I draw attention to this case for the reason of its eccentricities, and in order to point out the seemingly not-quite-Middle-Ages elegance of the Jordanian court's position. How precisely is "changing her clothes" indicative of whether or not the man's sister had a boyfriend, or had sex? Because if she did, she would have to be a slut and dress accordingly? Ah. Right, the whole "uncovered meat" thingy. Gotcha.

But it generates still more questions. For example: what happened to the rights of women after divorce in islamic society? The sister was divorced, not married. And what business is it of men in women's affairs? And why not instead punish the man she was sleeping with? Wouldn't that be the first recourse, rather than murdering a blood relative? Would such a man be let off here? What would be said of such a decision, if one were? (Well...there's OJ.)

Clearly sharia - that Total System to Life, Death and Everything - has such intricate designs that no mortal mind could hope to understand it. And yet then why is it necessary?

AMMAN -- A Jordanian who killed his divorced sister over rumors that she had a lover was cleared of premeditated murder because he acted in a "fit of rage," after his family dropped charges, the Jordan Times reported Thursday.

The verdict was handed down Wednesday, five months after the 19-year-old university student shot to death his 22-year-old sister, 10 minutes after he was told that she had a lover out of wedlock, it said, quoting court papers.

The student, whose name was not disclosed, received a three-month jail sentence and walked free for time already served.

"The 10-minute interval between hearing of his sister's immoral actions and meeting her face-to-face is proof that he did not plot the murder," a court statement said.

The young man had turned himself in to the police after the murder claiming that he acted to "cleanse the family's honor" and initially received a six-month prison sentence.

But the court slashed the verdict by half and changed the charge from premeditated murder to a misdemeanor "because the defendant killed his sister in a fit of rage," in line with Article 98 of the penal code, the daily said.

It also argued that the "victim brought disgrace to her family and the defendant and tarnished their honor her actions were against religion and social norms" in the conservative Muslim country.

The court said that it also opted for a reduced sentence "[B]because his family dropped the charges against him and because he is a student."

Medical sources quoted by the Jordan Times, however, said that an autopsy performed on the victim after the murder showed that the woman had not been sexually active before she was killed.

But the court countered: "It is possible the victim had changed her clothes ... before she was killed to hide evidence that would show she was engaged in an illegitimate affair."...

Jordan's parliament has twice rejected proposed changes to the penal code that would impose harsher sentences on "honor killers," despite campaigns by human rights activists.

http://www.metimes.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20070201-063624-9274r

Clearly the legal system of Jordan is not too, ah, "penetrating", if you'll excuse the pun. And yet seemingly this is what a fair percentage of muslims wish to impose on their own communities, and/or outside them.

************************************************** ********

"I say, Holmes, what have you got there?"

"It is the key to this entire riddle, Watson. Do you note this dropped tobacco ash, Inspector Jones?"

"I do, Mr. Holmes. But what can it tell us about the identity of the man who committed this heinous crime?"

"A very great deal, Inspector. You can see from the circular tumbling of the edges of the periphery of the ash that it is clearly a brand of the more loosely packed Turkish variety - as you know, things here in Jordan are wound a bit more tightly. I therefore suspect that a Turk has been involved with the disgrace of this woman, and with her eventual murder. I recommend the rounding of all Turkish emigres in the area. I think a little summary torture shall prove to the advantage of the police; a handy and scientifically proven methodology."

"So long as they aren't forced to wear women's undergarments over their heads."

"A regrettable necessity of law enforcement here in Jordan, Mr. Watson: an American invention, if memory serves."

"But...shouldn't one perform a complete autopsy, Holmes? After all, we are dealing with a case of illegal sexual relations."

"Tish tosh, Mr Watson. The case is as clear as the Kaaba on a winter's day. Besides, the sexual proclivities of the Turks are well known here in Jordan. I rather suspect that we shall find an Israeli hand behind this act; but such politics are better left to our good King, and Allah. Come, Watson! I have fresh news of idolaters in the Levites' quarter!"

Exeunt

It would appear to be a political issue:


Jordan's parliament has twice rejected proposed changes to the penal code that would impose harsher sentences on "honor killers," despite campaigns by human rights activists.


The government has barred over 150 clerics from preaching in recent years. Around forty have been banned since the beginning of 2004, according to one of their lawyers, despite the fact that courts had cleared them of charges under the Law on Preaching and Guidance in Mosques.


In its first annual report, issued in 2005, Jordan’s National Center for Human Rights, a government-regulated body, painted an unflattering picture of the state of political and civil rights and transgressions by security forces. Established by law in 2002, the center has a mandate to follow up on individual human rights violations, but many victims complain that it does not expend serious effort on their cases, especially when sensitive issues such as torture, unfair trials, or redress for victims are involved. The center has fostered public debate on prison conditions in the country following the release in October 2004 of a report documenting one case of torture in detention.


The government censors printing houses, especially those used by smaller circulation weekly newspapers. Intelligence officers have stopped print runs, and demanded changes in or cancellation of articles, most recently on September 19, 2005, concerning an article in the weekly Al-Wahda. Managers of newspapers, as well as editors, can be held criminally liable for content in breach of the law, such as alleged slander.

Perhaps you should take it up with the king, though blaming Muslims is so much more fashionable.


