[W]e’re both Muslims. That if we could just settle this outside the court in a more Muslim manner family to family, have our families meet and settle this out of court and not take this to court.On the basis of that conversation, he was also charged with attempting to dissuade a witness from testifying. The court held that this conversation meets the "knowing and malicious" standard of the statute. California Penal Code Sec. 136 defines "maliciously" very broadly to include interfering in any manner with the orderly administration of justice, and in general was intended only to exclude attempts by family members to protect a witness or victim by urging them to not become involved. The Los Angeles Metropolitan News-Enterprise reports on the decision.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Friday, January 03, 2014
Urging Religious Resolution of Altercation Violated Ban or Attempting To Dissuade Witness From Testifying
In People v. Wahidi, (CA App., Dec. 30, 2013), a California state appeals court upheld the conviction of defendant Abdullah Wahidi for violating California Penal Code Sec. 136.1(a)(2) which prohibits any person from "[k]nowingly and maliciously attempt[ing] to prevent or dissuade any witness or victim from attending or giving testimony at any trial, proceeding, or inquiry...." Wahidi had been in an altercation with Farahan Khan and three of Khan's friends. He was charged with assault, vandalism and battery. The day before his preliminary hearing, Wahidi approached Khan following prayer services at Khan’s mosque to urge him, instead of testifying at the preliminary hearing, to settle the matter informally using the Muslim custom of resolving disputes through discussions between affected families. Wahidi said to Khan: