Posted on 04/22/2019 4:43:08 PM PDT by Kaslin
To forgive and forget - or to punish and stand vigilant. That is the question about how to treat Americans who fought for the territorially defeated ISIS as they reenter society, presumably with battlefield experience, atrocities, and religious zealotry for bloodletting baked in.
In Texas, judges of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals are grappling for an answer in a bizarre case in which a federal judge doled out what prosecutors say was a “substantively unreasonable” 18-month sentence for a returned ISIS recruiter and fighter who caused the battlefield death of at least one American. Prosecutors asked for at least 15 years.
Houston-based National Security Division prosecutors in the Southern District of Texas appealed the sentence after Reagan-appointed U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes scoffed at their arguments, expressed a paternal sympathy for the convicted terrorist, and dismissed input from the dead victim’s bereaved mother (present in court) as “only her grief…sad but not cogent.”
The 18-month sentence was given to Asher Abid Khan, a 24-year-old University of Houston engineering student, after he pleaded guilty to one count of material support to ISIS for trying to join them with a high school friend in 2014, who was killed in action.
Transcripts of the sentencing hearing show the judge readily accepting Khan’s narrative that he quickly matured after he was tricked into returning in 2014, no longer believes the propaganda, and that he made one bad youthful mistake. Khan professed to having straightened out his life while free on bond that Judge Hughes granted Khan after his 2015 FBI arrest, despite opposition from prosecutors.
To forgive and forget - or to punish and stand vigilant. That is the question about how to treat Americans who fought for the territorially defeated ISIS as they reenter society, presumably with battlefield experience, atrocities, and religious zealotry for bloodletting baked in.
In Texas, judges of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals are grappling for an answer in a bizarre case in which a federal judge doled out what prosecutors say was a “substantively unreasonable” 18-month sentence for a returned ISIS recruiter and fighter who caused the battlefield death of at least one American. Prosecutors asked for at least 15 years.
Houston-based National Security Division prosecutors in the Southern District of Texas appealed the sentence after Reagan-appointed U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes scoffed at their arguments, expressed a paternal sympathy for the convicted terrorist, and dismissed input from the dead victim’s bereaved mother (present in court) as “only her grief…sad but not cogent.”
The 18-month sentence was given to Asher Abid Khan, a 24-year-old University of Houston engineering student, after he pleaded guilty to one count of material support to ISIS for trying to join them with a high school friend in 2014, who was killed in action.
Transcripts of the sentencing hearing show the judge readily accepting Khan’s narrative that he quickly matured after he was tricked into returning in 2014, no longer believes the propaganda, and that he made one bad youthful mistake. Khan professed to having straightened out his life while free on bond that Judge Hughes granted Khan after his 2015 FBI arrest, despite opposition from prosecutors.
U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick of the Southern District of Texas, argued as much in a brief filed with the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals last month, that “The district court’s error was not harmless. Indeed, the magnitude of its error was enormous. The U.S. Attorney’s office wants a new sentencing hearing."
“The sentence… did not reflect the gravity of Khan’s conduct and would not sufficiently deter others from taking the first step along the path to radicalization. The sentence also results in unwarranted disparity with sentences of similarly situated defendants who have received far more serious sentences.”
A counter-brief by Khan and his attorney, David Adler, is expected sometime in the coming weeks.
The investigation and case against Khan
In 2014, the FBI learned the 19-year-old had joined Jizb ut-Tahrir, a U.S.-designated terror group, while living temporarily with an uncle in Australia. FBI investigators found Khan’s Facebook postings lavishing praise on ISIS and declaring his plan to join the group so he could “die a shahid.” Houston FBI also learned that Khan successfully recruited high school friend Sixto Ramiro Garcia at their Houston mosque. The two planned to meet in Turkey with a guide who would take them into Syria.
Khan and Garcia got on planes to meet in Turkey, Khan from Australia and Garcia from Houston. But a family ruse – that Khan’s mother was dying in a hospital -- tricked Khan into catching the next flight to Texas. Back in Texas, he wired his panicking abandoned friend Garcia $300 and successfully arranged for him to meet the ISIS guide. Garcia reportedly eight months later.
For more than a year, until his May 2015 arrest, Khan kept shilling online for ISIS and communicated with Garcia on the battlefield. It was only after the arrest, when Judge Hughes allowed him to be freed on bond, that Khan began claiming that he was a changed man.
Much of the fight over his sentencing boils down to whether he can be held to account for the death of Garcia.
Down-drafting a bereaved mother and U.S. terrorism law
After 9/11, U.S. prosecutors were given tough new anti-terrorism laws and sentences to punish and deter. The idea was to throw a bigger book at not only terrorist acts that directly cause death and destruction but also “material support” like money, weapons, and people that enable the violence.
The USA Patriot Act, for instance, increased the prison terms for two of the more common kinds of material support, 2339A and 2339B of 18 U.S.C., the latter bearing more prison time because it addresses support that results in death.
