Thread: Saudi Arabia : Judge Mulls Spinal Paralysis Sentence

Saudi Judge Mulls Spinal Paralysis Sentence
CAIRO, Egypt, Aug. 20, 2010

Fight Victim Asks Court to Order Attacker Paralyzed by Damage to Spinal Cord Under Eye-for-an-Eye Islamic Law



(AP) A Saudi judge has asked several hospitals in the country whether they could damage a man's spinal cord as punishment after he was convicted of attacking another man with a cleaver and paralyzing him, the brother of the victim said Thursday.

Abdul-Aziz al-Mutairi, 22, was left paralyzed and subsequently lost a foot after a fight more than two years ago. He asked a judge in northwestern Tabuk province to impose an equivalent punishment on his attacker under Islamic law, his brother Khaled al-Mutairi told The Associated Press by telephone from there.

He said one of the hospitals, located in Tabuk, responded that it is possible to damage the spinal cord, but it added that the operation would have to be done at another more specialized facility. Saudi newspapers reported that a second hospital in the capital Riyadh declined, saying it could not inflict such harm.

Administrative offices of two of the hospitals and the court in Tabuk were closed for the Saudi weekend beginning Thursday and could not be reached for comment.

A copy of the medical report from the King Khaled Hospital in Tabuk province obtained by the AP said the same injury al-Mutairi suffers from can be inflicted on his attacker using a nerve stimulant, and inducing the same injuries in the same locations. The report was dated six months ago.

Saudi Arabia enforces strict Islamic law and occasionally doles out punishments based on the ancient legal code of an eye-for-an-eye. However, King Abdullah has been trying to clamp down on extremist ideology, including unauthorized clerics issuing odd religious decrees.

The query by the court, among the most unusual and extreme to have been made public in the kingdom, highlights the delicate attempt in Saudi Arabia to balance a push to modernize the country with interpretations of religious traditions that critics say are out of sync with a modern society.

The Saudi newspaper Okaz identified the judge as Saoud bin Suleiman al-Youssef.

The brother said the judge asked at least two hospitals for a medical opinion on whether surgeons could render the attacker's spinal cord nonfunctional. He and Saudi newspaper reports did not identify the attacker

Khaled al-Mutairi, 27, said the assailant was sentenced to 14 months in prison for the attack that paralyzed his younger brother, but he was released after seven months in an amnesty. He said the attacker then got a job as a school teacher .

"We are asking for our legal right under Islamic law," the brother said. "There is no better word than God's word - an eye for an eye."

A Saudi newspaper Okaz reported that a leading hospital in Riyadh - King Faisal Specialist Hospital - responded that it could not do the operation. It quoted a letter from the hospital saying "inflicting such harm is not possible," apparently refusing on ethical grounds.

Islamic law applied in Saudi Arabia allows defendants to ask for a similar punishment for harms inflicted on them. Cutting off the hands of thieves, for example, is common.

Under the law, the victim can receive a blood money to settle the case.

Khaled al-Mutairi said his family is not interested in blood money, and would be ready to send the attacker abroad to perform the operation if it were not possible in the kingdom.

Human rights group say trials in Saudi Arabia fall far below international standards. They usually take place behind closed doors and without adequate legal representation.

Those who are sentenced to death are often not informed of the progress of legal proceedings against them or of the date of execution until the morning on which they are taken out and beheaded.

Crucifying the headless body in a public place is a way to set an example, according to the kingdom's strict interpretation of Islam.

Amnesty International expressed concerns over the reports and said the rights group was contacting Saudi authorities for details.

"We are very concerned and we will appeal to the authorities not to carry out such a punishment," said Lamri Chirouf, the group's researcher on Saudi Arabia. Such measures are against international conventions against torture and international standards on human rights.

Chirouf said this was the first time Amnesty had heard of a punishment involving the damaging of a spinal cord.

"But it's hard to follow details of the Saudi justice system. People are sentenced in closed trials with no access to the public and no lawyers," he said.

