Kashif Hafeez Siddiqui

Archive for the ‘Dr. Aafia Corner’ Category

Wish You Best

In Dr. Aafia Corner, I Hate USA on September 30, 2010 at 10:56 am

عافیہ صدیقی ایک معمہ

In Dr. Aafia Corner on September 26, 2010 at 8:11 pm

ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی ایک معمہ ہے۔ جو کچھ اس کے ساتھ ہوا وہ کوئي نہیں جانتا۔ نہ ہم جانتے ہیں نہ یوئر آنر آپ جانتے ہیں، نہ عدالت میں موجود سب لوگ، نہ ہی استغاثہ ، اور نہ ہی امریکی اور پاکستانی۔ جس طرح ہم خفیہ امریکی جیلوں اور ٹارچر کے بارے میں نہیں جانتے۔ اگر کوئي جانتا ہے تو حکومت امریکہ جانتی ہے، سی آئي اے جانتی ہے‘۔

یہ تھے وہ الفاظ جو جمعرات کی صبح نیویارک کی وفاقی عدالت میں ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کی دفاع وکیل ڈان کارلی نے عافیہ صدیقی کو چھیاسی برس کی سخت سزا سنائے جانے سے قبل اپنے دلائل کے دوران کہی۔ جبکہ جج کی طرف سے عدالت میں سزا سنائے جانے کے قبل اور اس کے بعد ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی نے کہا کہ وہ دنیا میں اپنے تمام حامیوں سے کہتی ہیں کہ وہ غصے اور اشتعال میں نہ آئيں بلکہ امن قائم رکھیں اور تشدد سے اجتناب برتیں۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ ایک دفعہ پھر وہ صدر اوبامہ اور طالبان سے امن قائم کرنےکو کہتی ہیں۔

نیویارک میں ستمبر کی اس خوشگوار صبح مین ہیٹن کی وفاقی عدالت یو ایس ڈسٹرکٹ کورٹ سدرن میں غیر معمولی بھیڑ تھی کہ ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کو افغانستان میں امریکی فوجی اور سرکاری اہلکاروں پر قاتلانہ حملے کے جیوری کی طرف سے جوابدار ٹھہرائے جانے کے بعد سزا سنائے جانے کا دن تھا۔

ویسے تو عدالت میں ہر دن اکثر بھیڑ لگي ہوتی ہے لیکن جمعرات کی صبح عدالت کی سکیورٹی چیک ان کی قطار عدالت کے داخلی ریوالونگ دروازوں سے بھی باہر سیڑھیوں سے نیچے تک جاتی تھی۔ حجاب پہنے خواتین، باریش یا مردوں سمیت ڈاکٹر عافیہ کے حامی یا ہمدرد خواتین و مردوں کے علاوہ ایک بڑی تعداد صحافیوں اور ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کے مقدمہ کے مشاہدہ کاروں کی بھی تھی۔

عدالت کے اکیسویں منزل پر جج رچرڈ ایم بریمن کا کمرہء عدالت سخت سکیورٹی چیک ان کے بعد مقدمے کی آخری کاروائي دیکھنے کیلیے کھچا کھچ بھرا ہوا تھا۔

جب جج رچرڈ برمین نے اپنے چیمبرز سے آ کر کرسی سنبھالی ہی تھی کہ عدالت سے ملحق ایک دروازے میں حرکت ہوئی اور مارشلز ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کو کمرۂ عدالت میں لائے۔

جج رچرڈ برمین نے مقدمے کا پس منظر پڑھتے ہوئے کہا کہ یہ سب سے مشکل مقدمہ تھا جو ان کی عدالت میں پیش ہوا ۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی افغانستان کے شہر غزنی میں سترہ جولائی دو ہزار آٹھ میں پیش ہوئیں، اس سے قبل وہ کہاں تھی اور اسکے امریکی او ر پاکستانی حکام کی تحویل میں ہونے کی اور ٹارچر ہونے کی گواہی ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کے دفاع کے وکلاء نہیں ثابت کر سکے جبکہ امریکی حکومت انکی (ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کی ) امریکی فوج اور حکومت کے اہلکاروں پر انکی ایم فور رائفل سے قاتلانہ حملہ ثابت کرچـکی ہے اور جیوری نے ان کو سات الزمات میں مجرم قراردیا ہے۔

