[ April 19, 2024 ]
“A verdict of not guilty did NOT mean that we [the Jury] thought Noor Salman was unaware of what Omar Mateen was planning to do,” wrote the Jury Foreman. “On the contrary we were convinced she did know. She may not have known what day, or what location, but she knew. However, we were not tasked with deciding if she was aware of a potential attack.” This statement was posted by the Orlando Sentinel (03-30-18).
Defendant, NOOR ZAHI SALMAN, was found not guilty of two charges: (1) “Aiding and Abetting the Attempted Provision and Provision of Material Support to a Foreign Terrorist Organization;” and (2) “Obstruction of Justice.” See the Indictment.1
Respect the Jury and Verdict
Story continues below advertisement
The American legal system works only if citizens respect the Jury and Verdict. The Judge provides the law and instructions. The parties provide facts and evidence. The Jury is tasked to determine whether a defendant is guilty of the crime as defined in the Indictment, and based on evidence only presented in court. The Jury has returned a Verdict of not guilty of all charges.
It is human nature to play “armchair pundit.” This author, and likely you as reader, did not attend the trial. We do not have access to evidence including testimony, other than reports via the media. A defendant is not required to, and this defendant did not, testify at trial. So we do not know the defendant’s state of mind, or whether defendant is credible.
Yet, we may analyze, speculate, and proffer opinions as hypotheticals. To help understand the distinction between not guilty and innocent, please consider review of charges; Taqiyya: Islamic doctrine of lies to infidels; and whether there should be recorded interviews of persons who may be charged later.
The charges require a defendant to have actual knowledge
From the Indictment:
COUNT ONE: She “did knowingly aid and abet Omar Mateen’s attempted provision and provision of ‘material support or resources,’ as this term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b)(1), including personnel and services, to a designated foreign terrorist organization, namely, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, knowing that the organization was designated as a terrorist organization, and that the organization had engaged and was engaging in terrorist activity and terrorism, and the death of multiple victims resulted. [sic] In violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2339B(a)(1) and 2 (aiding and abetting).” 2
COUNT TWO: She “did knowingly engage in misleading conduct toward another person and persons, that is, Officers of the Fort Pierce, Florida, Police Department and Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with the intent to hinder, delay, and prevent the communication to federal law enforcement officers and judges of the United States of information relating to the commission and possible commission of a federal offense, … information relating to the attack on June 12, 2016, at the Pulse Night Club, in Orlando, Florida.” [sic] In violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(3).” 3
Islamic doctrine not explained during trial?
Trials often include experts, who may offer opinions. The media apparently did not report testimony from experts on Islam. No evidence of Islamic doctrine including every Muslim’s duty of Jihad, or women considered as a second-class. Oh, but that would be misconstrued as “Islamophobic!”
Yet, if a Muslim wife is charged for allegedly helping her Muslim husband to commit Jihad, should a Jury understand a possible Islamic motivation? There are Islamic scholars: Robert Spencer, whose Jihad Watch includes Gregory M. Davis’ explanations as “Islam 101:”
“The violent injunctions of the Quran and the violent precedents set by Muhammad set the tone for the Islamic view of politics and of world history… Islam means submission… The rest of the world, which has not accepted Sharia law and so is not in a state of submission, exists in a state of rebellion or war with the will of Allah… Islam’s message to the non-Muslim world is the same now as it was in the time of Muhammad and throughout history: submit or be conquered.” 4
“Taqiyya – Religious Deception[:] Due to the state of war… systematic lying to the infidel, must be considered part and parcel of Islamic tactics… Historically, examples of taqiyya include permission to renounce Islam itself in order to save one’s neck or ingratiate oneself with an enemy. It is not hard to see that the implications of taqiyya are insidious in the extreme: they essentially render negotiated settlement – and, indeed, all veracious communication… impossible.” 5
The above was not presented to the Jury in this case. Defendant claimed ignorance of the attack, but re-read the Jury Foreman’s statement at the beginning of this article.
Whether a statement is reliable and credible
Islamic doctrine, including Taqiyya, is not relevant, a possible argument by defense. Yet, consider the Jury Instructions, specifically no. 7:
“In determining whether any such statement is reliable and credible, consider factors bearing on the voluntariness of the statement. For example, consider the age, gender, training, education, occupation, and physical and mental condition of Ms. Salman, and any evidence concerning her treatment while being questioned if the statement was made in response to questioning by government officials, and all other circumstances in evidence surrounding the making of the statement.”
Before her arrest, Defendant submitted her defense to the New York Times. “In the interview, Ms. Salman said she had a reason for talking publically now (11/16): ‘I just want people to know that I am human. I am a mother.’”
Was Ms. Salman uneducated or unsavvy? “She was a poor student in high school but earned an associate degree in medical administration.”