According to Amnesty, in 2005, a convict in the kingdom had his teeth pulled out by a dentist because he had smashed another man's teeth out in a fight.

"We have also had cases of people sentenced to blindness because they have caused the blindness of another person," Chirouf said. "But never anything involving a spinal cord."

cbsnews.com

That's actually quite an interesting story. Having had the misfortune to live in the Eastern Province for two years, I firmly believe that they are capable of just about anything. It should be interesting to see how this plays out - doubt any real doctor would do it, but who knows?

Let's look on the bright side, if they do carry out the guys wishes then that is two more that we don't have to worry about.

Well in line with the Hippocratic oath, that one.

The rich ones, if they have the misfortune to receive the chopping off of the hand for thieving, are known to have the surgeon and team on hand to race them and their severed limb to the nearest VIP hospital to have it sown back on.

Saudis really are a bunch of fucking retards from the top down.

and would be ready to send the attacker abroad to perform the operation if it were not possible in the kingdom.

shouldnt be too hard to get a thai quack to do it for some decent shekel.

Originally Posted by jojo333

Let's look on the bright side, if they do carry out the guys wishes then that is two more that we don't have to worry about.

Have you considered that if the attacker who is a free man and working as a teacher manages to leave Saudi and say enter Britain and then apply for asylum, it will be granted as Britain ain't gonna send someone back home to get their spinal cord tampered with.

^Excellent! A TALL'er is born! (Teaching Arabic As A Local Language).

Saw this a few days ago... will be interesting to see if anything comes of it.

Any update on the eye-for-an-eye case that went down last year, with the judge ordering the attacker who blinded his ex-gf with acid to be blinded himself?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Saudis really are a bunch of fucking retards from the top down.

Yet have America on their knees, gently sucking on their nuts.

Absolutely, BRamboy, I do hope they prevent him from reaching the evil, nasty free world, so that it has one less parasite to pay for.

This is the reality of Islam and always has been, a backward, bloodthirsty dictatorial tyranny that oppresses the people under Sharia. It is the nature of Islam and Sharia, the 'peaceful' and 'tolerant' doctrine of slaughter, mayhem, murder, annihilation of peoples and cultures, all in the name of a moon god adopted by some homicidal desert rodent.

And this is how it will continue, until the forces of progress do the world a favour and pummel the dysfunctional ideology of Satan back into the desert from where it spewed to distress the world.


I note that the mealy mouthed hate-filled usefully brain damaged inbreds are inexplicably silent on this one. Can't imagine why.

Originally Posted by Chairman Mao

Saw this a few days ago... will be interesting to see if anything comes of it.

Any update on the eye-for-an-eye case that went down last year, with the judge ordering the attacker who blinded his ex-gf with acid to be blinded himself?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Saudis really are a bunch of fucking retards from the top down.

Yet have America on their knees, gently sucking on their nuts.

Not sure what the outcome was, CM. Last I know is that the lady was cleared to do the honours; and I do hope it was excruciating.

I agree with the most barbaric punishment for those dishing out domestic and other forms of gratuitous violence, and there is no hesitation in my mind that scummy Muslim males that mutilate their women and daughters should be subjected to the molten griefs of the damned. I also believe many otherwise pc infidels privately endorse certain Sharia deterrents, even if they lack the courage to admit it on an open forum. That said, the law of a depraved desert bandit runs counter to civilised principles and is wide open to deliberate, willful, and state sponsored abuse.

As for apologist arguments that Islam, or just Sharia can be reformed, forget it; this is a sham. Nothing can change. Neither Sharia nor a single word or comma of the Koran or other 'god given' Islamic text can be accepted while a single Muslim is still alive to resist, since this would render the whole imperfect and a renunciation of Allah.

And as it is both evil and cannot be reformed, it must be unmercifully trounced.