جج بریمن نے ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کے وکلاء کی طرف سے ’نفسیاتی مریض‘ ہونے کے استدلال کو ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کی ’میلنگرنگ‘ یا مقدمے سے فائدہ اٹھانے کیلیے ذہنی یا جسمانی بیماری کا ڈھونگ رچانے کی کوشش قرار دیا۔

جج رچرڈ ایم برمین نے ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کے خلاف سزا کی تعین و توسیع کی گائیڈ لائنز پڑھ کر سناتے ہوئے کہا کہ امریکی فوج اور حکومتی اہلکاروں کے خلاف جان بوجھ کر انہیں امریکی سمجھ کر نشانہ بناتے ہوئے ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی نے ایم فور رائفل سے ان پر گولی چلائي اور ایسے الزمات امریکی حکومت گواہی کے ذریعے ثابت کر چکی ہے۔ جج نے کہا کہ امریکی شہریوں پر قاتلانہ حملے کی ترتیب وار سزا بیس سال،امریکی عملداروں اور اہلکاروں پر حملے کی سزا بیس سال، امریکی حکومت اور فوج کے عملداروں اور اہلکاروں پر ہتھیار سے حملے کی سزا بیس سال، متشدد جرم کرنے کے دوران اسلجہ سے فائر کرنے کی سزا عمر قید ، امریکی فوج اور حکومت کے ہر اہلکار اورعملدار پر حملے کی ہر اک سزا آٹھ سال یعنی چوبیس سال بنتی ہے۔ اسی طرح ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کو زیادہ سے زیادہ ممکن سزا چھیاسی سال دی جاتی ہے۔

ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کی وکیلِ صفائی ڈان کارڈی نے جج سے ایک عورت اور انسان ہونے کے ناتے عافیہ کی سزا کی مدت بارہ سال کرنے کا درخواست کی۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ زیاد سے زیادہ او جنم قید دیکر سزائے موت ہوگی کیونکہ یہ مقدمہ سزائے موت کا مقدمہ نہیں۔

ڈاکٹرعافیہ صدیقی عدالت میں سزا سنائے جانے سے قبل اور بعد میں جج اور وکلاء یہانتک کہ استغاثہ سے بھی ہنسی مذاق اور جملوں کا تبادلہ کرتی رہیں ۔ ایک موقع پر جب سزا کے تعین کے دوران استغاثہ کے وکیل نے جج کی توجہ ایک کاؤنٹ یا الزام میں سزا کی معیاد کی طرف نشاندھی کرائي تو ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی نے استغاثہ کے وکیل کو نام سے مخاطب کرتے ہوئے کہا’شکریہ آّپ نے میرے وکلاء سے زیادہ بہتر کام کیا ہے‘۔ ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی ہر بار اپنے وکلا کے اس استدلال انکی موکلہ کی ذہنی صحت ٹھیک نہیں کو ہاتھ اور بازو کے اشاروں سے انکار کرتی رہی۔

جج رچرڈ برمین نے سزا کے تعین و توسیع کی گائيڈ لائنز میں پہلی بار دہشتگردی سے متعلقہ الزام کا ذکر کیا جو کہ ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کے تمام مقدمے کے دوران عدالت میں نہیں لائے گئے۔

بعد میں عدالت کی عمارت کے بعد ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کے دفاع کے وکلاء چارلس سوئفٹ اور ایلین شارپ نے میڈیا کے اراکین سے بات چیت کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ جج برمین کی طرف سے دہشتگردی کے متعلقہ الزام کے حوالے سے امریکی حکومت کی طرف سے پیش کی جانیوالی خفیہ گواہی پر انہیں یعنی ذاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کے دفاع کے وکلا ء کو دسترس نہیں دی گئي اور نہ ہی ان کو اسے مسترد کرنے کا موقع دیا گیا۔

