indeed.
at May 6, 2008 11:20 AM
What. A. Dozy Bint. Let's give this woman a two fisted fisking:
One of Muhummed's so-called wives, Laura Cowan, testified that in 1995, Muhummed and his 13 children and Boddie moved into the San Bernardino condominium where she lived with her infant daughter and toddler son. Her husband had just recently gone to prison. Sweet! I can just imagine this conversation: Is it alright if I bring my 13 OTHER kids and other wife to live...in our spacious Amrikan pandominium?
Why am I asking you, shut up and get me some hummus! Three wives, you would think is punishment enough, but nooooooo, he had to spawn! And here is the kicker: they lived on the 49000 block of SWEEPSTAKES LANE! And she closed all her bank accounts, lost her businesses, and went broke and hungry.
Too rich, or not. But thankfully, the muslims have made staying at home a completely portable thing, with tents women can wear all the time! You can leave home without leaving home, now.
This cautionary tale should be whispered into the ears of little girls and young ladies every night before they say their prayers. A stark warning, indeed.
at May 6, 2008 11:22 AM
Nothing to do with mohammedanism.
It's a cultural thing.
Everybody does it.
Posted by: joeblough at May 6, 2008 11:39 AM
From the Press Enterprise.Com site:
http://www.pe.com/localnews/murrieta/stories/PE_News_Local_D_mansa05.3737d9d.html
"Deputies in April 1999 found the women and children, then ages 3 to 6, in an unheated garage within a gated community in the foothills southeast of Temecula, according to sheriff's officials."
A gated community. With guards?
No one noticed anything unusual?
And how did the self-employed Richard Boddie and his three wives afford such a place (a three car garage and all)?
"...19 children, then ages 8 months to 25 years."
A twenty five year old 'child' submitted to this?
"Muhummed, whose birth name is Richard Boddie, told authorities he is a Muslim and his faith allows him to have more than one wife, according to court records."
In this case, Dick, the filthy kuffar have passed rules which make haram what Islam makes halal.
Any responses from the San Diego Muslim community during the nine years that Dick has been in jail?
Didn't find any.
Posted by: PRCS at May 6, 2008 1:17 PM
"And why has this case been dragging on since 1999?"
WHY?
That woman must have been a retard.
at May 6, 2008 1:17 PM
“I wanted to take my children and move,” said Cowan, who said she was Muslim when she became involved with the defendant but had never heard of some of the rules he imposed on her, in the name of Islam and Sharia.
I wonder if this harrowing experience changed her perception of the real Islam, or will she continue to live in her utopian delusions about Islam, only to fall prey to yet another “misunderstander” of the religion of peace and tolerance.
In particular, I would like to know if "in the name of Islam and Shria" were the victim's words, or were they the biased "contribution" of the reporter/editor who toes the prevalent politically correct line?
Posted by: US_infidel at May 6, 2008 2:17 PM
You have to be a really special type of stupid to be female in America and choose to be Muslim.
You asked for Islam, you got Islam in spades, honeybunch!
at May 6, 2008 3:03 PM
"You asked for Islam, you got Islam in spades, honeybunch!"
I can has izlam?
Posted by: Tapper at May 6, 2008 4:37 PM
If any so-called Christian did anything even remotely similar to this, ALL Christian leaders would publically and very loudly and clearly denounce the scumbag for living like a scumbag.
However, there is not a peep from any Muslim leader about this, or any other, atrocity committed by a Muslim, and justified by the teachings of Islam.
The deafening silence of the Muslim leaders speaks volumes about what Islam is really like -- a scumbag religion.
Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at May 6, 2008 4:50 PM
Notice that the Muslim community and their leaders are silent on this. That's because they encourage this behavior.
Reason #1 not to marry a Muslim:
They treat their wives like Shit!
Sorry for the profanity.
Posted by: Mystical Time Traveler at May 6, 2008 5:52 PM
Notice that the Muslim community and their leaders are silent on this. That's because they encourage this behavior.
Reason #1 not to marry a Muslim:
They treat their wives like Shit!
Sorry for the profanity.
Posted by: Mystical Time Traveler at May 6, 2008 5:52 PM
Sorry for the double post. Having computer troubles again.
Posted by: Mystical Time Traveler at May 6, 2008 5:53 PM
Anyone know what to do if one suspects that some people are in a polygamous relationship? Is there some govermental agency that should be contacted?
Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at May 6, 2008 5:57 PM
"They treat their wives like Shit!
Sorry for the profanity.
Posted by: Mystical Time Traveler"
even worse, at least they clean the s*** from their arse every once in a while.
Posted by: pulsar182 at May 6, 2008 6:28 PM
"Deputies in April 1999 found the women and children, then ages 3 to 6, in an unheated garage within a gated community in the foothills southeast of Temecula, according to sheriff's officials."
I'm familiar with that area. It's pretty exclusive, known to the locals as Wine Country.
http://www.temeculawines.org/map.asp
at May 6, 2008 6:34 PM
I know why this case hasn't gotten to trial in 9 years. It's in multie-cultie Californicatia. The judges were pondering that if they're going to make shack-ups, adultery, sodomy, and, coming to a schoolyard near you, pederasty, legal, they were wondering if they really had any grounds to go after Dickie Moe. Further, they knew damn well that if they went after this family, their careers would be ruined by a single cry of "RACISM!"
Posted by: Kepha at May 6, 2008 7:10 PM
That woman must have been a retard.
Posted by: Dumbo
Yeah, Dumbo. To be anti-jihadist we should all start calling developmentally challenged people "retard"
Posted by: skevin at May 6, 2008 9:23 PM
Welfare is Jizya.........
Will Americans be absolved from welfare fraud when all of the illegals are absolved by the new president? That would include these loonie toons. It doesn't matter which one is elected, they all want to provide amnesty for those who disrespect the law. Are we supposed to believe the government will be able to do background checks on all of the non-citizens, especially from terrorist-supporting countries?
Can I cheat on my taxes? Afterall, I'm working hard and just trying to support my family.......
Posted by: lafn at May 7, 2008 1:42 AM
Isn't there a clause in the Qur'an that states a man isn't supposed to marry more wives than he can support?
Perhaps he's never read the rulebook, either.
Posted by: Abscedere at May 6, 2008 10:00 AM
Well the stupid infidel welfare system was "supporting" them, or him anyway. What filth we have allowed to slither into our society. Pure, unadulterated FILTH! One can only imagine the depth of maladjustment and psychological damage the poor children have suffered at the hands of these animals, and they will one day be unleashed on society, probably permanently scarred.
Posted by: Susanp at May 7, 2008 1:59 AM
Yeah, Dumbo. To be anti-jihadist we should all start calling developmentally challenged people "retard"
In Dumbo's defense, we don't know that the woman is "developmentally challenged". Maybe she's just dirt stupid. It's OK to say that, isn't it? That she's as dumb as a shoe? I'm assuming that is what a "retard" is. For a person to be actually retarded, there has to be a physiological basis for the retardation. Some people are just really, really dumb-ass but not retarded. That's what I think Dumbo meant by "retard". Calling people out on PC violations is a self-righteous and self-aggrandizing act when it is clear that the person is not refering to truly retarded (yes, we are allowed to use that word) people. They are not developmentally challenged because there is no way that they can "beat" the physiology, it's not a challenge, it's a disability. If it turns out that the woman was in fact a truly mentally disabled person that makes this crime even more horrific than it already is.
at May 8, 2008 12:38 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dhimmi Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)