Originally Posted by keda

I agree with the most barbaric punishment for those dishing out domestic and other forms of gratuitous violence, and there is no hesitation in my mind that scummy Muslim males that mutilate their women and daughters should be subjected to the molten griefs of the damned.

What about scummy non-muslim males that mutilate their women and daughters?

what is the difference between a man blinding another with acid, and paralizing one with a cleaver, that warrants such difference punishments... you support blinding in one case, yet just a custodial sentence in the other?

Afghan Women and the Return of the Taliban

By Aryn Baker Thursday, Jul. 29, 2010





ENLARGE PHOTO+

Photograph by Jodi Bieber / INSTITUTE for TIME

• Comment

The Taliban pounded on the door just before midnight, demanding that Aisha, 18, be punished for running away from her husband's house. They dragged her to a mountain clearing near her village in the southern Afghan province of Uruzgan, ignoring her protests that her in-laws had been abusive, that she had no choice but to escape. Shivering in the cold air and blinded by the flashlights trained on her by her husband's family, she faced her spouse and accuser. Her in-laws treated her like a slave, Aisha pleaded. They beat her. If she hadn't run away, she would have died. Her judge, a local Taliban commander, was unmoved. Later, he would tell Aisha's uncle that she had to be made an example of lest other girls in the village try to do the same thing. The commander gave his verdict, and men moved in to deliver the punishment. Aisha's brother-in-law held her down while her husband pulled out a knife. First he sliced off her ears. Then he started on her nose. Aisha passed out from the pain but awoke soon after, choking on her own blood. The men had left her on the mountainside to die. (See managing editor Richard Stengel's message to readers about this story's cover image.)
This didn't happen 10 years ago, when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan. It happened last year. Now hidden in a secret women's shelter in the relative safety of Kabul, where she was taken after receiving care from U.S. forces, Aisha recounts her tale in a monotone, her eyes flat and distant. She listens obsessively to the news on a small radio that she keeps by her side. Talk that the Afghan government is considering some kind of political accommodation with the Taliban is the only thing that elicits an emotional response. "They are the people that did this to me," she says, touching the jagged bridge of scarred flesh and bone that frames the gaping hole in an otherwise beautiful face. "How can we reconcile with them?"



Read more: Afghan Women Fear Their Fate Amid Taliban Negotiations - TIME

Originally Posted by Chairman Mao

Originally Posted by keda

I agree with the most barbaric punishment for those dishing out domestic and other forms of gratuitous violence, and there is no hesitation in my mind that scummy Muslim males that mutilate their women and daughters should be subjected to the molten griefs of the damned.

What about scummy non-muslim males that mutilate their women and daughters?

ditto.

what is the difference between a man blinding another with acid, and paralizing one with a cleaver, that warrants such difference punishments... you support blinding in one case, yet just a custodial sentence in the other?

Please don't tell me what I support, or twist what I posted to give you grounds for righteous outrage at what you can then say I support. We were discussing the punishment in the context of Muslims and Sharia, which is why I referred to Muslims in the context of Sharia. I am sure that is not difficult to follow, unless it is for you.

Anyway, I don't recall making any mention of a custodial sentence for the type of crime under discussion. Clearly I must have, though, since you say so.

Our spineless leaders have much to learn from this Sharia interpretation of an 'eye for an eye'.

Each time Islamic terrorists murder 10, 50, 100, we could respond in the same spirit of Sharia by deleting a Muslim village, town, and city respectively.

Do it once, twice, ten times with fingers on the button for the next as we reach for the coffee, and I swear by Allah the rodents will retreat to lick their wounds.

Originally Posted by keda

what is the difference between a man blinding another with acid, and paralizing one with a cleaver, that warrants such difference punishments... you support blinding in one case, yet just a custodial sentence in the other?

Please don't tell me what I support,

I'm not, I was asking you a question.

or twist what I posted to give you grounds for righteous outrage at what you can then say I support.

We were discussing the punishment in the context of Muslims and Sharia, which is why I referred to Muslims in the context of Sharia. I am sure that is not difficult to follow, unless it is for you.

