Quantcast
Connect with us

Clarification: New information in the Shaima Alawadi case.

Published

on

When I first wrote about the bloody murder of Shaima Alawadi in her California home, I hedged my bets a little, and then called it a hate crime:

…leaving room for the possibility of new information, [I’m] not the El Cajon police, and I can go ahead and make the leap of judgment. Shaima Alawadi was almost certainly killed for the color of her skin, the accent in her voice, and most importantly, the scarf on her head. The way in which she worshiped her Maker. And it just makes me ill.

ADVERTISEMENT

Apparently, however, new information has in fact emerged, and it does point in a different direction:

Search warrant records obtained Wednesday in the beating death of an Iraqi-American woman show a family in turmoil and cast doubt on the likelihood that her slaying was a hate crime.

Shaima Alawadi, a 32-year-old mother of five, was apparently planning to divorce her husband and move to Texas when she was killed, a family member told investigators, according to the court documents.

The records obtained at El Cajon Superior Court also reveal Alawadi’s 17-year-old daughter, Fatima Alhimidi, who called 911 to report the attack, was distraught over her pending arranged marriage to a cousin.
A search of Fatima’s cellphone records shows that while she was being interviewed by investigators hours after the attack, someone sent the teen a text message that read, “The detective will find out tell them (can’t) talk,” the affidavit states.

Alawadi’s death is no less horrible, no matter why she was killed or by whom, and Islamophobia no less prevalent in this country — but the simple truth is that I jumped the gun, in the absence of information. I regret that very much.

To explain my thinking (not explain away the error of judgment): Initially I hesitated to call it a hate crime, because the presence of a single note, reportedly reading “Go back to your own country. You’re a terrorist,” is not actually enough to go on. I wondered if the note might have been placed there in order to throw off law enforcement.

Then I learned that the Alawadi family had just recently moved to their current residence from Michigan, and read that an earlier note with the same message had recently been found outside the house. Given the family’s apparent relative lack of ties to the area, and the apparent fact of an earlier note, I felt pretty confident, and ran with the hate crime assumption.

ADVERTISEMENT

But you know, when we assume, we really do make an ass out of you and me. We still don’t have all the information, but we didn’t have all the information when I first wrote about the case, either. The old-school reporter in me was warning against drawing too many conclusions, and I ignored her warnings.

I apologize.

When I learn the results of the investigation, I’ll post them here. And going forward, I’ll look not just once, but twice or three times before I leap. And perhaps I won’t leap even then.

Crossposted at Emily L. Hauser In My Head.

ADVERTISEMENT

Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump White House hammered for covering up their own economic projections as jobs vanish

Published

on

The Trump White House has decided against releasing midyear economic projections this summer, breaking precedent at a time when unemployment is expected to top 20 percent.

The Washington Post reports that the administration is not releasing updated economic projections that "would almost certainly codify an administration assessment that the coronavirus pandemic has led to a severe economic downturn" with massive job losses that have topped 36 million in just two months.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Joe Scarborough can sue for defamation — and ‘it could require Mr. Trump to pay substantial punitive damages’: Legal expert

Published

on

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough may have a defamation case against President Donald Trump, according to one legal expert.

Peter Schuck, an emeritus professor of law at Yale and visiting professor at the University of California, Berkeley, laid out the case against the president in a new column for the New York Times.

"Trump’s wantonly cruel tweets about the tragic death in 2001 of Lori Klausutis are distinctive," Schuck writes. "They may constitute intentional torts for which a civil jury could award punitive damages against him."

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

New study links Fox News viewership to higher non-compliance with stay-at-home orders

Published

on

Researchers at Columbia University and the University of Chicago linked Fox News viewership with reduced compliance with states' stay-at-home orders in a new working paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

The study, which has not been peer-reviewed, found that a 1% increase in Fox News viewership in a zip code "reduces the propensity to stay at home by 8.9 percentage points compared to the pre-pandemic average."

Continue Reading
 
 
You need honest news coverage. Help us deliver it. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free.
close-image