Of course. It isn’t as if he were a right-wing extremist or anything really dangerous like that.
In any case, it is clear from the photographs of him that Rahimi is a devout, observant Muslim, and that, no doubt, was a considerable part of his motivation in planting the bombs. But that almost certainly will not be explored in the courtroom. To do so would be “Islamophobic.”
“Lawyers for bomb suspect say feds falsely linking him to terrorism,” Associated Press, July 21, 2017:
NEW YORK — Lawyers for a man accused of plotting bomb attacks in New Jersey and New York say the government is doing everything it can to wrongfully portray their client as a terrorist.
The lawyers said in papers filed in Manhattan federal court Thursday that prosecutors plan to show jurors inflammatory evidence against Ahmad Khan Rahimi at his October trial, including letting them hear that he owned a gun, shot at police and has been charged in New Jersey with attempted murder.
Prosecutors responded in court papers, saying “the defendant’s murderous efforts to flee, less than 48 hours after the bombings in Manhattan, are probative of his consciousness of guilt.”
Defense lawyers noted Rahimi has not been charged with a federal crime of terrorism.
Rahimi, an Afghanistan-born U.S. citizen, has pleaded not guilty to charges alleging he detonated a pipe bomb near a Seaside Park, New Jersey, charity run and planted two pressure cooker bombs in Manhattan last September. A bomb in Manhattan’s Chelsea neighborhood went off, injuring 30 people.
Federal prosecutors said evidence defense lawyers want excluded from trial is important.
“The defendant’s interest in jihad, terrorist organizations, terrorist attacks, and other terrorists, is probative of his motive, intent, and plan to commit the charged crimes,” prosecutors said.
The defense said it is particularly bothered by government plans to show jurors emails seized from Rahimi’s electronic accounts that attach video links showing people with headscarves, an assault rifle and a rocket-launcher, and other links to a criminal complaint and “The Book of Jihad.”
“The government’s insistence on introducing these three plainly inadmissible emails can only be explained by the government’s desire to cherry-pick the most inflammatory evidence to force-fit the ‘radicalization’ theory it has drummed up to make its case more ‘compelling, dramatic, and seductive,'” the lawyers wrote…..
Eur says
Of course he is not a terrorist, he is a being of light.
mortimer says
Koran 8.60 “TURHIBUNNA” (terrorize them).
Who? Me? Couldn’t be.
somehistory says
The lawyers have no integrity. Each defendant has the legal right to a defense, and the attorney is to do his/her best. But these guys are acting way beyond that by claiming the evidence that he committed acts of terror…shooting at police who were trying to bring him in for planting and denoting bombs…is *inflammatory* in order to get it thrown out before the jury can see it.
That is evil at work. If they get him off with this, he will be more successful next time and their hands will be bloody.
mohamonator says
No, Rahimi’s lawyers are doing their best by trying to defend a challenging client. As loathsome and probably guilty as he is, he deserves a competant defense against the charges leveled against him. This is not Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or Turkey.
With any luck, he will be convicted, and the fact that his attorneys took all possible measures to defend him will lessen the chance of his conviction being overturned on appeal, and ensure that he spends a long time in Club Fed with his Bureau of Prisons issue prayer rug.
somehistory says
There are lawyers and then there are lawyers. I’ve known several. Some are people of integrity. Others…not so much. I stand by my comment. Evil at work.
John Forbes says
What MUST always be remembered is that you BUY legal advice & honesty does not always come with he purchase !!
mortimer says
The fairness of the trial does credit to the American judicial system. Hopefully, the prosecutor and judge will have the KNOWLEDGE of the JIHAD DOCTRINE required to UNDERSTAND the MOTIVE FOR JIHAD.
All Muslims are jihadists…verbal jihadists…lying about jihad…but less than 1% of Muslims are MILITANT, VIOLENT jihadists.
Repeat: ALL MUSLIMS are VERBAL JIHADISTS.
Donald R Laster Jr says
I would use the statements
“All Muslims/Islamics engage in Jihad. Some of the Jihad engaged in involves violence and terror, and some of involves verbal deception.”
Many of the leaders of the Islamic theocracy are deadly honest about what they are doing. And many people don’t want to believe them. The National Socialist did the same thing and people did not believe them as well.
