A Matter of Degree

I was at my desk in the conservatory, absorbed in an article on nematodes, when my handyman Ahmed came in, his face a mask of sadness. This was odd -- his coming nuptials with the fair Consuela should have argued for a different mien -- and I wondered what had occurred.

He handed me a newspaper clipping, an AP snippet from some place called Orchard Park in New York state, and said simply, "I am ashamed of my religion. This is behaviour not sanctioned by the Prophet, Peace Be Upon Him, nor can it be found in the Holy Qu'ran. Perhaps, my Lady, you could give it a wider audience." Without explaining more, he left.

What was this all about?

I read the article, and had two reactions.

Shock, and rage.

First, the shock. Apparently a TV show managed by Aasiya Hassan and her husband Muzzammil, termed "Bridges", had as its purpose the showing of a more moderate Islam. It dealt with the more lunatic aspects of Shariah law -- amputating hands for theft, stoning women (never men) to death for adultery, the non-education of girls, and the practice of "honour killings." Well good on them, I thought.

But I speak too soon. Apparently what the Hassans dealt with in the abstract level became something quite different at the personal level. From what I could gather the marriage was in trouble, and Aasiya was seeking a divorce. This was a bridge too far for Muzzammil, and seizing a ceremonial sword, he hacked her head off. Can't be "dishonoured" you see. Reading this part, I fondly wished that I could have faced this guy with some good Damascus steel in my own hand.

Now the rage.

A few phone calls to certain people in New York state jurisprudence resulted in the following information. Hassan, having done the deed, phoned the police with some pride, and was shortly thereafter arrested. The Erie County District Attorney, one Frank Sedita, called the crime "the worst form of domestic violence", and charged Muzzammil with second degree murder.

SECOND DEGREE MURDER?

What on earth would it have taken to lay a charge of first degree murder? Subjecting the woman to hanging, drawing, and quartering? I mean really. The act fulfilled both aspects of the mens rea, actus reus standards (planning plus intent) and was hardly done in the passion of the moment, the criteria for murder in the second degree. Dickens' Mr. Bumble surely had it right: "The law is a ass!"

What further enrages is the extremely sparse coverage given to the act. Maybe he should have thrown a shoe at her -- that behaviour appears to get tons of coverage. Good on The Toronto Sun for allowing columnist Peter Worthington to address the whole sordid tale in his column of February 20th, and good on Bill Maher for also leaping into the fray on his HBO show, also on February 2oth. But so little for so much.

A final comment. It is sad when lunatics take over a system of thought -- all right, a religion -- that is embedded in compassion and redemption, and turns that system into something so perverse that even the Marquis de Sade would raise his dandruffy head. I was raised an Catholic, but now I am very far from being a paragon of Christian womanhood. Made the mistake of being pro choice, you see, and Holy Mother Church has cast me out, and in an earlier age would have done much worse. Of course, if men gave birth, abortion would be a sacrament.

But I am in danger of digressing from the major thrust of this note -- the lack of media attention to a truly heinous act, and an idiotic criminal charge. To lean on Dickens again, "Bah. Humbug!"