Atlas Shrugs

Rifqa Bary's former imam in Ohio, Sallah Sultan: People worldwide "thirst for the blood of the Jews"

This was the Muslim community that the media, Hamas-CAIR, and Rifqa Bary's devout Muslim family worked feverishly to return her to after she escaped imminent death in an honor killing (because she had converted out of Islam).

Sallah Sultan, former "scholar in residence" at the Noor Mosque, Rifqa Bary's former mosque in Ohio, called for the murders of the Israeli Ambassador and tourists in Egypt. Sultan was close to Anwar Awlaki, imam to the most notorious jihadists across the world (the 911 Muslim terrorists, Major Hasan, the Fort Hood jihadi, etc.).

Is it any wonder that I fought so fiercely for this young woman and was the victim of a $10,000,000 Islamic supremacist lawsuit becuase of my unwavering advocacy for her freedom?

Sultan has previously said that "every Muslim who meets a Zionist is entitled to kill him." He is the former imam of the Ohio mosque attended by the famous convert from Islam to Christianity, Rifqa Bary, and her parents. And what do you bet that when he was there, local politicians and non-Muslim clerics courted his favor, certain that he was a "moderate" and anxious to prove their multiculti bona fides?

"Egyptian Cleric Sallah Sultan: People Worldwide 'Thirst for the Blood of the Jews,'" from MEMRI, n.d.:

Following are excerpts from two Friday sermons delivered by Egyptian cleric Sallah Sultan, the founder of the Ohio-based American Center for Islamic Research. The sermons aired on Al-Aqsa TV on July 27 and August 3, 2012.

Sallah Sultan: I travel all over the world, and I met supporters of Al-Aqsa, of the prisoners, of Jerusalem, and of Palestine – people who thirst for the blood of the Jews, and who are eager for the promised war against the sons of Zion, until Palestine is liberated in its entirety. .

[...].

Under the previous [Egyptian] regime over 30,000 Zionists entered Egypt every month, defiling its land. The Egyptian police were forced to protect them, while they were getting drunk and picking fights. .

There was a great scandal, when [alleged Israeli spy] Misrati and some Jews entered Egypt, in order to commit all kinds of crimes here: counterfeit dollars, taking photographs of military bases, girls with AIDS seducing young Egyptians in order to infect them, and the vilest act of all – for the price of one Egyptian pound Misrati and his gang would seduce young Egyptian boys from Cairo, Alexandria and Upper Egypt. They took young children who did not know any better and sodomized them.

Historic Free Speech Victory! Litigation Jihad Utterly Defeated: CAIR-Linked Omar Tarazi, Rifqa Bary's Parents' Attorney, Suffers Stunning Loss, Drops Lawfare Lawsuit Against Pamela Geller

The years-long battle is over, and Islamic supremacism has suffered a stunning and well-deserved defeat, and a good, stiff kick in the ass.

First, allow me to give a huge thank you to my lawyers, Robert Muise of the Thomas More Law Center and David Yerushalmi, for their tireless efforts and unwavering commitment to free speech in their defense of this egregious and harassing lawsuit against me. Despite the six-figure legal costs (which they absorbed and represented me pro bono), they were steadfast when I held firm that no settlement would be reached in this attempt to enforce the blasphemy laws under the sharia and restrict free speech and truth.

From the Law Offices of David Yerushalmi, P.C. Win Important Victory for the First Amendment & Conservative Blogger

CAIR-linked lawyer dismisses $10 million defamation suit against AtlasShrugs.com blogger Pamela Geller 

September 21, 2011 – New York, New York: Omar Tarazi, the Ohio lawyer who represented the parents of Rifqa Bary and who had filed a $10 million defamation lawsuit against AtlasShrugs.com blogger Pamela Geller, has dismissed his lawsuit with prejudice.  The dismissal came on the heels of a court document filed by David Yerushalmi of the Law Offices of David Yerushalmi, P.C., and Robert Muise of the Thomas More Law Center, asking the court to enter a judgment in favor of Pamela Geller.  The voluntary dismissal with prejudice prevents Tarazi from refilling the law suit at some later date and was part of a settlement in which Ms. Geller paid no money and only agreed to remove five specific blog entries out of dozens criticizing Tarazi’s involvement and handling of the Rifqa Bary juvenile proceedings.

