I typed up a response to your points but then I realized that it would be wrong to do that and then say, but I don’t want to talk about it any more. So, I’ve deleted my points and I’ll just say I don’t think it’s productive to discuss it anymore. :)

Salaam.

LOL, siraaj you’re really kind of full of it at this point. Sorry. You and 100 other commenters had no problem with the police investigation when it first began (and same with the Dayton incident) which you are now hypothesizing might be corrrupt and intentionallly hiding information (Apparently it’s only corrupt when it’s not on the side of the muslims, when it benefits the muslims than it’s all good) and went on ad nauseum about the evil doers who attacked the woman. You had no proof, no suspects and no confession. You did not wait for a trial, you did not wait for evidence. The entire thing was based on speculation. Yet you’re now suddenly getting all sanctimonious about “innocent until proven guilty” and all this other nonsense of waiting for the evidence and trial before indicting the woman and the police might be lying and blah blah blah when it’s fairly obvious she’s a liar and completely full of it. It’s pretty laughable and quite pathetic.

Actually, my first comment on this thread was to counsel muslims to patience rather than attacking sister Safia. In no place do you find me “condemning” anything.

Secondly, it is the accused, not the accuser, that is innocent until proven guilty. Read my posts above – I have said very clearly that I will readily accept her guilt if the proof of such guilt is made public – what’s wrong with wanting to know how everyone came to their conclusions? Thus far, none of that has been shared.

Finally, I am not accusing the Elmhurst police of anything – my point in throwing those examples out is that there are a number of reasons for why this case could have been dismissed, that is one. Another is incompetence, and I mentioned that in a later post.

I’m open to her being guilty, but I think the door has been shut too quickly on her.

Siraaj

“So quick reactions from police and university = proof of guilt? You’ve said this twice now in one way or another, I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that one.”

You and everyone else certainly seemed to think so when all this and the Dayton issue first came out. Kind of weird that you have suddenly had a change of heart.

“Assume the best until you can prove the worst”

The smiley after it was particularly appropriate, Again, nice to see you’ve had such a charitable change of heart

The reason we don’t know 100 percent for sure whether the sister is still claiming there was an attack is because she and her attorney are choosing not to be explicit about it. And it seems for the most part that the police and school are trying to be respectful to her by not openly saying that she lied and you are taking their respect as a reason to accuse them of botching the investigation or falsely accusing her which I must say I think is a little unfair to them.

Salaam alaykum,

Correct me if I’m wrong here, but isn’t charging her with making a false charge and openly disclosing this to the public just that – saying she lied? If it isn’t, then what is it?

But back to the original point of this post (which was going to be short, remember?). The reason I was almost completely certain that the sister did confess and even more certain that the investigation showed the attack story was completely incredible is that the police and school moved so quickly to conclude that.

So quick reactions from police and university = proof of guilt? You’ve said this twice now in one way or another, I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that one.

So, that’s why I was so sure so quickly that there was not an attack. However, certainly I don’t put anything past the police and while I don’t see why the school shouldn’t be trusted, I don’t claim the school is infallible either. However, for the authorities to come out and say that she lied and for her or her attorney not even to release a statement saying that she maintains the attack occurred basically proves that the sister is admitting that the attack did not occur.

On the flip side, if the attack did occur, and then she was accused of lying on top of it, and had to deal with all the media about her, and her young age, maybe she didn’t handle it too well, or maybe her family is simply saying we want to keep quiet about this because we don’t want to draw attention to ourselves, our names are already being dragged in the mud (desi culture).

Yes, this is all drawn from right out of my imagination, but these are also credible possibilities – if we have nothing concrete, no matter how likely a scenario you have, until the facts come out unequivocally (and not anonymously), it remains speculation, and so I still maintain, let’s not indict her (metaphorically speaking, not literally).

Assume the best until you can prove the worst :)

Siraaj

I’m not going to belabor this (too late, you say?) because I’d really rather be arguing on the side of the sister and the benefit of our discussion is not entirely clear. But since you did specifically wonder why people reached the conclusion they did so early I’ll tell you at least why I did. Though, before I do, I again want to separate myself from those that attacked the sister or, as you said seek to ‘indict’ her (but of course no one on the comments thread indicted here, that was done by others in the legal system).