Robeaver says
And cost American tax payers 60 thousdand a year, every year he is in prision. And he will radicalize countless others in Jihad. But he will have his own Iman, courtesy of taxpayers again. And a gym and weight room so he can be fit and strong when he gets out to continue jihad. Just watch.
Donald R Laster Jr says
The evidence says he is a terrorist or the lawyers would not be trying to get it omitted. Then add in all Islamics are required to wage war (i..e Jihad) against the non-Islamic and he has at least 2 strikes against him. Until people start dealing what Islam is – a foreign government at war with everyone – and its citizens are required to do – wage war and force their government on everyone – no one will be safe. Terrorism is just one the tools Islamic uses in this 1400 year old war.
Oliver says
Any chance that there will be a patriot in prison? And kill this piece of Afghani crap?
Or, why not deport him? Drop him over Kabul ( without a parachute).
mohamonator says
Well, none of his victims died, fortunately, so he is ineligible for the death penalty. Given the severity of the offenses and especially the use of explosives, Rahimi is likely to wind up at ADX Florence, “the Alcatraz of the Rockies”. If so, contact with other inmates will be all but non-existent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence
JP Bernhardt says
What’s a terrorist?
Would you please define what it take for an attack to be classified as a terrorist attack?
Peter says
Verily, he was just a devout Muslim gardener planting seeds of Islamic supremacism and trying to uproot infidel weeds from Allah’s blessed green garden meant only for the faithful.
Michael Copeland says
What do lawyers know about the jihad doctrine? It is not part of Law School.
Remember when American tourist Darlene Horton was stabbed to death last August in London? It was a random jihad attack by a teenage knifeman, a Somali muslim from Norway, who wore a “crazed smile”. When arrested, he was muttering “Allah, Allah, Allah”, and had a pamphlet entitled “Fortress of the Muslim” in his pocket. The lawyers knew what mattered: the judge was told that these two details were “not considered relevant to the attack”.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/06/teenager-zakaria-bulhan-admits-russell-square-killing-of-us-tourist-in-stabbing-spree
Lee Rigby’s killer had a carefully researched list of Koran verses that commanded and justified the killing. “We are forced by the Koran in Sura at-Tawba”, he explained to the camera, handing over the list. Nonetheless the judge, with ABSOLUTELY NO TRAINING in Islam’s doctrines, confidently assured him that his actions were “a betrayal of Islam”, thereby showcasing his judicial ignorance. The killers were understandably furious, and howled with protest. The media reported this as if it simply showed how crazy they are. Reporters, likewise, have ABSOLUTELY NO TRAINING in Islam’s doctrines, though they could easily learn from the internet. They are negligent.
Voytek Gagalka says
Always (pretending) to be innocent! ALWAYS! Perhaps in perverse of their ideology known as “Islam,” they are: they despise kuffar and they are never guilty when they kill them.
Michael Copeland says
“So you did not slay them, but it was Allah Who slew them”,
Koran 8:17
Monty says
He is not a terrorist. He is a Muslim just going about his normal, murderous endeavor to violently enforce the religion of peace.
Jack Holan says
ROBERT Who is paying for these experienced and specialized attornies. It’s surely not the client and these are not Public Defender types or Prp-Bono Attornies looking for fame representing terrorists. Is it CAIR or the Muslim Brotherhood
John says
All you have to do is look at him. A picture is often worth a thousand words. Why do our unelected judges rule that we have to let such people into our country?
Donald R Laster Jr says
Because the Judges are ignoring the US Constitution and the Law. And many of these Judges are not actual judges due to the appointment being fraudulent due to Mr Obama. And then you add what the “Progressives” have been doing to undermine the country. I would recommend people read “Law of Nations”. It is one of the US’s founding documents and covers what a government is supposed to actually do.
gravenimage says
Lawyers for Muslim who planted bombs in NYC and NJ say he isn’t a terrorist
……………….
Uh huh. Unless he was–say–trying to blow the door off a safe or the front off an ATM (which he was not), there could be no other reason save Jihad terrorism for his planting these bombs.
WorkingClassPost says
I don’t know what you guys are complaining about…
It makes me feel so much safer knowing that these were not acts of terrorism, and also, presumably, had nothing to do with islam.