To summarize: “Ms. Salman denied any involvement in the attack or any knowledge of what her husband was going to do. She described him as someone who angered easily, beat her often and lived his life in secret.”
See Something, Say Nothing
Was Ms. Salman the stereotypical American housewife, non-religious, who was oblivious of her husband’s actions?
She reportedly was aware: Her husband was investigated twice (circa 2013) by the FBI, but cleared him, as reported by the above NYT’s article.
She reportedly was aware: Her husband watched “ISIS propaganda and beheading videos,” as reported by Fox News, and the above NYT’s article.
She reportedly was aware: She “shopped with her husband at a Walmart the night before the massacre where he bought five containers of ammunition,” reported by Fox News.
She reportedly was aware, as indicated by her alleged third statement: “[W]hat Mateen had been planning – and had been with him as he drove around Pulse days earlier,” as reported by the Orlando Sentinel.
Ms. Salman did not connect the dots: She claimed the above as isolated, otherwise innocent, circumstances: Her husband was cleared; he worked as a security guard; and he only wanted site-seeing trips to Orlando.
Should law enforcement record interviews?
Yes, according to the Jury Foreman: “I wish that the FBI had recorded their interviews with Ms. Salman as there were several significant inconsistencies with the written summaries of her statements.” See the Foreman’s statement listed above.
Historically, recorded interviews were the exception. Consider the FBI’s memo (03-23-06) titled Electronic Recording of Confessions and Witness Interviews. “[A]gents may not electronically record confessions or interviews, openly or surreptitiously, unless authorized by the SAC [Special Agent in Charge].”
“There is no federal law that requires federal agents to electronically record custodial interviews and, to our knowledge, no federal law enforcement agency currently mandates this practice,” reported the memo, but observed: “agents testifying to statements made by criminal defendants have increasingly faced intense cross-examination concerning this policy in apparent efforts to cast doubt upon the voluntariness of statements in the absence of recordings or the accuracy of the testimony regarding the content of the statement.” 6
Arguments against a recorded interview: “First, the presence of recording equipment may interfere with and undermine the successful rapport-building interviewing technique which the FBI practices. Second, FBI agents have successfully testified to custodial defendants’ statements for generations with only occasional, and rarely successful, challenges. Third, as all experienced investigators and prosecutors know, perfectly lawful and acceptable interviewing techniques do not always come across in recorded fashion to lay persons as proper means of obtaining information from defendants.” 7
A recorded interview may be appropriate in circumstances, such as “extensive media scrutiny,” cited the memo.8 And equally important, consider: “If prosecution is anticipated, the type and seriousness of the crime, including, in particular, whether the crime has a mental element (such as knowledge or intent to defraud), proof of which would be considerably aided by the defendant’s admissions in his own words.” 9
The above is nuanced for “individuals in federal custody, following arrest but prior to their first appearance in court,” wrote the Department of Justice in a press release: “Beginning on July 11, 2014, the new policy establishes a presumption that the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosive [sic] (ATF), and the United States Marshals Service (USMS) will electronically record interviews occurring in a place of detention with suitable recording equipment.”
Conclusion
The Jury has returned a Verdict of not guilty of all charges. We respect the Jury and Verdict.
Defendant claimed a defense of domestic violence, that: “Ms. Salman was too busy trying to survive,” as reported by the NYT’s above article. “In the last weeks of Mr. Mateen’s life, Ms. Salman said, her husband started being kind again. She believed she was being rewarded for her silence.”
“See something, say nothing” should be the equivalent of “aiding and abetting.”
Gerald Lostutter is a Florida licensed attorney, college professor, and journalist. He has worked in the print and broadcast media. His comedy can be heard on Central Florida Radio. Scroll down to WDBO-AM 580, and WMEL-AM 920.
1 United States of America v. Noor Zahi Salman, Case: 6:17-cr-00018-JA-KRS. This case merged a related case of 6:17-cr-00018-JA-KRS-1. Both were filed Jan. 12, 2017, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Orlando). This public record is online via Pacer, which will require the User’s account, and possible costs.
2 Indictment, Count I, B. The Crime, p. 2.
3 Indictment, Count II, pp. 2-3.
4 Islam 101 (PDF): 2. Jihad and Dhimmitude, c. Dar al-Islam and dar al-harb: the House of Islam and the House of War.
5 Islam 101 (PDF): 2. Jihad and Dhimmitude, c. Dar al-Islam…, i. Taqiyya – Religious Deception.
6 FBI Memo, Electronic Recording, p. 2.
7 FBI Memo, Electronic Recording, p. 3.
8 FBI Memo, Electronic Recording, p. 2, footnote 2.
9 FBI Memo, Electronic Recording, p. 4.
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Please contribute here.
or
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.
Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America's survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.
Follow Pamela Geller on Trump's social media platform, Truth Social. It's open and free.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spammy or unhelpful, click the - symbol under the comment to let us know. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
If you would like to join the conversation, but don't have an account, you can sign up for one right here.
If you are having problems leaving a comment, it's likely because you are using an ad blocker, something that break ads, of course, but also breaks the comments section of our site. If you are using an ad blocker, and would like to share your thoughts, please disable your ad blocker. We look forward to seeing your comments below.
24 Comments
6 years ago
OT
… “sit down with an Islamic scholar” to LEARN about Islam. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/audio-uk-thought-police-claim-were-not-the-thought-police-as-they-harass-man-for-his-opinions-about-islam
… dont’t need a scholar™ — graduate basic school is enough -> can READ sadist 40/2, ‘amputate hands’ (without anesthesia) https://quran.com/5/38-40
vs. Art 1; 2, 2 German Basic law (Constitution)
britianistan is finished.
This happened when one is too coward to name the enemy -> allah https://quran.com/41/28
6 years ago
Reply to
Thorsten
Thx for trying to contribute info,but I’ve got no time for obscure(to me)texts.So you’re banned on my acct.
6 years ago
“See something, say nothing”
should be the equivalent of “aiding and abetting.”
It is and justice was not carried out.
LBGT are you celebrating this????
6 years ago
She didn’t physically aid and abet, but by the evidence she was definitely hoping her husband would execute a successful jihad.
6 years ago
I get from the article that Ms. Geller respects the verdict, but nonetheless something is rotten in Denmark if this is a “legitimate” verdict.
6 years ago
Why isn’t Ms Geller posting this material?
Revelations from Bill O’Reilly’s settlements underscore how Fox News enables its sexual harassers http://mm4a.org/Z6s
6 years ago
Reply to
Kat Mandu
What does that have to do with ALL of the mass murders, tortures, and gang rapes perpetrated by moslems? Those run into the millions.
6 years ago
There is a problem with the f. b. i. If a person tells them something, they in essence are volunteering to be a suspect. If nothing is said, then they are traitorous. This all stems from the f.b.i not being trustworthy, open with information as it is declassified and heavily involved in perceived coverups. The shameless pursuit of convictions and apparent manipulation or withholding evidence that leads to the truth has made the f.b.i a liability to the legal industry.
6 years ago
Reply to
Mahou Shoujo
It has a great deal to do with the filthy, lying, stealing, corrupt FBI. One can affix blame on the judge and jury. Yet, the VAST (special emphasis added) blame falls onto the shoulders of the FBI.
6 years ago
Reply to
Mahou Shoujo
Agreed. Martha Stewart spent time in a federal lockup for lying about a crime that was never committed. The real underlying reason is she is a strong conservative woman.
6 years ago
We need cheeseburger control, damn it! and cheeseburger background checks!
In 2004 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention slashed its estimates of obesity-related deaths from 365,000 a year
https://www.nbcnews.com/healthmain/heavy-burden-obesity-may-be-even-deadlier-thought-6C10930019
6 years ago
She said “nothing”. I say accomplice.
F- this B-.
F- pisslam.
6 years ago
The article leaves itself open to question with such grammatical gaffes as “publically” for publicly and “site-seeing” for sight seeing, though the second one may have unintentional merit. She helped him scout potential targets in addition to accompanying her husband on trips to buy ammo.
You don’t sleep with someone for such an extended period of time and remain oblivious as to what makes them tick. To paint raghead women as being innocent victims incapable of murder and mayhem is suicidal. After all, they have had a good teacher.
Also, there is no mention that Mateen’s father was a paid FBI informant.
6 years ago
I do not respect this verdict. Once again, our laws and legal system are being used against us. Once again, law enforcement has failed us.
6 years ago
There was no way that the bitch Muslim didn’t know the husband was planning a terrorist act. By the way what ever happened to the Nidal Hasan case that Obamba never put on trial.
6 years ago
Reply to
Stephen Honig
And handed a death sentence. The feds comply with state law in such cases and TX is definitely a death penalty state.
6 years ago
Agreed about the jury. Instead of relying on dumb luck to empanel the twelve stupidest people in town, adept lawyers use “jury consultants” who check the personal profile of those potential jurors in the pool and then advise the attorneys on which ones which statistically may render the desired verdict.
6 years ago
Yes, Jury went with the law, and how the charges were explained. It’s not a matter of laws or procedure being changed, my opinion is that the prosecutor was remiss in laying charges that could be prosecuted. OR – is there something missing in potential charges that would take away more rights from most of us? IE: “ya, I had my doubts; he seemed to be obsessed but I thought it was a rant; I just tried to help him through a hard place in his life; etc. How much privacy, or thoughts, is ANYONE willing to give up, on a daily basis in reality?
