Has U.S. Court of Appeals gone nuts allowing a Muslim woman charged with raising money for a terrorist group to follow her interpretation of Islamic law and therefore refuse to stand during her trial?
A Rochester, Minn., woman who refused to stand when a judge entered the courtroom during her trial last year may have had a religious right to keep her seat, a federal appeals court has ruled.
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a ruling Monday, June 4, threw out 19 of 20 contempt citations that Chief U.S. District Judge Michael Davis had levied against Amina Farah Ali because she wouldn’t rise when court was called to order.
On the first day of her trial on charges of raising money for the terrorist group al-Shabaab, Ali ignored Davis’ order to rise, telling him she interpreted Islamic teachings to mean she didn’t have to stand for anybody.
The judge disagreed, saying that rising was a show of respect to the legal process and that court decorum demanded she stand.
The woman told Davis that the Prophet Muhammad once told a group of followers they didn’t have to honor him by standing. She said that if she didn’t have to rise for the founder of her religion, she didn’t have to rise for anybody….
_______________
Does this court know what idiocy they are peddling. JAJ48@AOL.COM
