/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Saudi blood money ruling angers activists



Roasted Cashew
02-04-2013, 04:48 PM
Religious scholar "sentenced to pay blood money to mother after serving short jail term" for daughter's death.



A Saudi man who raped his five-year-old daughter and tortured her to death has been sentenced to pay "blood money" to the mother after having served a short jail term, according to activists.

The man, said to be a religious scholar who is also a regular guest on Islamic television networks, confessed to having used cables and a cane to inflict the injuries, activists from the group Women to Drive said in a statement on Saturday.

Lamia was admitted to hospital on December 25, 2011, with multiple injuries, including a crushed skull, broken ribs and left arm, extensive bruising and burns, the activists said.

They said the father had doubted his daughter Lama's virginity and had her checked up by a medic.

She died last October.

Randa al-Kaleeb, a social worker from the hospital where Lama was admitted, said the girl's back was broken and that she had been raped "everywhere", according to the group.

The activists said that the judge had ruled the prosecution could only seek "blood money and the time the defendant had served in prison since Lama's death suffices as punishment".

Three Saudi activists, including Manal al-Sharif, who in 2011 challenged Saudi laws that prevent women from driving, have raised objections to the ruling.

The ruling is based on national laws that a father cannot be executed for murdering his children, nor can husbands be executed for murdering their wives, activists said.


http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middle...618362435.html
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
سيف الله
02-05-2013, 02:54 PM
Salaam

If the details are true, then yes this is appalling. imsad
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
02-05-2013, 05:44 PM
I dont know if this is true or not - but all i know is Arabia needs to remove saudi from its name - its ruling and system completely.

saudi sickens me.
Reply

Urban Turban
02-05-2013, 06:10 PM
I give a **** about what the activists say the judge said and such sort of stuff, tell us what the judge said without the intermediaries.

There's already enough media machinery employed across the world to defame Muslims and Islam, even the few leaders / scholars that we have...

Even Al-Azhar hasn't been spared.

Dar al Ulum Deoband is regularly maligned by the Indian media.

To hell with al Jazeera.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Jedi_Mindset
02-05-2013, 06:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Urban Turban
I give a **** about what the activists say the judge said and such sort of stuff, tell us what the judge said without the intermediaries.

There's already enough media machinery employed across the world to defame Muslims and Islam, even the few leaders / scholars that we have...

Even Al-Azhar hasn't been spared.

Dar al Ulum Deoband is regularly maligned by the Indian media.

To hell with al Jazeera.
Bro, there are many corrupt scholars and this case can be used by the media to spread it all over the world. If a non-muslim has done this you wouldnt see it on international media.

I have the same viewpoint about 'Saudi' arabia, the rulers are ehrrr...well they are the only rulers who has named the country after their name.

However this forum has the rule to not speak bad about the house of saud, on one thing i agree with this as this could prevent arguments, but one the other side, the saudi rulers have brought the enemies of Allah into the lands of arabia, estabilish military bases, and most of the oil goes to the west/israel. Not the muslim world. This regime has also been responsible for waging a war on yemen and actively has paid mercenaries, and involved in gun running. With backing of the west.

Anyway enough..lets go ontopic.
Reply

Urban Turban
02-05-2013, 06:59 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
Bro, there are many corrupt scholars and this case can be used by the media to spread it all over the world. If a non-muslim has done this you wouldnt see it on international media.

I have the same viewpoint about 'Saudi' arabia, the rulers are ehrrr...well they are the only rulers who has named the country after their name.

However this forum has the rule to not speak bad about the house of saud, on one thing i agree with this as this could prevent arguments, but one the other side, the saudi rulers have brought the enemies of Allah into the lands of arabia, estabilish military bases, and most of the oil goes to the west/israel. Not the muslim world. This regime has also been responsible for waging a war on yemen and actively has paid mercenaries, and involved in gun running. With backing of the west.

Anyway enough..lets go ontopic.
I agree with you bro (on the Saudi shenanigans) but its between us, an internal problem, we'll have to sort it out between ourselves, but if the kuffar comes between us, I'll put a bullet in their heads rather than our mischief making brothers (the Saudis), there's no denying they (the house of Sauds) have problems.

May Allah guide us all, aameen.
Reply

YusufNoor
02-05-2013, 07:21 PM
:sl:

so...if it is true, release him for the murder...the arrest him and kill him for the rape
Reply

Roasted Cashew
02-05-2013, 09:11 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Urban Turban
To hell with al Jazeera.
To hell with your stupidity.
Reply

Woodrow
02-05-2013, 10:01 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Junon
Salaam

If the details are true, then yes this is appalling. imsad
:wa:

That is what has me puzzled. Why wasn't he tried on the Rape?

At the moment I will just say it is possible we do not know the whole story and have been given just enough information to think bad about. We should not and can not judge others, when we ourselves are not witnesses to the event.