The jury did their job based on the ACTUAL CHARGES. I don’t like the outcome, but no way do I want to trade places with anyone on that jury.
Question: were the charges laid against her appropiate for what we ‘think’ she did?
6 years ago
Bitch should be in jail.
6 years ago
3.30.18: Noor Salman, wife of Pulse nightclub shooter Omar Mateen, was exonerated on all charges of aiding and abetting and obstruction of justice even though the jury was convinced she knew her husband was plotting the attack. WHY?
The jury foreman in the case, “I wish that the FBI had recorded their interviews with Ms. Salman as there were several significant inconsistencies with the written summaries of her statements. The bottom line is that, based on the letter of the law, and the detailed instructions provided by the court, we were presented with no option but to return a verdict of not guilty.”
WHAT? The interviews were not recorded? Why not?
7.5.16: FBI director James Comey made three discrepant statements during his concluding press briefing remarks:
● “Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary [Hillary] Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”
● “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
● “In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.”
REALLY?
The letter of the law exonerated the defendants in both cases? I don’t think so. In both cases the FBI failed to make its case. Is the FBI an organization of bunglers? Or has the FBI been so compromised and politicized by Obama and the Deep State that it failed its mission to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution?
Thanks to the persistence and perseverance of Tom Fitton, president of watchdog organization Judicial Watch, and Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) we know that Comey’s original memo was altered. Comey’s draft read:
“There is evidence to support a conclusion that Secretary of State Clinton, and others, used the private email server in a manner that was grossly negligent with respect to the handling of classified information.”
Reference to Hillary Clinton’s illegal private email server were removed. Grossly negligent is a criminal offense – extremely careless is not. Of course the FBI could not find a single case to support bringing criminal charges! The altered language in Comey’s memo intentionally perverts the letter of the law to exonerate Hillary Clinton. Why?
Because bringing criminal charges against Hillary Clinton would expose Obama’s corrupt Justice Department including Loretta Lynch.
The FBI was called upon to investigate both Salman and Clinton. The FBI is not an organization of bunglers – far from it. But the FBI has been politicized beyond recognition by Obama and the Deep State. So what does absolving these two FBI sister wives accomplish?
Beyond protecting Obama and his administration absolution erodes public confidence in the FBI, the rule of law, and validates suspicions of a two-tier system of justice. When the rule of law breaks down, lawlessness follows, ultimately leading to anarchy. Anarchy is the goal of the Deep State because it provides the chaos necessary to nationalize the police force.
If you want to know the motive look at the result. The aftermath of the FBI investigations and sensationalized reporting of the Pulse nightclub massacre, Las Vegas shooting, and Parkland School shooting tragedies expose a principal objective of the Deep State – gun control. The current hysterical leftist cries for gun control are designed to leave the public disarmed and unable to protect itself from a nationalized police force.
The Deep State requires a disarmed public to implement its New World Order of one-world government – ruled by themselves, of course. President Trump’s America-First presidency, with its commitment to American sovereignty, has destabilized the Deep State. Obama, the primetime spokesman for the Deep State, promised to transform America. In 2008 most Americans had no idea that his promise was a pledge to socialize and then internationalize America into a New World Order ruled by globalist elites. Now we know.
The Deep State is populated by a species of politicians interbreeding and colluding to increase the population of their own breed of collectivism called globalism. Globalism is internationalized collectivism. A system of governance that denies national sovereignty, individual freedom, and ownership of personal property. Like socialism and communism, globalism promises social justice and economic equality. But just like socialism and communism, globalism will provide a three-tier infrastructure of enslavement.
At the tip of the pyramid will be the few globalist elite power brokers living in splendor who own everything and dispense goods and services as they deem appropriate – “for the public good,” of course. The second tier belongs to the globalist enforcers who implement the will of the elite and keep the population in line. The third tier is the pyramid’s enormous base and belongs to the enslaved population duped by promises of free stuff to surrender their individual freedom.
The promises of collectivism are never the reality of collectivism. They are the deceitful political promises of Ponzi-schemers conning the public to invest in their globalist pyramid.
The Washington Ponzi swamp is the habitat of the Deep State and the rivers that supply it have lettered names – FBI, CIA, DOJ and NSA. What the absolution of FBI sister wives Salman and Clinton reveal is that politicized government agencies do not support the United States Constitution and rule of law. They support the promises of Deep State pyramid schemers intending to bring Obama’s collectivism and one-world government to America.
6 years ago
They should have arrested her from the next day and had no bail because of terrorist murders the FBI seems more corrupt the more we learn about all the terrorists the “have on their radar” that complete their killing sprees