Ms. Geller also refused to agree to keep the terms of the settlement confidential.  As she put it, “This law suit was filed as part of the Islamist lawfare against critics of sharia, jihad, and honor killings and I refused to capitulate.  At the end of the day, Tarazi blinked and folded.” 

Ms. Geller was unflinching in her assessment of the outcome of this suit: “This is a huge victory for the First Amendment, truth, and the anti-sharia movement in this country exposing an insidious cancer that brings progressives and Islamists together in common cause to attack anyone who criticizes Islamists with the threat of law suits, actual lawsuits, or worse, violence.”

Mr. Tarazi came under intense criticism by Ms. Geller during the Rifqa Bary litigation, which arose after the 17-year old Rifqa converted from Islam to Christianity and ran away from her Ohio home in the summer of 2009 to take refuge with Christian friends in Florida, alleging that her father threatened to murder her in an honor killing.  The case garnered enormous media coverage both nationally and internationally and involved vituperative juvenile proceedings in both Florida and Ohio.

Ms. Geller blogged about the case extensively given her work at the American Freedom Defense Initiative, an organization Ms. Geller founded and directs, the mission of which in part is to protect young Muslim women from the violence of honor killings.

In the course of her blogging about the case, which also included a rally she organized in Ohio to advocate for Rifqa’s right not to return to her parent’s home, Ms. Geller reported on various stories published at My Pet Jawa and televised on Fox News critical of Mr. Tarazi’s legal representations in court.  The central allegation against Tarazi was that he had perjured himself in court filings in the Ohio juvenile proceedings.

Mr. Tarazi filed his lawsuit in September 2010 against Ms. Geller and Rifqa’s Florida lawyer, John Stemberger, seeking $10 million in damages.  The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio based upon diversity of citizenship.  Ultimately, Mr. Tarazi and Mr. Stemberger entered into a confidential settlement and Mr. Tarazi dismissed his complaint against Mr. Stemberger.

Soon after the lawsuit was filed, Ms. Geller’s lawyers filed a motion to dismiss in November 2010, asserting that Ms. Geller’s comments were protected speech under Ohio Free Speech law and under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  The court never got around to ruling on that motion.

In the meantime, the parties conducted discovery and in August 2011, Mr. Tarazi filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that he believed he had made out his case for liability and asked the court to grant judgment on liability and to set a trial just on the amount of damages.

On September 19, 2011, David Yerushalmi and Robert Muise filed an opposition to Tarazi’s motion and argued that not only had Tarazi failed to make out a case of defamation, but also that all of Ms. Geller’s published statements were true and not defamatory.  The 400+ page opposition detailed to the court just how Tarazi had been less than candid with the juvenile court, resulting in “truth” as a defense.  In the opposition papers, Ms. Geller also raised Free Speech defenses and asked the court to award her judgment and to dismiss the lawsuit against her in its entirety.

The very next day, Tarazi called Mr. Yerushalmi and asked to settle.  Although Tarazi sought to keep the terms of the settlement confidential, Ms. Geller refused. 

Mr. Yerushalmi explained the calculus during the settlement negotiations which culminated in a voluntary dismissal the very same day:  “I explained to Mr. Tarazi: you can walk away now with no money and no secrecy agreement, or you can wait until the court dismisses your suit and renders a formal judgment that you were not truthful to the Franklin County Juvenile Court.  Take your pick.”  The settlement agreement and voluntary dismissal with prejudice were negotiated, drafted, and filed with the court before the close of business.

Although Ms. Geller agreed to take down five specific blog entries that directly mentioned and criticized Tarazi, dozens of critical blogs remain and there are no restrictions on Ms. Geller’s future blogging on the Rifqa Bary affair and Tarazi’s role.

One of the claims of defamation lodged by Tarazi was that Ms. Geller had linked him to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim Brotherhood-Hamas front group, which the U.S.. Department of Justice had previously named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial in Texas, which culminated in guilty verdicts for all defendants. 

During discovery, Ms. Geller’s lawyers uncovered that Tarazi in fact has personal and professional links to CAIR and argued to the court that Ms. Geller’s statements linking Tarazi to CAIR could not be defamatory because they were true.

Tarazi, an Ohio licensed lawyer, represented himself during the proceedings. Ms. Geller was represented by David Yerushalmi of the Law Offices of David Yerushalmi, P.C. (New York and Washington, D.C.) and by Robert J. Muise, senior trial counsel to the Thomas More Law Center (Ann Arbor, Michigan).  Patrick Dunphy of Falke & Dunphy, LLC, in Dayton served as local counsel. 

