Jihadis Jailed: Five Extremist Muslims from New Mexico Compound Arrested by FBI

LifeZette ^ | Saturday, September 1, 2018 | By Michele Blood

[Eddie01]

The FBI arrested New Mexico Amalia compound residents on Friday on federal firearms and conspiracy charges, according to a statement by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the District of New Mexico.

The arrests came just two days after Judge Emilio Chavez dismissed child abuse charges against three of the five on a timing technicality.

Prosecutors had missed the deadline for an evidentiary hearing to establish probable cause under New Mexico’s “10-day rule,” as Fox News and other outlets reported.

Earlier this month, police raided the ramshackle dessert dwelling in search of 3-year-old Abdul-Ghani Wahhaj, who had gone missing from Georgia.

They discovered 11 starving, severely neglected children along with the boy’s remains amid the squalor, as multiple outlets reported.

The children were reportedly being trained to conduct school shootings.

The adult defendants arrested Friday, all between the ages of 35 and 40, include Haitian national Jany Leveille — who was illegally present in the United States — Siraj Ibn Wahhaj, Hujrah Wahhaj, Subhanah Wahhaj, and Lucas Morton.

Leveille is charged with “being an alien unlawfully in possession of firearms and ammunition in the District of New Mexico from Nov. 2017 through Aug. 2018.”

The Wahhajs and Morton are charged with aiding and abetting Leveille’s offense and conspiring to commit the offence, per the DOJ statement.

The firearms charges arose from a search warrant executed August 3, when the Taos County Sheriff’s Office found at least 11 firearms and a large quantity of ammunition. Leveille stands accused of transporting the firearms in her car across state lines.

If convicted, Leveille faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison followed by deportation.

The remaining four also face a maximum of 10 years in prison if convicted on aiding and abetting.

All five face a statutory penalty of five years if convicted on the conspiracy charge, the statement explained.

The group was reportedly arrested in Taos, New Mexico, on Friday afternoon without incident.

They are slated to appear in federal court on Tuesday, September 4, in Albuquerque.

What about child abuse, and murder and teaching children to become terrorists? Any way I am just glad some had the guts to prosecute these vile people for something. Now someone should get rid of that insane judge.

— PJ (@Peggy01895813) September 1, 2018

Islamic extremist compound. Quit sugar coating it abc, you don't work for Willy wonka.

— Derrick Shepard ❌🇺🇸 (@DerrickShepar17) September 1, 2018

INCREDIBLE NEWS: Remember the radical Islamic terrorists from the New Mexico compound that a judge let off?

The FBI arrested all 5 of them on firearms and conspiracy charges! https://t.co/bkAGgySCWq#SaturdayMorning

— #ThePersistence (@ScottPresler) September 1, 2018

[AndyJackson]

Sorry, but it is not a “silly technicality.” It is the law. Blame rests squarely on the prosecutor’s office.

[ETCM]

Rather than just zeroing in on the judge, how about doing that also for the FBI/prosecutor that let the 10 days slip by?

Correct about the Prosecutor, but it wasn't the FBI or USDOJ. Both the Judge and Prosecutor were NEW MEXICO STATE EMPLOYEES, not Federal. Like the Judge or not, it was 100% the fault of the Prosecutor and investigators for failing to prosecute this case. These cases were dismissed without prejudice which means the DA can refile them. Also, the accused were rearrested and are being held without bond pending a hearing that is scheduled for next week. USDOJ, seeing that New Mexico lacks the competence to handle this case, is stepping in. People are flailing around without informing themselves about this case based on much fake news and false assumptions.

https://eighthdistrictcourt.nmcourts.gov/more-information.aspx

[Roccus]

There’s some kind of scumbaggery going on there.
I don’t know what it is, but it ain’t what its been reported as happening.
Can’t tell if it’s CYA or trying to hold together a busted operation, but it ain’t what we are being told it is...or isn’t.

[wastedyears]

ramshackle dessert dwelling

A hole-in-the-wall dessert place?

[NonValueAdded]

Technically, the judge’s hands were tied by yet another set of inept prosecutors. They are the ones who fumbled what should have been a slam dunk.

[AlaskaErik]

MAYBE this is why the judge dismissed the STATE charges, so The FEDS could take over, federal crimes seem to carry much stiffer sentences!!!!

That's not how it works. The normal procedure is for the state to decline prosecution if there are federal charges filed that are more serious. In this case the state charges were outright dismissed on a technicality before the feds filed any charges.

[Liberty Valance]

NM Ping

[Does so]

*IMO, the FBI only made an arrest to save face.*

Maybe the NM prosecutor’s intent?