وکیل چارلس سوئفٹ نے کہا کہ ’امریکی نظام انصاف میں شفافیت اولین شرط ہے اور آج کے دن نیویارک کی عدالت میں شفافیت کو نظر انداز کیا گیا ہے‘۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ وہ نہ استغاثہ کو قصور وار ٹھہرارہے ہیں اور نہ ہی جج پر الزام لگا رہے ہیں لیکن وہ مقدمے کے عمل پرتنقید کر رہے ہیں۔ چارلس سوئفٹ جو امریکی بحری فوج کے سابق عملدار اور گوانتانامو بے میں ایک مقدمے میں دہشتگردی کے ملزم سلیم ہمدان کے وکیل رہے تھے نے کہا کہ ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کی سزا کے خلاف اپیل میں وہ یہ مسئلہ اٹھائيں گے اور اس پر پہلے ہی امریکی سپریم کورٹ اپنا فیصلہ واضح کرچکی ہے۔

اس سے قبل عدالت میں ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کو سزا سنائے جانے کی شنوائي کے دوران ان کی دفاع کی وکیل ڈان کارڈی اپنی تقریر کے دوران کہا کہ انہوں نے امریکی حکومت کے پاس ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کے خلاف موجود خفیہ گواہی پر دسترس حاصل کرنے کیلیے تمام سیکیورٹی کلیئرنس حاصل کی تھی اور تمام سکیورٹی کلئیرنس کےبعد جب وہ حکومت کے پا س پہونچی تو انہیں بتایا گیا کہ ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کیخلاف کو‏ئي خفیہ گواہی موجود نہیں۔

دالت میں جج رچـرڈ برمین نے ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی کو بولنے کا موقع دیا اور کہا کہ وہ جو چاہیں اور جتنا چاہیں بول سکتی ہیں۔ ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی نے کہا کہ وہ طالبان سے کہیں گی کہ اپنے دلوں میں رحم پیدا کریں اور امریکی فوجیوں کو قتل مت کریں۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ یہ تمام اہم مقدمہ ہے اور تمام دنیا میں انکے حامیوں اور مسلمانوں کی نظریں اس مقدمے پر ہیں میں ان سے کہوں گی کہ وہ تشدد سے اجتناب برتیں۔ جو کچھ بھی میرے ساتھ ہوا ہے میں خدا کی طرف سے سمجھتی ہوں اور میں اس پر خوش اور مطمئن ہوں۔

انہوں نے کہا ’میں امریکہ اور اسرائيل سمیت کسی بھی ملک کے خلاف نہیں ہوں۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ میرے حامی میرے ساتھ امریکی سلوک کے بارے میں افواہوں پر کان نہ دھریں مجھے خفیہ جیلوں میں ٹارچر کیا گیا لیکن امریکہ میں مجھے کوئي ٹارچر نہیں کیا گیا۔ بہرحال انہوں نے کہا دوران مقدمہ کئي نا انصافیاں کی گئی ہیں۔ بہرحال انکے حامی نہ جج برمین اور نہ امریکیوں اور امریکہ پرناراض ہوں۔ امریکہ اور پاکستان میں دونوں سے پیار کرتی ہوں‘۔

لیکن اس سے قبل جب جج نے انہیں سزا سنانا مکمل کی تو عافیہ صدیقی نے با آواز بلند کہا شیم آن دس کورٹ” (کہ اس عدالت کو شرم آنی چاہیے)۔ اس پر جج نے انہیں کہا کہ وہ عدالت میں موجود رہنا چاہتی ہیں یا متصل کمرے میں جانا چاہتی ہیں۔

عدالتی کاروائي کے خاتمے پر جج رچرڈ بریمن نے عافیہ صدیقی سے کہا ’وش یو بیسٹ‘ اور جواب میں ڈاکٹر عافیہ صدیقی نے جج کو بھی ’وش یو بیسٹ‘ کہا۔

مقدمے کی کارروائی سے قبل، دوران اور بعد میں عدالت کی عمارت کے باہر اور آس پاس نیویارک پولیس کی طرف سے غیر معمولی انتظامات دیکھنے میں آئے۔

Jailed for 86 years, the Pakistani mother-of-three

In Dr. Aafia Corner on September 24, 2010 at 1:22 am

Source : http://www.dailymail.co.uk

A Pakistani neuroscientist convicted of trying to kill American agents during her interrogation has been jailed for 86 years despite protestations she is mentally ill.

Aafia Siddiqui grabbed an assault rifle while she was detained for questioning in Afghanistan’s Ghazni province over terrorism matters and tried to shoot FBI operatives and soldiers.