We all may agree a horrible act was committed. But, we are depending on the words of others to make any opinion and not what we have personally seen.
Reply

Roasted Cashew
02-05-2013, 10:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
We should not and can not judge others, when we ourselves are not witnesses to the event.

We all may agree a horrible act was committed. But, we are depending on the words of others to make any opinion and not what we have personally seen.
So, we shouldn't judge USA for its atrocities in Iraq until we personally go and see what has happened there? I would spare myself the ticket and the danger and put my trust on trusted news agencies.
Reply

QueenofHerts
02-06-2013, 12:26 AM
disturbing
Reply

Woodrow
02-06-2013, 07:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Roasted Cashew
So, we shouldn't judge USA for it's atrocities in Iraq until we personally go and see what has happened there? I would spare myself the ticket and the danger and put my trust on trusted news agencies.


We can personally verify and compare news from multiple sources if they are available. But when like in this case we are just looking at one source. we are not certain if there is or is not another side to the story.

We can not personally be a witness to all things, but we can look at multiple sources, including those we disagree with and try to sort out all the facts. but, I believe we need to be open to the possibility that our sources contain error and with hold judgement until we see a preponderance of evidence.
Reply

Urban Turban
02-06-2013, 09:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Roasted Cashew
To hell with your stupidity.
Look my comment was not directed at you, I'm just cynical about the western media and their pet dogs across the world.
Reply

Roasted Cashew
02-06-2013, 01:26 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
We can not personally be a witness to all things, but we can look at multiple sources, including those we disagree with and try to sort out all the facts. but, I believe we need to be open to the possibility that our sources contain error and with hold judgement until we see a preponderance of evidence.
Sure, only if u had said this the first time around!!!
Reply

Karl
02-07-2013, 12:20 AM
Strange ruling. I thought blood money was only paid out to other victims families, not to a wife of the killer. If this man killed a child from another family the father can ask for death penalty, prison, blood money or forgive the man. However, I believe a man can kill his OWN wife and offspring and it is no one else's business except Allah. That's what a Shafi Imam told me.
Reply

Roasted Cashew
02-07-2013, 06:30 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Karl
However, I believe a man can kill his OWN wife and offspring and it is no one else's business except Allah. That's what a Shafi Imam told me.
This is the most absurd thing I have heard so far. Killing anybody innocent is wrong and should be punished! PERIOD!
Reply

Futuwwa
02-07-2013, 06:45 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Karl
Strange ruling. I thought blood money was only paid out to other victims families, not to a wife of the killer. If this man killed a child from another family the father can ask for death penalty, prison, blood money or forgive the man. However, I believe a man can kill his OWN wife and offspring and it is no one else's business except Allah. That's what a Shafi Imam told me.

Reply

ripamaru
02-07-2013, 05:44 PM
This is exactly the kind of thing the propagandists use to defame Islam.
Reply

May Ayob
02-07-2013, 08:15 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Karl
However, I believe a man can kill his OWN wife and offspring and it is no one else's business except Allah. That's what a Shafi Imam told me.
Excuse me, but on what Islamic evidence did the Shafi imam you are speaking of deduce his conclusions?. No where in the Qur'an does it say that a man who kills his wife and children is exempted from jursidical judgement. That doesn't even sound fair at all.
Reply

Amat Allah
02-07-2013, 10:39 PM
if what is written in the main post about the father raping his daughter proven then undoubtedly what the father did to this innocent small child – if it is proven – is a serious crime, for which he deserves to be excuted.

and Shaikh Ibn Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said the same as the following (found the fatwa of Ibn Uthaymeen in Arabic and after searching found another fatwa Alhamdulilah in english here http://www.onislam.net/english/ask-t...g-his-son.html stating the same as what Ibn Uthaymeen said( Rahimahu Allah):


if a father kills his son on purpose, he should be executed for killing him. This is the opinion of imam Malik. Some Muslim scholars, however, see it unimaginable for a father to intentionally murder his, supposed to be beloved and dear, son and therefore a father may not be executed for killing his son as this is most probably not an intentional killing. All in all, a judge could punish the criminal with the proper penalty according to the evidences he has regarding the case.

A father is not expected to kill his child on purpose. It was narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “No father should be killed (executed) for killing his son.” (At-Tirmidhi) Some Muslim scholars, therefore, see it unimaginable for a father to intentionally murder his son.