About David Yerushalmi, Esq.

David Yerushalmi has been practicing law for more than 27 years. He is a litigator specializing in securities law, public policy relating to national security, and public interest law. Mr. Yerushalmi is licensed and practices in Washington D.C., New York, California, and Arizona and serves as General Counsel to the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C., one of the nation’s leading national security think tanks founded by former Reagan administration official Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

Former "Scholar in Residence" at Rifqa Bary's Noor Mosque in Ohio Calls to Kill Israeli Ambassador and Tourists in Egypt

Here is explicit and terrible evidence on why we must monitor the mosques in America.

During my deposition in the $10,000,000 (say what?) lawsuit against me by Rifqa Bary's parents' lawyer, Omar Tarazi, he took exception to my description of the Noor mosque as a terror-tied mosque.
In my opinion, this means that telling the truth about the Noor mosque was .......... in effect a violation of sharia in America. According to shariah, you cannot blaspheme Islam, the prophet or Muslims--i.e., put them in a bad light even if TRUE. I stood by my description. One of the examples I cited was Salah Sultan.

Here is what I said in November 2009:

There are more radical ties to the Noor mosque that CAIR and devout Muslims are strong arming Ohio authorities to send Rifqa Bary back to. Rifqa Bary's Mosque imam is a Muslim Brotherhood leader. There was an in-depth investigation of the Noor mosque (here), exposing the radical ties. Rifqa's Imam Hany Saqr was Taking Calls from Hamas Leader.

Here's the latest on Salah Sultan, formerly of Columbus, Ohio, and former resident scholar at the Noor mosque before being banned from the United States. He and Anwar Al-Aulaki (Major Hasan's imam) are jihad buds. Check out the picture of the  hajj brochure. It specifically states that Hasan's extremist Imam and the former scholar in residence at the Noor mosque were hajjing together back in 2002. 

Rifq Bary is not safe in the state of Ohio. Period.

Salah Sultan is back in the news. This jihadi was a scholar in residence at the Noor mosque.

Special Dispatch No. 4102—Egypt/Conspiracy Theories

Egyptian Cleric Dr. Sallah Sultan, Founder of the American Center for Islamic Research, Calls to Kill Israeli Ambassador and Tourists in Egypt

Following are excerpts from a statement by Egyptian cleric Dr. Sallah Sultan which aired on Al-Jazeera on August 26, 2011.

 

Sultan, who in 2004 founded the American Center for Islamic Research (ACIR) in Columbus, Ohio, has, according to his eight-page resumé, held many consulting and teaching positions in the U.S. Since coming to the U.S. in 1998, he has founded several Islamic institutes, including the Islamic American University in Southfield, Michigan, and the Sultan Publishing Co. in Columbus, Ohio.

Sallah Sultan: "As someone who has studied Islamic law, specializing in Islamic jurisprudence, I am calling to kill the [Israeli] ambassador, not just expel him. Our sons were killed in our country, on our land, and our sons are being killed in Gaza by an occupying enemy. Brothers and sisters, the genuine rulings of Islamic law can no longer be silenced. I am prepared to confront any Islamic scholar who says otherwise."

To read the full report, go here.

Back in 2006, Patrick Poole wrote about Salah Sultan: Hometown Jihad: Citizen Salah Sultan

Hometown Jihad: Our Newest Citizen?, is headlining this morning at FrontPage Magazine. Follow the links to my previous articles on this topic, Hometown Jihad, the initial exposé published back in April, and Hometown Jihad: Blowback, which came out in late May.

The newest revelation is that Salah Sultan, the individual who has been the subject of these articles that lives here in my hometown of Hilliard, Ohio, is set to get his US citizenship within the next few weeks. This despite extensive connections and close relationships to terrorists, terror sympathizers, apologists and financiers. He is also the protégé of HAMAS spiritual leader Sheikh Yousef Qaradawi, who the Anti-Defamation League has characterized as the "Theologian of Terror".

For those who have asked me what can be done to prevent Salah Sultan from receiving US citizenship, my suggestion would be to contact Rep. Deborah Pryce , our local congressional representativewho is looking into the matter (be sure to be polite), and Ohio Senator Mike DeWine, who is in a tight race for re-election. Also be sure to contact your own Congressman and Senators. They are the only people who can apply the pressure to the idiots at the USCIS to put the kabosh on this deal.