The case had attracted significant attention and protests in Pakistan where the 38-year-old mother-of-three was touted by human rights groups as an innocent martyr.

Jailed for 86 years: Pakistani scientist Aafia Siddiqui with Judge Richard Berman in New York today as she was sentencedJailed for 86 years: Pakistani scientist Aafia Siddiqui with Judge Richard Berman in New York today as she was sentenced for attempting to kill FBI agents and U.S. soldiers

Questions: An FBI photo of Siddiqui. Her defence team claimed she was mentally unwell and should only serve 12 years

Her lawyers claimed that the string of outbursts during the trial and her erratic behaviour proved she was mentally unwell and that she should only serve 12 years.

But prosecutors convinced a court that she was in fact a serious threat and at Manhattan’s District Court Judge Richard M. Berman told her that a ‘significant incarceration is appropriate’ meaning she will likely die in jail.

‘Don’t get angry,’ Siddiqui told her supports in court. ‘Forgive Judge Berman.’

She repeatedly told supporters in the gallery not to fight in her name and that she was being well treated.

‘I don’t want any violence in my name, please,’ she said. ‘Thanks to God, I am well in prison. They are not torturing me.’

‘I am a Muslim, but I love Americans too,’ she said during one of her rambling speeches.

The sentence brought to an end a peculiar case which proved she wanted to kill Americans yet left lingering doubts about her state of mind.

Siddiqui was arrested in July 2008 by Afghan police, who said she was carrying containers of chemicals and notes referring to terror attacks.

When they and American soldiers went to interrogate her she grabbed an unattended assault rifle and shot at them whilst shouting ‘Death to Americans!’

She was shot in the stomach by return fire and after recovering was brought to the U.S. for trial.

Family's grief: Siddiqui's sister Fauzia, and mother Ismat, react after learning of the verdict in Karachi, Pakistan todayFamily’s grief: Siddiqui’s sister Fauzia, and mother Ismat, react after learning of the verdict in Karachi, Pakistan today

In court prosecutors made out that she was a ‘cold, calculating jihadist who set out to harm American troops by any means necessary’.

They quoted from notes she was carrying at the time of her arrest referring to ‘a ‘mass casualty attack’ … NY CITY monuments: Empire State Building, Statue of Liberty, Brooklyn Bridge,’ and another musing how a dirty bomb would spread more fear than death.

They claimed the notes, along with the fact that she was carrying sodium cyanide, showed she wasn’t an accidental menace.

‘Her conduct was not senseless or thoughtless,’ prosecutors said in legal papers, ‘It was deliberate and premeditated. Siddiqui should be punished accordingly.’

According to Siddiqui’s legal team, however, her behaviour was a spontaneous ‘freak out’ born of mental issues rather than Islamic militancy.

Protests: Pakistani demonstrators in Karachi today voice their support of Siddiqui

Siddiqui’s rambling courtroom rants proclaiming her innocence and offering odd solutions for Middle East peace ran counter to the prosecution’s portrait of her.

Testifying in her own defence while wearing a head scarf, she claimed she was tortured at a ‘secret prison’ before her detention.

Charges that she purposely shot at soldiers were ‘crazy,’ she said. ‘It’s just ridiculous.’

Among Saddiqui’s possessions at the time of her arrest was a computer disk with an essay she’d written about feminism and her struggles as a Muslim woman living in America.

The title: ‘I am not a Terrorist.’

Siddiqui trained at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the U.S. in the early 1990s and, according to prosecutors, returned to her native Pakistan in 2003 after marrying an al Qaeda operative related to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

News of her sentence sparked protests in Karachi whilst others demonstrated outside the courthouse.

Though she was not convicted of terrorism, the U.S. government argued that Siddiqui is a cold-blooded radical who deserves a ‘terrorism enhancement’ under federal sentencing guidelines that would guarantee a life term.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1314716/Jailed-86-years-Pakistani-mother-tried-kill-FBI-agents-U-S-soldiers-assault-rifle-Afghanistan.html#ixzz10PCLAqNd

DNA test proves teenage girl as Aafia’s daughter

In Dr. Aafia Corner on April 12, 2010 at 7:27 pm

Source : http://united4justice.wordpress.com

The mystery surrounding the teenage girl found in front of Dr. Fauzia’s house is finally resolved. After mixed reports it is finally confirmed by the family and government
that the girl is really Aafia’s daughter Maryam.