King Abdullah II is invested with extensive executive and legislative powers under Jordan’s constitution. He issues decrees and dismisses and appoints key government officials, including a new prime minister and cabinet in April and a new chief of intelligence in May 2005. The government and the king have announced their intention to anchor the right to freedom of expression in law, but in practice the exercise of basic rights such as freedom of expression, association and assembly remains restricted. Security forces carry out arbitrary arrests and detain people without charge in the name of counterterrorism. A lack of determined government action against “honor” crimes and discrimination continues to circumscribe women’s political, civil and economic rights.

Sharia in Brazil:
http://www.hrw.org/about/projects/womrep/General-194.htm

On June 3, 1985, Aníbal Maciel de Abreu e Silva shot and killed his ex-wife Nícia de Abreu e Silva, from whom he had been separated for three months. He shot her four times, once in the back. Several days after the murder, Aníbal presented himself to the police. In his deposition he said he had waited to see Nícia outside the school where she was studying. He was carrying a gun "as usual." He testified that when she came out of the building they got into an argument and he "lost his senses" and killed her. He said he did not plan the crime and did not suspect her of having any lovers.59

The prosecution charged Aníbal with qualified homicide, aggravated by surprise (medical records showed that Nícia did not physically anticipate the assault) and by base motive, due to his unwillingness to pay the alimony asked for by Nícia pursuant to their separation. This crime carries a minimum sentence of twelve years. The defense asked that the aggravating factors regarding motive be dropped and that Aníbal be charged with simple homicide. In classifying the crime the judge retained only the aggravating factor of surprise.

In the trial, according to the victim's sister, Aníbal's attorney argued that the murder was a privileged homicide committed in a state of violent emotion provoked by the victim. He contended that Aníbal had committed the crime out of jealousy prompted by the fact that Nícia had had three lovers and a lesbian affair with the family's maid.60 The prosecution contested this defense, pointing out that the accused himself did not suspect a lover. The lovers were never produced, nor was any evidence regarding the maid. The prosecutor further argued that the crime was premeditated. No witness was produced to verify that Aníbal normally carried a gun.

The jury accepted the violent emotion defense. In 1989 Aníbal was convicted of privileged homicide and sentenced to four and one half years. Because he was a first-time offender with good behavior he served eighteen months in an "open" prison and then was released. The state prosecutor in the case told Human Rights Watch that the jury's decision was against all facts in the case.61 Thus, even though there was ample evidence that Abreu e Silva had planned the crime and no evidence to support the defense's claim of provocation by the victim or that the claimed provocation had immediately preceded the murder, the court sentenced the defendant according to the violent emotion exception.

It would appear to be a political issue:

Quite. This relates to my "failure of separation between mosque and state is bad for human rights" theme.

Perhaps you should take it up with the king, though blaming Muslims is so much more fashionable.

Rather, perhaps there should be separation of mosque and state; which muslims am I specifically blaming here? :confused:

Regards,

Geoff

Sharia in Brazil:
http://www.hrw.org/about/projects/womrep/General-194.htm

Shocking. Is this terribly common in Brazil? Was there nothing more current than 1989? Is it an example of the correct application of Western jurisprudence? Did you not like the Sherlock Holmes thing? Is Exeunt an actual command in radio and television these days?

Muslim nations should make a law like America's:

"The national government shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion."

But of course, abolishing theocracy knocks the legs out from under Islam, and the mullahs wouldn't like that.

It is a bit central to the structure of a self-avowed "islamic nation".

, ruled by sharia law. Is sharia law in the Koran?

Derived thereof; numerous elements are in the Quran.

Perhaps you should take it up with the king, though blaming Muslims is so much more fashionable.

right, it's just one rogue king. all the other islamic countries never have stuff like this happen. the problem is islam, or rather religious law of any kind wherever on earth it happens to be taken seriously.

That's where the U.S. founding fathers were very wise in enacting that "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion."

right, it's just one rogue king. all the other islamic countries never have stuff like this happen. the problem is islam, or rather religious law of any kind wherever on earth it happens to be taken seriously.

You're "with it". Yay!

Hi Sam and GeoffP,

Sam, your example was of a man killing his ex-wife in Brazil? This doesn’t really make a good comparison because GeoffPs’ was an example of a man killing his sister.

Another bad example would be this one, from this week, 5 February 2007: 'Honour killers' expect to walk free (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6332751.stm) because its in Pakistan.

Now to get a better idea of what’s going on here we need to see the statistics of honor killing in Jordan, Pakistan, Brazil, India, etc… comparing these murders per Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindu, Buddhists, etc... then run an ANOVA - this should eliminate the cultural aspect and give a statistical significance per country per religion.

So? Are there stats on the number of Xians, Jews, Muslims, Hindu, Buddhists, etc.. that honor kill their female blood relatives per country?

I think that should help separate the effects of religions and the effects of culture?

An interesting question and also maybe we can all brush up on our stats…!

Michael


PS: Another interesting question would be one of the justice melded out.

So???

Any Stats? I want to know if Xians in Jordan also have a propensity for honor killing. There was/is a popular case of a Lebanese-Aussie Xian kidnapping his two kids from their Canadian mother. Not that such is unusual regardless of religion but it has a twist because fathers are almost always awarded children in Lebanon - so I thought maybe ME Xians and Muslims both honor kill their female relatives and therefor it's purely a cultural phenomena?

A good use of Stats no????

Dear Michael,

You have a great idea, however i was wondering over what length of time should this survey be conducted? are we talking about the last year, or the last 10 years or perhaps the last 100 or 1000 years. as i am sure the results will be different on all these counts.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
take it ez
zak