Accordingly, a suspected father may not be executed for killing his son as this is most probably not an intentional killing.Having said this, it should be also pointed out that Imam Malik has a different opinion: if a father kills his son definitely on purpose without any doubt, he may be executed. The judge, therefore, has the right to afflict the proper punishment on the criminal on the basis of the proofs he has regarding the case.
Allah knows the best

and this is the link of complete fatwa in Arabic of the ruling if a father killed his son/daughter
Reply

titus
02-07-2013, 10:53 PM
We can personally verify and compare news from multiple sources if they are available. But when like in this case we are just looking at one source. we are not certain if there is or is not another side to the story
Daily Mail

Albawaba

The Independent

It seems the main sources for this are the activists and Saudi media. Many reputable companies are also reporting it.
Reply

Karl
02-07-2013, 11:20 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by May Ayob
Excuse me, but on what Islamic evidence did the Shafi imam you are speaking of deduce his conclusions?. No where in the Qur'an does it say that a man who kills his wife and children is exempted from jursidical judgement. That doesn't even sound fair at all.
In the time of Muhammad a man's wife or wives and children were his property as were his slaves. Feminism, equality and socialism, humanism and the American way did not exist yet. The thing here is that a man does not fear jurisdical judgement more than he fears the judgement of God. So these killings were very rare even in pagan times. The Quran is not a law book but a religious book, it implores good behaviour and moderation in all things. Common Law would be from old customs of the day in different areas. People in those days minded their own business when it came to domestic affairs. Law scholars also use Hadeeth not just the Quran. I have not read all the Hadeeth so I can't give you the details.
Reply

Futuwwa
02-07-2013, 11:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Karl
In the time of Muhammad a man's wife or wives and children were his property as were his slaves.
That time is called Al-Jahiliyah for a reason.

format_quote Originally Posted by Karl
Feminism, equality and socialism, humanism and the American way did not exist yet.
Equality and Socialism are certainly Islamic values, even if they were not called that at the time. Caliph Abu Bakr launched the Ridda Wars because the apostates refused to pay zakah. That's almost as communistic as a giant missile parade ;D
Reply

titus
02-07-2013, 11:32 PM
Caliph Abu Bakr launched the Ridda Wars because the apostates refused to pay zakah. That's almost as communistic as a giant missile parade
Sounds like colonialism to me. Or maybe imperialism. Certainly not socialism and most certainly not equality, especially considering the losers and their families became slaves of the winners.
Reply

Futuwwa
02-07-2013, 11:51 PM
Uh, do you know the first thing about zakah or the Ridda Wars other than my previous post?
Reply

Karl
02-08-2013, 12:33 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by titus
Sounds like colonialism to me. Or maybe imperialism. Certainly not socialism and most certainly not equality, especially considering the losers and their families became slaves of the winners.
Lol was this Caliph a socialist? Like Richard the Lion Heart and Julius Caesar? Lets get serious. Powerful rulers of Pagans, Christians, Muslims, Jews and whatever were/are all imperialists. I don't have a problem with Imperialism unless I am on the losing side.
Reply

ardianto
02-08-2013, 01:13 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Karl
In the time of Muhammad a man's wife or wives and children were his property as were his slaves.
You know that it's not true but you try to make Muslims believe that it's true. This is not the first time you spread lie about Islam.
Reply

Karl
02-08-2013, 04:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
You know that it's not true but you try to make Muslims believe that it's true. This is not the first time you spread lie about Islam.
I think you misunderstand. This is not about Islam it is about the way things were everywhere at the time. Men were warriors and ruled their household. Interferers would be put to the sword. No man anywhere would tolerate outside interference of their private property and domestic affairs. Interfering in domestic matters would cause feuds and wars. Even in modern times some men (myself included) would not tolerate outside interference in their domestic affairs.
Reply

islamica
02-08-2013, 05:01 AM
“O you who believe! If a Faasiq (liar — evil person) comes to you with any news, verify it, lest you should harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful for what you have done”
[al-Hujuraat 49:6]


Saudis: Muslim cleric still on trial


RIYADH, Saudi Arabia, Feb. 7 (UPI) -- A Muslim cleric charged with the torture killing of his daughter is still on trial, the Saudi government said Thursday, denying reports he was spared prison.

Fahad bin Abdullah al-Bokran, a spokesman for the Justice Ministry, said in a statement released to Saudi news media reports last week that Fayhan al-Gamdi had been ordered to pay blood money or diya to the 5-year-old girl's mother were inaccurate, Gulf News reported. He said the next court date will be Wednesday.

"The case is still being heard at the court and no sentence has been issued yet," the statement said. "The father is still in prison and we expect a ruling soon after all aspects related to the case are examined."

Al-Gamdi's daughter, Luma, died in November, after six months in a Riyadh hospital. The little girl had a fractured skull and other severe injuries.

Reports that her father would suffer only a financial penalty outraged many in Saudi Arabia.

Luma's mother, who is divorced from al-Gamdi, denied her daughter was raped.

"My daughter was not raped," she told Saudi news media. "All the official evidence both at the hospital where she was treated or by the police indicate that she had not been raped by her father. I am shocked by the assault on my daughter's honor."

The government says al-Gamdi is not an official cleric. He is known for television appearances.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-Ne...2961360269972/
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!