$10,000,000 Lawsuit Against Pamela Geller, Cites Free Speech Lawfare Lawsuit Brought by Omar Tarazi -- Litigation Jihad

In July of 2009, a young teenage girl ran away from her home in Ohio, after her father threatened to kill her upon discovering her conversion out of Islam. When she disappeared, many of her friends and those of us who had heard of her plight thought that she had met the worst of fates (as almost of these cases end the same horrible way). Imagine our joy when she emerged alive.

Who can forget? Rifqa Bary: "I want to be free"

What followed was a campaign of intimidation and persecution by Islamic supremacists, her parents and CAIR. Their objective was to shut her up and return her to the hellish home she fought so desperately to escape.

The Islamic supremacists lost. The lovers and defenders of freedom were victorious. But no good deed goes unpunished.

David Yerushalmi is representing me in the outrageous ten million dollar Islamic supremacist lawsuit brought by Omar Tarazi, lawyer for the parents of Rifqa Bary, whose father threatened to kill her after the Noor mosque ratted her out to her parents. Members of the Noor mosque had spied on her and found out that she had converted out of Islam. Scroll this link.

Tarazi has been a featured speaker at the Noor mosque that spied on Rifqa and publicly ridiculed her. The pressure on Rifqa Bary was intense, the fatwas calling for her death numerous.

The Barys had been working closely with Muslim Brotherhood front, Hamas-linked CAIR to return this poor tortured girl to her violent home. Atlas readers fought hard for Rifqa. We rallied, covered her trials to return her home, sent hundreds of Christmas cards in a holiday campaign (the lawyer Tarazi tried to have the cards seized and banned -- unsuccessfully, I might add) and we contacted Florida and Ohio politicians and officials to keep Rifqa safe from her Islamic fundamentalist home and mosque.

Islamic supremacists sprung into action.

Here's a picture of  CAIR-Columbus executive director Babak Darvish advising the Barys back last summer. At a January 2010 hearing, Omar Tarazi was going out into the lobby and apparently colluding with the CAIR representative SEVERAL times before and after the hearing. At the very far left, you can see Darvish sitting at his desk supervising the interview. And in this next photo you can see the whole scene inside Darvish's office (this one taken at some other time, as the Barys' clothes have changed, but the picture above them in Darvish's office, as in the other photos, is still the same):

                                    Here is Darvish sitting at his desk

Here was CAIR's PR strategy against Rifqa Bary. And their lapdogs in the media here, here and here.

Rifqa's "loving" radical devout parents releasde Rifqa Bary's personal diaries and private writings to CAIR and released them to the media

We won, but Islamic supremacists are not known for being terribly good sports. Here is the AP's take on the lawsuit:

Blogger who backs runaway Christian convert cites First Amendment in defamation suit response via FOX 59 news

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A blogger championing the case of a Muslim-to-Christian convert from Ohio says allegedly defamatory comments she's being sued over were protected free speech.

Atlas Shrugs blogger Pamela Geller also says many of the postings singled out in a federal lawsuit could fall into the realm of hyperbole and not defamation.

Geller says in a federal court filing Tuesday that she is a journalist writing about a matter of public interest and is protected by the First Amendment.

Tarazi's lawsuit is an embarrassment to the legal profession. Apart from being factually wrong, his emails are riddled with spelling errors. He exhibits little knowledge of procedure and less of rule of law. One has to wonder how these incompetents pass the bar.

Here is the Dayton Daily News:

Blogger Cites Free Speech in Lawsuit

Geller said many of the postings singled out in the defamation lawsuit also could fall in the realm of hyperbole and not defamation.

In addition, statements of facts she may have posted "are accurate reports of statements of others or they are true statements simply," according to the filing in U.S. District Court. Geller was writing about a matter of public interest as a journalist and so is protected by the First Amendment, the filing said.

[..]

Tarazi represented the parents of Rifqa Bary, a Christian teenager who fled to Florida, saying she feared harm from her Muslim mother and father. Bary was returned to Ohio last year and placed in foster care while a juvenile court judge tried unsuccessfully to reunite Bary and her parents.

[...]

Tarazi said Tuesday he had not yet seen the court filings.

 Geller has advocated for Bary on Geller's Atlas Shrugs blog.

Geller's attorney, David Yerushalmi, said in an interview that nothing his client wrote was defamatory or malicious in the sense of reporting something she knew was false.