Congrats to the family and hopefully Aafia’s youngest son Suleman will also be handed over. It is also reported that Maryam was held in Bagram jail which also confirms that Aafia wasn’t arrested in Ghazni alone or some say with her son. In fact she was abducted with her 3 children (2 boys and 1 girl).

DNA test proves teenage girl as Aafia’s daughter

Source: http://www.awamimarkaz.com/2010/04/dna-test-proves-teenage-girl-as-aafia’s-daughter/

The Eastern Tribune
Islamabad: According to initial report of DNA test, the teenage girl, brought by unidentified men to home of Dr Fauzia Siddiqui, has been declared as daughter of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui.

Dr. Fauzia Siddiqui, sister of Dr Aafia Siddiqui visited the Interior Ministry with 12 years old Maryam on Saturday and held a meeting with Interior Minister Rehman Malik.

Talking to media after holding the meeting, the Interior Minister said that Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani wanted to make the announcement himself but he asked him to announce this.

Rehman Malik said that the DNA Report has proved that 12 years old Maryam is daughter of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, adding the girl only speak English.

Responding to a question, the Interior Minister said that the government is taking all possible measures for the return of Dr. Aafia, saying the Prime Minister during his stay in the United States would strongly raise the issue of release of Dr. Aafia with the leadership of the United States.

The Minister on the occasion congratulated the entire nation and the family of Dr. Aafia.

Dr. Fauzia Siddiqui while talking to media said that the DNA test has proved that the girl is daughter of Dr. Aafia and praised the efforts of the government regarding repatriation of Dr. Aafia and her children and specially mentioned efforts of the Interior Minister.

On current visit of the Prime Minister to the United States, Dr. Fauzia expressed her hope that he (Gilani) would raise the issue regarding release of Dr. Aafia with US Leadership.

Terming the visit of Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, a key factor in making the efforts of the government and the Interior Minister productive, she said that the rehabilitation of Maryam would be started soon.

Dr. Aafia Case Verdict & Our Responsibility

In Dr. Aafia Corner on February 9, 2010 at 6:19 am

Downfall of America has just Begun – Dr. Aafia’s Mother Statement

In Dr. Aafia Corner on February 4, 2010 at 7:36 am

Dr. Aafia Convicted of trying to kill Americans – That’s why we hate YOU -Americans

In Dr. Aafia Corner on February 3, 2010 at 8:04 pm

NEW YORK—A U.S.-trained Pakistani scientist was convicted Wednesday of charges that she tried to kill Americans while detained in Afghanistan in 2008, shouting with raised arm as jurors left the courtroom: “This is a verdict coming from Israel, not America.”

A jury deliberated three days in federal court in Manhattan before finding Aafia Siddiqui guilty in the third week of her attempted murder trial, which she often interrupted with rambling courtroom outbursts.

After declaring the verdict came from Israel, she turned toward spectators in the packed courtroom and said: “Your anger should be directed where it belongs. I can testify to this and I have proof.”

Siddiqui, 37, was convicted of attempted murder, though the crime was not found by the jury to be premeditated. She was also convicted of armed assault, using and carrying a firearm, and assault of U.S. officers and employees.

Before her arrest, U.S. authorities had called Siddiqui an al-Qaida sympathizer. She was never charged with terrorism, but prosecutors called her a grave threat who was carrying bomb-making instructions and a list of New York City landmarks including the Statue of Liberty when she was captured.

The defendant—a spindly neuroscience specialist who trained at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Brandeis University—”is no shrinking violet,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher La Vigne said in closing arguments.

“She does what she wants when she wants it,” he said. “These charges are no joke. People almost died.”

Testifying in her own defense, Siddiqui claimed she had been tortured and held in a “secret prison” before her detention. Charges that she attacked U.S. personnel who wanted to interrogate her were “crazy,” she said. “It’s just ridiculous.”