At the risk of repeating the main point of my last comment, my interest in the topic at this point is that it should be clear whether the sister is acknowledging there was no attack or still maintaining there was one. The school, the police, the prosecutors are all clear that there was no attack. This was definitely based on their investigation, but according to some sources, was based on her confession as well. The reason we don’t know 100 percent for sure whether the sister is still claiming there was an attack is because she and her attorney are choosing not to be explicit about it. And it seems for the most part that the police and school are trying to be respectful to her by not openly saying that she lied and you are taking their respect as a reason to accuse them of botching the investigation or falsely accusing her which I must say I think is a little unfair to them.

But back to the original point of this post (which was going to be short, remember?). The reason I was almost completely certain that the sister did confess and even more certain that the investigation showed the attack story was completely incredible is that the police and school moved so quickly to conclude that.

If you’ll remember this was a big story at the time in the media and no doubt was an even bigger event for the campus community. They were increasing security, vigils were being held, etc. In that context, if the school and police were just a little unsure of her story or didn’t know what to think, they would have continued to act as if the attack happened as they sought more information. IN fact, even if they were basically sure the attack didn’t happen but not 100 percent the police would most likely not have arrested her. (In fact, one of the reasons I believe the confession story, although it was apparently an anonymous tip to one media outlet is that I can’t believe the police would have arrested her without a confession in a situation like this.)

So, that’s why I was so sure so quickly that there was not an attack. However, certainly I don’t put anything past the police and while I don’t see why the school shouldn’t be trusted, I don’t claim the school is infallible either. However, for the authorities to come out and say that she lied and for her or her attorney not even to release a statement saying that she maintains the attack occurred basically proves that the sister is admitting that the attack did not occur.

Allaah knows best.

Let me preface my response by saying that I’m by no means a conspiracy theorist, or a partisan who is simply taking this sister’s side because she’s Muslim and will blindly defend her regardless of facts on the ground.

You’ve made some valid arguments, and I appreciate the points you’ve made – however, those points are easier to make in hindsight as more information becomes available – the information you’ve presented was surely not available at the time the conclusion by yourself and others were drawn – those conclusions were drawn immediately after the report without the information at hand you’ve presented now – I’d be more interested in what caused everyone to initially come to the conclusion that they did (as you did, for example, in the quote I posted).

Therein lies my point – waiting for it all to come out. It may be that as more information comes out, we’ll find she did lie, and I’m very open to that possibility. However, I’m still very open to the possibility of the opposite being the case as well.

As for some of the points you raised:

1. “…then the attacker is still out there and the police have decided to let him get away.” Very possibly – I have had family in the police force, and while there are many good guys out there, there’s also a lot of crooked officers, particularly in the suburbs (surprise surprise, it’s not just cook county). I’m sure you’re keeping up more with Patrick Fitzgerald’s current investigation into corruption with Chicago officers than I am. So no, I don’t think because the cops said so, it must be true.

2. “The school has decided to expel her for making the allegation.” Yes, she withdrew, actually, after officials told her she would be expelled for the allegations. This doesn’t prove she lied, this proves that the school was sufficiently convinced by the investigation of the police – it doesn’t prove that the investigation came to the proper conclusion.

3. “If that is the assumption you are going on, you think we should be sitting still and doing nothing about it?” As I’ve said previously, I’m open to her being guilty, and I simply don’t find enough compelling evidence (presented in the media) to personally indict this sister, so, being openminded about either possibility, I want to know who’s in the right, and who’s in the wrong before I decide how to act.

4. “You think her lawyer would be complimenting the police for the way they handled the investigation?” Maybe he believes they followed the correct procedures for conducting such an investigation, were cooperative in dealing with him, the girl, and their family, but it’s altogether possible is the wrong conclusion and there is a mistake? I really don’t know, you’d have to ask him ;) Does this prove she lied? Probably not.

Again, that’s why I feel many of you are mistaken and just plain wrong in indicting her. From what I can see, conclusions were made well in advance of available information (which is being used now), and the available information being provided to prove she lied is essentially reactions by various people to the investigation.