[MEG33]

The prosecutors are the ones who failed to meet the legal deadline...The judge followed the law.

[precisionshootist]

Maybe, you can’t tell me they just forgot about the deadline.

[OddLane]

BTTT.

[henbane]

Sorry, but it is not a “silly technicality.” It is the law. Blame rests squarely on the prosecutor’s office.

Here is the actual Ruling

5-302. Preliminary examination.
A. Time.
(1) Time limits.
A preliminary examination shall be held within a reasonable time but in any event not later than ten (10) days after the first appearance if the defendant is in custody and no later than sixty (60) days after the first appearance if the defendant is not in custody.

(2) Extensions. Upon a showing of good cause, the court may extend the time limits for holding a preliminary examination for up to sixty (60) days. If the defendant does not consent, the court may extend the time limits in Subparagraph (A)(1) of this rule only upon a showing that extraordinary circumstances exist and justice requires the delay. The time enlargement provisions in Rule 5-104 do not apply to a preliminary examination.

(2) Extensions.

Upon a showing of good cause, the court may extend the time limits for holding a preliminary examination for up to sixty (60) days.
If the defendant does not consent, the court may extend the time limits in Subparagraph (A)(1) of this rule only upon a showing that extraordinary circumstances exist and justice requires the delay.

It's absolutely clear that the judge had a judicial choice to make and he made it in favor of the Muslim terrorists and against the New Mexican people.

This was not a case where his hands were tied and the law forced him to release the terrorists.

Judge Jeff McElroy chose to ignore the obvious fact that extraordinary circumstances exist in the details of this terrorist-school shooting training compound with child abuse and dead child factors.

Judge McElroy allowed three of the dangerous perps to walk back into the world of innocent victims.

[ETCM]

The Judge cannot “show good cause” or “extraordinary circumstances”. That is the responsibility of the prosecutor. Not only had the prosecutor not requested such a delay, they had not even SCHEDULED the preliminary examination hearing. This is incompetence on the part of the prosecutor. The Judge dismissed without prejudice which means the DA can refile the charges. Also, the 3 women released were only charged with “child abuse”, while the men who were NOT released, were charged with “child abuse resulting in death”. All were back in jail before the FBI stepped in.

[henbane]

The Judge cannot “show good cause” or “extraordinary circumstances”. That is the responsibility of the prosecutor.

No doubt the prosecutors were sadly--perhaps consciously-- neglectful of their duties in this case.

But why wouldn't the judge see it as part of his responsibility to the community and its safety to remind the prosecutors of the rules and wait for a responsive action before issuing the release of these dangerous characters?

[Magnum44]

One has to ask “What took them so long?”

[ETCM]

But why wouldn't the judge see it as part of his responsibility to the community

Because the Judge cannot go by what he reads on the internet, or sees on CNN. He can only go by what has been filed in court by the prosecutor, and the law. The women were charged with child abuse, not terrorism.

[CedarDave]

NM list PING!

I may not PING for all New Mexico articles. To see New Mexico articles by topic click here: New Mexico Topics

To see NM articles by keyword, click here: New Mexico Keywords

To see the NM Message Page, click here: New Mexico Messages

(The NM list is available on my FR homepage for FR member use; its use in the News Forum should not be for trivial or inconsequential posts. Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)
(For ABQ Journal articles requiring a subscription, scroll down to the bottom of the page to view the article for free after answering a question or watching a short video commercial.)

[henbane]

But why wouldn't the judge see it as part of his responsibility to the community?
Because the Judge cannot go by what he reads on the internet, or sees on CNN. He can only go by what has been filed in court by the prosecutor, and the law. The women were charged with child abuse, not terrorism.

Judge McElroy was fully aware of all details relative to the terror camp, its horrors and the monsters who were running it.

He learned those details at first hand, not from CNN, TV or the internet.

His duty was to do everything in his judicial powers to prevent the release of dangerous characters back into the community.

Judge McElroy was criminally lax where he should have been judicially proactive in the service of the people he has sworn to protect.

[Reynoldo]

“The judge is following the law, which we stand for here.”
—

“Not when some silly technicality is all that’s keeping a bunch of murdering terrorists off the streets - no. Then the law is being abused in the name of evil. “
———————————————————————

Is that ‘silly technicality’ a law?
If so, how is the judge supposed to decide to just skip over that law?

Wouldn’t that create a glaring jumbo appeal any public defender could drive a truck through?

[lizma2]

YES!

The judge did the right thing. The prosecutor needs to be fired!

Any one have an idea on who they are?