In court, Siddiqui veiled her head and face with a white scarf and often sat slumped in her chair. She openly sparred with the judge and her own lawyers, insisted she could single-handedly bring peace to the Middle East and lashed out at witnesses in tirades that got her kicked out of the courtroom.

“I was never planning a bombing! You’re lying!” she yelled while an Army captain testified.

In her closing argument, defense attorney Linda Moreno accused the prosecutors of trying to play on the jury’s fears.

“They want to scare you into convicting Aafia Siddiqui,” she said. “The defense trusts that you’re much smarter than that.”

During the two-week trial, FBI agents and U.S. soldiers testified that when they went to interrogate Siddiqui at an Afghan police station, she snatched up an unattended assault rifle and shot at them while yelling, “Death to Americans.” She was wounded by return fire but recovered and was brought to the United States to face charges attempted murder, assault and gun charges.

A chief warrant officer, who testified in uniform but did not give his name, told jurors he had set down his M4 rifle after being told Siddiqui had been restrained. He testified he was shocked when she suddenly appeared from behind a curtain wielding his M4 rifle and yelling, “Allah akbar,” Arabic for “God is great.”

“It was pretty amazing she got that thing up and squared off,” he said. “She was looking at me and aiming dead at me.”

Hearing the rifle go off, the officer said he followed his military training and pulled his pistol. Siddiqui was wrestling with an interpreter when he shot her in the stomach.

“I operated within the rules of engagement to eliminate the threat,” he said.

The defense told jurors there was no ballistic, fingerprint or other physical evidence proving the weapon was “touched by Dr. Siddiqui, let alone fired by her.”

Siddiqui testified she was shot shortly after she poked her head around a curtain to see if there was a way she might slip out of the room where she was being held. She said she was desperate to escape because she feared being returned to a secret prison.

“I wanted to get out. … I was afraid,” she said.

Verdict in Aafia Siddiqui’s case expected Wednesday

In Dr. Aafia Corner on February 3, 2010 at 12:50 pm
NEW YORK, Feb 03 (APP): A New York jury deliberated for several hours on Tuesday without reaching a verdict in the case of Pakistani neuroscientist Aafia Siddiqui, who is charged with attempted murder of FBI agents and US military personnel in Afghanistan.
The deliberations are scheduled to resume on Wednesday, at the end of which a verdict is expected. But no one could with certainty that the 12-member jury would return a verdict. Ms. Siddiqui’s case went to the jury after more than two weeks of trial in a Manhattan federal court.
She is accused of grabbing a US warrant officer’s M-4 rifle in a police station in Ghazni, Afghanistan in July 2008 and firing two shots at FBI agents and military personnel, who had gone there to interrogate her.
The prosecution alleges she emerged from behind a curtain and fire two bullets before she was shot by the chief warrants officer. Before adjourning Tuesday afternoon, the jury went over the testimonies of Ms. Siddiqui, Captain Robert Snyder of US Army, who accused her of picking an unsecured gun and firing two shots; FBI Special Agent Gordon Hurley, who was first to inspect the crime scene; and two Afghan police officers—Abdul Qadeer and Bashir.
The jurors also examined the M-4 rifle that Ms.  Siddiqui is alleged to have brandished at US personnel. Last week, Siddiqui testified she was concerned about being transferred to a “secret” prison by the US forces and was trying to slip out of the room when she was shot. “I’m telling you what I know.
I walked toward the curtain. I was shot and I was shot again. I fainted,” she said. Siddiqui’s lawyer Linda Moreno said during closing arguments Monday that the “science” supported her testimony that she didn’t touch the weapon or fire it. “Where are the bullet holes? Did the Afghanis take the bullet holes? There is no physical evidence that an M-4 rifle was touched by Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, let alone fired”, Moreno said.
Some legal experts believe that by testifying before the court against the advice of her lawyers and family, Ms. Siddiqui may have complicated her case. This was clear from the way the prosecution on Monday picked holes in her testimony, accusing her of lying planning to destroy New York City landmarks. Ms. Siddiqui vanished in Karachi with her three children on March 30, 2003.
US officials allege that she was seized on July 17, 2008 by Afghan security forces in Ghazni province and claim that documents, including formulas for explosives and chemical weapons, were found in her handbag. She has been brought to the United States to face charges of attempted murder and assault.
Siddiqui faces 20 years in prison on the attempted murder charges and life in prison on the firearms charge. However, human rights organizations have cast doubt on the accuracy of the US account of the event.