What would do it for me? A confirmation of a confession would be one means – thus far, I have not seen anything, not a quoted statement from any source stating she confessed. I have seen some Muslim blogs saying this, but no official quotes from Elmhurst Police. Another thing that would do it for me would be to know what it was in the interviews that Elmhurst Police conducted with staff and students that helped them conclude the whole thing was a hoax – I’ve only read the quoted statement that they charged her based on conclusions based on interviews, not based on confessions.

Strangely enough, the vast majority of media outlets who cover this story and rehash the details of its history never mention confessions, they mention police investigations that concluded she lied based on interviews (at least, from the sources I’ve read).

Siraaj

As you probably but may not know, pleading “Not Guilty” at the Arraignment is routine or as the news report said “perfunctory.” At arraignment you plead not guilty regardless of whether you confessed or not, regardless of whether there is a videotape proving you are guilty or not, etc.

Many people do plead guilty in our criminal justice system, but none of them do it at the arraignment. The attorney will not even ask the client what to plead but will tell him or her “At this court date you plead not Guilty.”

I’m not sure if the public ever needs to really understand all the facts behind what happened with the sister and why she claimed to have been attacked but for those who do think it’s necessary I agree that should be done once all the facts are out. However, it was announced to the public that there was a “Muslim student attacked, Held at Gun Point” based on her being a Muslim. If the sister has not acknowledged that it didn’t happen then the attacker is still out there and the police have decided to let him get away. The school has decided to expel her for making the allegation. If that is the assumption you are going on, you think we should be sitting still and doing nothing about it? You think her lawyer would be complimenting the police for the way they handled the investigation? You think the defense would be allowing media reports to surface claiming she confessed and not simply say, those are all lies, the attack happened, there is still a perpetrator on the loose?

I don’t know what she’s being treated for either but that’s because her attorney deliberately did not say. As Muslims, we don’t bet, but there is no chance that there will ever be a trial in this case (assuming that’s what you mean by her ‘day in court’). I hope for the sake of the sister and I’m sure this is what her attorney is trying to have happen, is that he will try to resolve the case in some way where the sister will not have to go to jail and where the case will not get any further media attention, and we will know as little as possible about what really happened. Now, that may not be completely possible because of how much media attention the case got initially.

I appreciate you sticking up for our sister and for Islamic principles but after she made a public statement that she was attacked it is her responsibility to be clear about whether she is still standing by that or not. While due to the pending trial, she is not going to speak directly to it, everything that she, the police, the school, and her attorney have done since then seems to me meant to indicate that there was no attack.
There is no need to await for a trial on the disorderly conduct charge to simply affirm that. And even if you choose to be safe and not draw any conclusions in your own mind, alhamdulillaah, but I think you are wrong to criticize others for concluding that there was no attack in light of the facts as we know them.

That is my only point.

Siraaj,

ABC7 News is reporting that the sister admitted to the police during questioning that she made up the story of being attacked. We don’t know for sure how they know this, but it is very unlikely she would be charged with a crime of false report if there was any doubt about it.

Allaah knows best.

Abu Noor, that was a statement you made earlier in the comments – my point this whole time has been that there are allegations against her, and we haven’t yet heard from her, and we ought not to act as though the police charging her with a crime automatically meant she was guilty – I didn’t read anywhere that she had confessed to anything, there’s been no verification (to my knowledge) of this, and now she’s pleading not guilty? Not guilty of what – lying to the police I would imagine, and if she told the truth, then the potential remains that she was assaulted.

Treated for what? Community backlash, people not believing her? I don’t know – what I do know is that until all the facts are out, no one should be automatically assuming she’s guilty, or anything of that nature. My point is, wait until everything comes out, let her have her day in court, let’s see what comes out of it, then let’s pass whatever final judgements we have on this. Right now, after the police said what they said, everyone, muslim and nonmuslim, was quick to either condemn or simply agree that she was wrong, or that she lied – I’m not saying the police are lying, I’m simply saying, wait it out.

Siraaj

The police concluded that there was no attack and arrested our sister. Her own attorney is complimenting them and saying they did an excellent job in handling the case. Are you still saying that somehow there is a question of whether the attack occurred?