[...]

In his lawsuit, Tarazi said Geller wrongly linked him to Hamas, considered a terrorist group by the U.S. government. He said she also falsely said he was appointed to represent Bary's parents by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR is a Washington-based Islamic advocacy group. Geller repeatedly refers to Tarazi on her website as a lawyer appointed or selected by CAIR. Her website also includes links to sites alleging CAIR is a terrorist front.

Geller also leads an organization called Stop Islamization of America that placed ads on New York City buses last spring, offering information to those wishing to leave Islam. And she organized a protest on Sept. 11 in New York against a proposed Islamic cultural center to be built near ground zero.

Tarazi said he has never worked for CAIR or been appointed by the group to represent Bary's parents. He said he worked for the couple pro bono except for some minor expenses his clients paid for.

Tarazi said his mother volunteered as a secretary with CAIR-Ohio in Columbus but left that position three years ago.

Pamela Geller, American Thinker: Rifqa's New Problem

Rifqa's New Problem Pamela Geller American Thinker

Rifqa Bary, the teenage girl who fled to Florida from her Ohio home in fear for her life after her Muslim parents discovered her conversion to Christianity, has just turned eighteen. Her life is now hers, and her Florida and Ohio lawyers have embarked upon an unseemly victory dance to spin their appalling and failed legal strategy. I have stood silently by watching this, but now they are spinning their failure into a fundraising circus and smearing me and my colleagues, and that cannot stand. 

Now that Rifqa has turned eighteen, one of her lawyers, Kort Gatterdam, has done an interview with Tom Trento, an activist with the Florida Security Council. Trento has in turn sent around an e-mail raising funds on the name of Rifqa Bary and excoriating "so many friendly 'arm-chair' lawyers and bloggers who so viciously attacked their own side." By "arm-chair lawyers," Trento means my associate, the attorney John Jay, and by bloggers, he means me. Pot, meet kettle.

If I had to sum the interview in four words, they'd be mighta, cudda, wudda, and shudda. Wish I hadda.

The failed legal strategy of Rifqa's Florida attorney John Stemberger and his Ohio associate Gatterdam refused to address the issue of Rifqa's death threat, or the issues of Islamic apostasy and honor killing -- the only things that gave credibility to Rifqa's claim that her father had threatened to kill her. Their strategy also enabled the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other Islamic supremacists to manipulate the legal process and deny Rifqa her civil rights, isolating her from her closest friends.

Rifqa has now turned eighteen, and her immigration status is still in doubt. Gatterdam admits that Rifqa "won't make it" if she is sent back to Sri Lanka, as she could be easily killed there because of her apostasy, but nonetheless, Stemberger and Gatterdam did not make it part of their strategy to try to gain asylum for Rifqa on that basis. Gatterdam even acknowledges that "we didn't know what we were talking about." Got that?

An asylum case based on the death penalty for apostasy should have been Stemberger's opening shot, not a hindsight call.

Instead, their strategy was to obtain Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) for Rifqa, and only that. SIJS gives a minor the ability to stay in the U.S. separate from his or her family's immigration problem. In that case, the immigration status would not be based upon any contention that the immigrant would be in any kind of danger back home -- as Rifqa clearly would be. But Rifqa's crack legal team couldn't even secure this status for her.

Now her lawyers are crowing that she didn't have to go home to her parents, but she never would have had to anyway. No child of Rifqa's age at the time she fled from her home -- seventeen -- would have been returned to her home if she refused to go. Whether the threat described by the child has been substantiated or not, a child will not be returned to a home if the child refuses. Period.

In the video, Trento complains about the Barys' CAIR-appointed lawyers "running the clock" -- stalling on resolving the family's immigration status so as to ensure that Rifqa would still be illegal and liable for deportation when she turned eighteen. It is interesting to note that I painstakingly outlined that wrongheaded strategy six months ago at my website AtlasShrugs.com, as further evidence of Rifqa's lawyers' abject failure.

So why did Stemberger and Gatterdam continue to pursue this nonsensical legal approach? Rifqa's entire legal strategy hinged on obtaining SIJS for her. This was the objective, the end run. If they could keep Rifqa out of her dangerous home environment and secure immigration status, then it didn't matter how they did it, as long as the goal was achieved. So they tried to play ball with the Barys' CAIR lawyers and counted on cooperation from them.