Jury To Decide Fate of Aafia Siddiqui

In Dr. Aafia Corner on February 2, 2010 at 5:37 am

 Source : http://ibrahimsajidmalick.com/jury-to-decide-fate-of-aafia-siddiqui/1027/ 

500pearlAs closing remarks came to an end and jury deliberations began in the trial of female Pakistani. Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, who faces 7 count assault and attempted murder charges in a New York Court room, for an alleged shooting incident in Ghazni Afghanistan, many spectators are wondering if it is possible for her to have a fair trial in post 9-11 America.

Although she is not charged with terrorism, the Prosecution was able to make that claim the underpinning of its entire case, due in large part to Judge Richard Berman’s decision to allow into evidence documents found in Dr. Siddiqui’s possession which include handwritten notes about “how to make a dirty bomb” and plans to cause “mass casualties” in the United States. The defense Attorney, Charles Swift said it was a legally “flawed” decision and will be the basis on an appeal if Dr. Siddiqui is not acquitted.

In their closing remarks the prosecution was able to spin the jury’s decision from a verdict on the guilt or innocence of Dr. Siddiqui, to the guilt or innocence of the 9 government eyewitnesses who say they heard or saw an M4 rifle shot on July 18, 2008 by Dr. Siddiqui. ‘For you to find Aafia Siddiqui not-guilty. That means you believe that the 9 Government witnesses who testified under oath stared you in the face and lied, men and women of the armed forces.’

The Prosecution characterized Siddiqui as a highly intelligent yet shrewd and cunning manipulator who carefully “planned her defense”. He described how she “ducked” and “dodged” questions referring to her answers about the year she was born and her son who was found with her. During her testimony Dr. Siddiqui was asked if she was born in 1972. Her response was “If you say so” , then when on to explain how can anyone recall when they were born. Later, she was asked by Jenna Dabbs if the boy she was with was her son. She again couldn’t answer directly claiming that she only saw pictures of him so she didn’t know for sure. Though many legal observers found her answers quite logical, it would be difficult for the jury to understand this without being informed of her claims of being in held in a secret prison for 5 years.

The prosecution then addressed the inconsistencies in the eyewitness testimonies as analogous to a car accident, in which different people would have different accounts of what happened prior to the accident as their “focus” would be on different things, but during the accident everyone’s focus would then “shift” to the sight of action and then perspectives would converge.

Later during the rebuttal phase of the closing, the prosecution argued that the inconsistencies were proof that the accounts were truthful. “They didn’t get together” and make sure their stories matched. “There was no grand conspiracy to convict this woman.” If they wanted to do that “why didn’t they simply plant some evidence” at the crime scene.

They were responding to the closing remarks made by the defense in which Linda Moreno argued that the ‘bond” between soldiers on the battlefield who must “protect each other”, influenced the testimonies of the government witnesses. She pointed out that their testimonies not only conflicted with each other’s but with their own earlier signed statements.

Moreno tried to get the jury to focus on the science and the forensic evidence. “there’s only one witness who’s impartial” and who “doesn’t have a dog in this fight”, and that is the room she said, the 26 X 12 ft room, 300 square feet with 10-120 people. She reminded the of the complete lack of physical evidence, no bullets, casings, bullet holes, gun shot residue. No one else was hurt except Aafia Siddiqui in this small crowded room where the M4 rifle allegedly went off. She responded to the government claim that the Afghans took the evidence, by pointing out that they (the Afghans) were the ones who alerted the Americans to her in the first place.

The Prosecution’s closing remarks had more references to the “documents” describing terrorist acts against Americans, than throughout the entire trial. Moreno responded to this by saying, “they’re trying to scare you. But that “Fear has no place in this trial. Fear has no place in America”

Aafia Siddiqui Trial: Jury Can Start Deliberation On Monday

In Dr. Aafia Corner on January 31, 2010 at 7:26 pm

  By Ibrahim Sajid Malick

Jury in Dr. Aafia Siddiqui trial is likely to begin deliberations Monday afternoon after prosecution and defense attorneys make closing statements.

In a taped video deposition presented by defense on Friday, Bashir, an Afghan police officer testified that he saw an American officer walk behind the curtain just before he heard gun shots, and that he never saw Dr. Siddiqui pick up a gun. Bashir was the last defense witness.

 Earlier in the day Judge Richard Berman allowed prosecution to produce additional witnesses to rebut claims made by the defense witnesses and experts. With lack of physical evidence and burden of proof – the Government has to demonstrate with mathematical certitude that Dr. Siddiqui grabbed the Chief Warrant Officer’s M4 Assault Rifle and fired at United States officers and employees in Ghazni, Afghanistan on July 18, 2008.

A point of possible contention was raised Friday when Bashir testified there were two shell casing found in the room. Government has produced only one .9mm shell casing as evidence during the trial. The prosecution offered rebuttal witnesses, intended to respond to the evidence presented by the defense. First, the prosecution called a firing range owner, Gary Woodworth, who testified that he remembered Dr. Siddiqui coming to the shooting range 19 years ago.

However under cross examination, Mr. Woodworth also admitted that there were no records of Dr. Siddiqui ever having visited the shooting range, and that even if she had, it could have been as part of her physical education requirements at MIT. Mr. Woodworth also acknowledged being a member of the National Rifle Association and having very close relationships with law enforcement officers. He also admitted that the course he alleged she came for is a very basic training pistol course.

 When asked by a defense attorney if he remembered the student he taught before Aafia he said, “no”; if he remembered the student he taught after Aafia, he said “no”. The prosecution then called FBI Special Agent Bruce Kammerman, who testified that while recuperating at Bagram Airbase hospital, Dr. Siddiqui had told him that she had picked up the gun because she wanted to scare people in order to ease her escape. However, on cross-examination, Agent Kammerman admitted that his original handwritten notes about the conversation did not mention anything about “picking up” the gun, but only Dr. Siddiqui’s desire to escape, and that the reference to the gun was added only in the final typed report.

Kammerman testified that during the conversations she was “lucid”, but he was not aware of what medications she was on and did not inquire about them. He testified that he addressed all of her needs for food, water, and bathroom use during his 12 hour daily shifts monitoring her.

 In Aafia Siddiqui’s direct testimony during her time at the hospital she said that Bruce’s presence was “torture” for her as he would cross examination, Kammerman conceded that when she needed to go to the bathroom he did insist that the door be open for “security”. According to Siddiqui’s testimony, he would stay all night and because of this during his entire 12 hour shifts she could not go to the bathroom. The Prosecution then brought the other FBI agent who monitored Dr. Siddiqui while in the hospital, Angela Sercer. Sercer is a female Special Agent who also kept 12 hour shifts every day that Siddiqui was at the hospital.

She offered similar testimony to Kammerman, however, acknowledged that Siddiqui was on a wide variety of medications including, morphine, ativan, haldol, phentinol, and percocet; still she maintained that Siddiqui was “lucid”. According to Siddiqui Angela seemed like a “nice person” Both Sercer and Kammerman testified that their purpose in being with Siddiqui was for “security” and to “gather intelligence” about matters unrelated to the shooting incident. They both also testified that Siddiqui initiated the conversations. If neither of these fact were accurate then Miranda Laws would apply and these alleged self-incriminating statements would not be admissible in court.

According to Miranda laws an arrested individual must be advised of their rights including the right to an attorney and/or consular staff, and right not to speak. Also, law enforcement officals must identify themselves. Although Siddiqui was not read her Miranda rights and FBI officals did not identify themselves, the judge has allowed their testimony.

 Thursday had marked a turning point in the trial of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, who decided to take the witness stand in her own defense. She declared under oath for the first time that she “was tortured in a secret prison” and that her missing children are all that has been on her mind every day. Dr. Siddiqui denied ever having shot at anyone, and appeared to remain unshaken even under intense cross-examination by the prosecution.

She explained that she was shot by US soldiers while attempting to peek around the curtain partition in the interrogation room, while looking for a way to escape. Before her testimony was cut short by the Judge, Dr. Siddiqui mentioned that her fear of being sent back to a secret prison had made her anxious to escape.

Source : http://ibrahimsajidmalick.com/aafia-siddiqui-trial-jury-can-start-deliberation-on-monday/986/