During last year’s sentencing hearing, Judge Hughes engaged prosecutors in verbal swordplay over a variety of legal definitions and precedents widely used to calculate punishment. One centered on whether 2339B – to which Khan pleaded guilty – should even be applied to Khan.
Judge Hughes was so disinclined to accept that Khan’s action led to the death of Garcia, despite a guilty plea to the contrary, that he dismissed a letter from Garcia’s mother blaming Khan for her son’s death because, “It bears only on her grief, and not anything that he did, or you did, or anybody else did. It’s sad, but not cogent.”
To which Assistant U.S. Attorney Alamdar Hamdani replied: “Your honor, she lost her son as a result of Mr. Khan’s actions, so I do see that. And she does mention that…it was because of Mr. Khan.”
Judge Hughes: “I know. And I am not taking a bereaved mother’s description of causation. What she said is, in essence, in two long pages, that she’s very sorry her boy is dead, if he is dead. He’s gone. Whatever it is.”
By refusing to take into account Khan’s role in recruiting and facilitating the delivery of Garcia to ISIS and Garcia’s eventual death, Judge Hughes felt himself free to reduce his sentence.
“He didn’t provide Garcia. He helped a friend,” Hughes said of Khan. “He (Khan) didn’t own him (Garcia). It wasn’t an asset that he had. So no, that is not provisioning.”
To no avail, prosecutors pointed out that Khan wired him $300 at a crucial decision point and arranged for Garcia to connect with the ISIS guide.
“You can’t pile everything that happens after he (Garcia) makes a really awful choice and say it adds to it. Communicating with him is not a crime. No. Those post-separation conversations do not say anything that is actionable.”
Helping a terrorist convict find himself
It was noteworthy that, during the hearing, Khan chose to frame his extremism as motivated solely by the atrocities of Syria’s Assad regime. Left unaddressed was the extent to which Khan committed to the ISIS brand of Islam, the scripture-based ideals that typically motivated wide-scale murder and enslavement in the caliphate and Europe.
“Your Honor, I want to make it unequivocally clear that I never condoned any act in which innocent civilians or people from this country died,” Khan insisted. “In fact, I despise such acts. My anger and hatred was towards the Syrian dictator.”
Khan’s narrative that he was only motivated to fight the Assad regime, if not completely unbelievable, certainly warranted deeper excavation. Is Khan still committed, biding his time until his 18 months are served?
Judge Hughes was willing to take that chance. He lectured Khan:
“Well, it looks to me like you have got potential. But in the ‘70s, people, not grownup people, but people, started saying they needed to find themselves. I never had any trouble with that. I am right there.”
What remains to be seen is whether the 5th Circuit Court is right there too.
An American causing or part of death of Americans on battlefield should be executed.
The bleeding heard judge should be disbarred.
The Judge had absolute discretion. The kid killed no one and never joined. This Reagan Judge did his job. He will be totally upheld.
Abid-khan
U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes is compromised.
That can only be corruption behind that judgement. There’s no way in hell it’s anything else.
Unless...
She’s become ideologically compliant and is directly aiding and abetting those at war with us by hasting the return of one of the warriors to the field of battle.
Treason or corruption.
one or the other.
Never trust a judge with the name “Lynn.” Is it fish or fowl, man or woman? Don’t trust it.
The sentence is absurd. But the 9th District would have awarded the perp $1,000,000, a new house and four wives, to boot!
Didn’t the charge come from the death of the person who collaborated with the would-be terrorist? This is common for engaging in a crime that causes death to a collaborator. It looks like that aspect was overlooked by the judge in the case. So he doesn’t believe in terrorism now — he still lured another to their ultimate death. This is the matter of consternation here.
Oh horse hockey. Garcia didn’t have to go. What a crock. I convince a kid to go in the marines and he gets killed— my fault? Let’s get off this kick quick. It is a slippery slope.
Judge dis SUPER job!! 5th circuit will uphold him big time!!
Huh.
Still don't like the smirk in the photo.
Judges only care if it's their loved ones that die. Hell's gonna' be chock full of judges.
a returned ISIS recruiter and fighter who caused the battlefield death of at least one American
He was a fighter and he was the one that killed the American. See my post #14.
anyone can post anything — where is the documentation
In Texas, judges of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals are grappling for an answer in a bizarre case in which a federal judge doled out what prosecutors say was a substantively unreasonable 18-month sentence for a returned ISIS recruiter and fighter who caused the battlefield death of at least one American. Prosecutors asked for at least 15 years.
OK, it’s your interpretation that the one directly murdered the other. Now dig back to source material to substantiate that, please.
As there is a fallacy well known on FR known as “Trusting the Very Letter Of The News Media Account.”
I believe you are the one that is doubting the news report, so you prove your point. I trust Townhall. One of the best sources out there for news.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.