They did not understand the nature of the threat and the enemy Rifqa faced. They were playing by a set of rules inapplicable to the challenge they faced. By pretending that Sharia was not the 800-pound gorilla in the room, they were out-strategized -- and now, Rifqa is eighteen and has no legal basis to be in the United States. At one point in the video, Trento notes the irreconcilability of the Islamic faith of the Barys and Rifqa's Christianity and asks Gatterdam, "Do you think that weighed in the fact that the parents would not allow this special immigration status for Rifqa?"

Attorney John Jay, who spent upwards of twenty years in the courtroom, three in juvenile court, observes that "it is not for the parents, who were, after all, Rifqa's adversaries, to agree to any special immigration status. That special immigration status for Rifqa was for her lawyers to secure for her, regardless of parental opposition."

Could Rifqa's lawyers have been more wrongheaded and clueless? They should have applied for apostasy asylum months and months ago.

But now they're singing a different tune. Even while taking shots at "bloggers" who supposedly "viciously attacked their own side," Gatterdam, in part I of Trento's video, at the seven-minute mark, cites exclusive material from AtlasShrugs.com concerning Mohamed Bary's immigration documentation. It proved that Bary perjured himself repeatedly when applying for immigration status under two separate and distinct applications. Gatterdam goes on to say that because of my exclusive documentation, Bary should be investigated and perhaps prosecuted by immigration authorities (he doesn't name me as the source, of course).

What is really rich is that at 13:04, when questioned about being criticized by bloggers, Gatterdam snarks, "Consider the source -- if the source is not a credible one, and most of the people writing those things are not credible." But not five minutes before that, he was citing my work as evidence credible enough to be introduced into a court of law.

It was symbolic of their overall confusion. Says Jay, "They have only these after-the-fact assertions" about how Rifqa's case should best have been conducted. Jay told me this about Rifqa's lawyers: "And like the Barys' perjury in immigration court, they learned what they learned mostly from you and other bloggers trying to help."

Stemberger and Gatterdam are ignorant of Islamic supremacism, CAIR tactics, and the threat doctrine. This makes them far less credible than they're trying to appear to be -- as is evidenced by their failure to secure Rifqa's immigration status. I have studied this subject matter for years. Robert Spencer is one of the world's leading scholars on Islam, and John, who practiced law for 25 years -- most of it as a felony level defender to include a five- or six-year stint as a juvenile court prosecutor and another two or three years working almost exclusively in juvenile dependency court -- observed that. Credible, indeed.

There's a whole lot  more here.

Judge Rules for Rifqa!

Excellent news ................. in five days she turns 18 and the door would close on juvenile status.

Judge opens path for Rifqa Bary to stay in U.S. Columbus Dispatch

A ruling by a Franklin County Juvenile Court magistrate this afternoon will allow Rifqa Bary to apply for an immigration status that her attorneys hope will keep her in the U.S. after her 18th birthday on Tuesday.

Magistrate Mary Goodrich ruled that reunification between Rifqa and her parents is not viable by Tuesday and that it is not in Rifqa's best interest to be returned to her native Sri Lanka at this time.

Rifqa's attorneys had filed a motion saying those findings were necessary for her to apply for an immigrant juvenile status that would allow her to apply for a green card to stay in the country. The special status provides a potential path to citizenship for children separated from their parents.

Rifqa Still Without Immigration Status: Judge to Rule

Rifqa Bary is still without the immigration status long promised by her legal team. Let's pray the judge rules in her favor tomorrow and she avoids deportation.

The judge rejected a request from Rifqa's parents to order her to receive medical treatment for uterine cancer. Rifqa (and her lawyers) insist she is cancer free after undergoing surgery and chemotherapy. Rifqa's lawyer Kort Gatterdam said that "multiple surgeries and chemotherapy" left her weak and sick.

Ohio judge delays ruling in Christian runaway case AP

COLUMBUS, Ohio — An Ohio juvenile court judge says she'll issue a decision Thursday in the case of a runaway Christian convert at odds with her Muslim parents and trying to avoid deportation.

The judge Wednesday told attorneys for 17-year-old Rifqa Bary and her parents to submit arguments before the court rules on whether Bary, an illegal immigrant from Sri Lanka, can receive special immigration status allowing her to stay in the U.S. Bary's attorneys say the girl is battling uterine cancer.

Rifqa Graduates!

Finally some sweet, happy news to report on Rifqa Bary, the besieged Christian convert out of Islam who was dogged and hounded for her apostasy. The straight-A student graduated with honors.