Yes, and I was wondering if you support the same punishments for same crimes, regardless of religion.

Anyway, I don't recall making any mention of a custodial sentence for the type of crime under discussion.

You didn't.

Clearly I must have, though, since you say so.

No I didn't, it was a question, you understand what a question mark (?) means, right?

Originally Posted by taxexile

Afghan Women and the Return of the Taliban

By Aryn Baker Thursday, Jul. 29, 2010





ENLARGE PHOTO+

Photograph by Jodi Bieber / INSTITUTE for TIME

• Comment

The Taliban pounded on the door just before midnight, demanding that Aisha, 18, be punished for running away from her husband's house. They dragged her to a mountain clearing near her village in the southern Afghan province of Uruzgan, ignoring her protests that her in-laws had been abusive, that she had no choice but to escape. Shivering in the cold air and blinded by the flashlights trained on her by her husband's family, she faced her spouse and accuser. Her in-laws treated her like a slave, Aisha pleaded. They beat her. If she hadn't run away, she would have died. Her judge, a local Taliban commander, was unmoved. Later, he would tell Aisha's uncle that she had to be made an example of lest other girls in the village try to do the same thing. The commander gave his verdict, and men moved in to deliver the punishment. Aisha's brother-in-law held her down while her husband pulled out a knife. First he sliced off her ears. Then he started on her nose. Aisha passed out from the pain but awoke soon after, choking on her own blood. The men had left her on the mountainside to die. (See managing editor Richard Stengel's message to readers about this story's cover image.)
This didn't happen 10 years ago, when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan. It happened last year. Now hidden in a secret women's shelter in the relative safety of Kabul, where she was taken after receiving care from U.S. forces, Aisha recounts her tale in a monotone, her eyes flat and distant. She listens obsessively to the news on a small radio that she keeps by her side. Talk that the Afghan government is considering some kind of political accommodation with the Taliban is the only thing that elicits an emotional response. "They are the people that did this to me," she says, touching the jagged bridge of scarred flesh and bone that frames the gaping hole in an otherwise beautiful face. "How can we reconcile with them?"



Read more: Afghan Women Fear Their Fate Amid Taliban Negotiations - TIME

The girl was clearly at fault because Muslims, their weak minded apologists, and even Western leaders tell us Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance where women have rights and are respected.

This is why we know the article was written by a bigoted Islamophobe, because it tells us only that the girl ran away in fear for her life, but not what else she obviously must have done to deserve the punishment of death.

Originally Posted by keda

The girl was clearly at fault because Muslims, their weak minded apologists, and even Western leaders tell us Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance where women have rights and are respected.

You need to pick up a weapon and get yourself on the frontlines mate.

Too old and mellow for that. Praps next time around, because one thing for sure I won't be distracted by 72 virgins.

Originally Posted by keda

mellow

yes, you sound at peace.

Originally Posted by Chairman Mao

Saw this a few days ago... will be interesting to see if anything comes of it.

Any update on the eye-for-an-eye case that went down last year, with the judge ordering the attacker who blinded his ex-gf with acid to be blinded himself?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Saudis really are a bunch of fucking retards from the top down.

Yet have America on their knees, gently sucking on their nuts.

Only because they're told to by the people that *really* run America. (Clue: It isn't Obama).

There was some brain scan research not so long go that showed that revenge lights up the brain in much the same way that cocaine does. Kind of explains why revenge can be pleasurable and so all consuming of the people who persue it.

Given that islam has 'protected' moslems from every kind of vice except revenge.... you can kind of understand why they are so into it.

I can understand why the victim and the family would want revenge like this. many would.... but its so unhealthy for a society to get involved in shit like this

Originally Posted by Chairman Mao

Originally Posted by keda

mellow

yes, you sound at peace.

Very much. Having a soft spot for Islam and its apologists, doesn't mean I'm not at peace with myself.