She turns 18 in August, still without the immigration status that her lawyers have been promising her for months, but her life will be her own and we will continue to pray for her health.

Rifqa Bary's Lawyer Charged with Illegally Disclosing Confidential Information

Deeply, deeply troubling. Rifqa Bary's legal team continues to work against her. The teenage Christian convert out of Islam who fled the death threats of her father has been saddled with the inept, self-promoting, failed legal strategy of John Stemberger.

From the beginning of her court case, Stemberger ignored experts in the field. He refused to enter into evidence the motive behind the death threats and her fears -- apostasy and its punishment under sharia (Islamic law). He made pie in the sky promises, none of which came true.

Rifqa is still without immigration status (the whole objective of the failed legal team), and the clock is ticking. Stemberger has refused to allow Rifqa to talk to anyone who objects to his failed legal strategy. Even at her sickest, Stemberger refused to allow her visits from certain friends.

Rifqa traded one master for another, one control freak for another. Who will be her health proxy? Where will she go in August once she is 18? She could have been in college on scholarship in the fall, but her lawyers dropped the ball on that too. More on that later.

Read this and weep.

Ohio convert's lawyer charged over records filing AP

COLUMBUS, Ohio — A lawyer has pleaded not guilty to charges she illegally disclosed confidential information regarding a teenage girl who converted to Christianity and ran away from her Ohio home.

Attorney Angela Lloyd entered the pleas Tuesday in Franklin County juvenile court after a magistrate approved bringing two misdemeanor charges.

Lloyd is accused of placing confidential child welfare reports into the public file of 17-year-old client Rifqa Bary (RIHF'-kuh BAYR'-ee), making them accessible to the media.

Bary fled central Ohio last year to stay with an Orlando, Fla., minister. She said she'd be harmed for converting from Islam. She has returned to Ohio, where her parents deny allegations she would've been hurt.

Lloyd's attorney, Jefferson Liston, says he doesn't believe Lloyd broke the law.

Post OP: Rifqa Bary's Surgery

Jamal Jivanjee was kind enough to send me the following update on the recent tragic news of Rifqa Bary's cancer diagnosis:

Rifqa Bary has been released from the hospital after this morning's surgery. Cancerous growths were removed and further action will be determined upon pathology tests. Chemotherapy treatments are expected in the near future.

Rifqa is thankful for the prayers and support that she has received.

Pamela Geller, American Thinker: Rifqa Bary Has Cancer, Lawyers Bring in Parents

Please check out my latest piece in The American Thinker on the tragic news of Rifqa' Bary's illness:

Rifqa Bary Suffering from Cancer, Her Lawyers Bring In Her Parents

There has been a terrible development in the case of Rifqa Bary, the teenage girl who fled from her home in fear for her life after her devout Muslim father found out she had become a Christian. According to Rifqa, who is now in foster care in Ohio, she has been diagnosed with advanced uterine cancer.

While this is a tragedy, how Rifqa is being victimized by her lawyers and her parents is nothing less than an atrocity. Her lawyers kept her in the dark about her condition -- despite the seriousness of her cancer -- for well over a week while they conferred with her parents and their CAIR-appointed lawyers about her treatment. While most cases like this result in a hysterectomy, Rifqa is only having the advanced malignancy removed. From what I understand, the survival rate in cases like these is only five percent.

Read it all.

Stemberger's Public Meltdown

John Stemberger, the svengali lawyer who is in way over his head in the Rifqa Bary case, left this as his status yesterday on Facebook:

Folks I do not know how to say this more kindly but Jamal Javanjee and Pamela Geller are not trusted or accurate sources of information on Rifqa Bary and her case. They also do not represent Rifqa or her views and neither one of them are Rifqa Bary spokespersons. Rifqa is in the hands of some of the best legal counsel available.

Is this how a top-notch lawyer behaves? I never said I was a spokeswoman for Rifqa. As for accuracy, I have been right every time. Every time -- on the beatings, the immigration papers, the indigency, the book deal he negotiated, all of it. He has been wrong every time. Every time. Inaccurate and dishonest.

I previously explained the colossal failure of the case here. And if you missed this -- read it: Stemberger's  house of cards.

The man is a clown, but a girl's life is at stake, so it is is not funny.

Jamal Jivanjee, whom Stemberger banned Rifqa from talking to, responded on Facebook today:

RIFQA BARY UPDATE -- it is time to speak boldly and plainly. (The facts are trustworthy and reliable)

It is with much sadness and concern that I write this update to you about the latest developments regarding Rifqa Bary’s situation.  On Monday, April 5’th, there was another hearing regarding Rifqa Bary’s situation in the Franklin County Juvenile court in central Ohio.  This hearing was an absolute disaster for Rifqa’s dire immigration situation.

As you may know, Rifqa’s family in not in the U.S. legally.  As a result, Rifqa’s attorney’s entire legal strategy has been to secure dependency of the state of Ohio for her so that she can remain in foster care until she is 18 and pursue permanent residency status as a minor.  According to a law passed during the Bush administration, minors who are declared to be a dependant of the state are eligible for a very special dependency proceeding.  The official name of this dependency proceeding is called Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS), which would allow Rifqa legal permanent residency in the U.S.   In order to obtain SIJS, a court order is needed by the juvenile court judge stating that reunification is no longer possible, and that Rifqa would be in danger if she were to return to her home country of Sri-Lanka.

While this sounds like a good strategy, what has actually occurred has been the exact opposite of what Rifqa’s entire legal team has said was going to occur.  They simply have gotten it wrong every time.  Many well qualified immigration attorneys have said that Rifqa has a strong case for asylum, yet Rifqa’s legal team has absolutely refused to listen to any other council, and has refused to pursue the asylum process in addition to SIJS.  They have put all their eggs in the SIJS basket, so to speak.  This has been a major mistake by Rifqa’s legal team.  They told Rifqa that she has nothing to worry about, and that SIJS is a foregone conclusion.  Yesterday’s (April 5’Th) court developments have proved them wrong yet again.  When will we wake up and smell the coffee? 

For the last several months, myself and many others have openly questioned Rifqa’s legal team’s strategy.  I have advised Rifqa to either allow another well qualified attorney to join her case, or to replace her attorneys altogether.  I have had good cause for doing this for a variety of different reasons.  As a result, I have been labeled as untrustworthy and Rifqa was told to no longer have any contact with me.  Whether myself, or others, are trustworthy is not what I would like to debate today.  It is not important.  Who I am and what my motivations are simply do not matter.  This is not about me.  What are more important are the facts.  I have been told that I should not criticize her legal team because they have been working hard and there are things that I do not know.  I wonder, does anyone know anything?  I do not want to debate what I don’t know, nor would I like to make speculations as well.  What I would like to do is look at what we DO know.  It is always best to make decisions and assertions based on what we DO know.  Here is what we DO know:

1.        Rifqa’s legal team told her, and others, that she would be declared by the court to be a ‘long term’ dependant of the state shortly after she arrived in Ohio (long term dependant means reunification is not possible).  It has been 6 months since her return to Ohio from Florida, and she still has not been declared to be a long term dependant of the state.  This is needed for SIJS immigration.  As a matter of fact, her attorneys signed on to a case plan that calls for reunification.  This is exactly the OPPOSITE of what needed to happen.  This case plan is now in place and the judge demanded that all parties pursue counseling as the case plan calls for.  This actually happened last month and that is why Rifqa has yet to be declared a ‘long term’ dependant of the court.  The judge has said that the case plan must be followed and given a chance to work. 

 

2.       Yesterday’s hearing (April 5) was when Rifqa’s attorneys again led others to believe the judge would declare that reunification is not possible.  This would make Rifqa a ‘long term’ dependant of the court.  Unfortunately, the judge refused to do this again at this latest hearing!  Her attorneys were wrong again, and the horrendous case plan continues.  She has still not been declared to be a ‘long term’ dependant of the court because the court refuses to go against the case plan that states that reunification is the goal. 

 

3.       After last month’s hearing, I was criticized for saying that Rifqa was running out of time regarding her immigration status.  Her attorneys have put all their eggs in the SIJS basket, and have refused to file for asylum.  She needs a court order from the judge to apply for SIJS and this court order must be obtained from the judge before the court loses jurisdiction over her when she turns 18 on August 10’th.  Now, the clock is her enemy, so to speak.  Rifqa’s attorneys again mistakenly led others to believe that at this month’s hearing, the judge would address the immigration and SIJS issue and allow them to move forward on her immigration status.  At this latest hearing Rifqa’s attorney, Angela Lloyd, spoke up in the court room and specifically said that time was running out for Rifqa.   Rifqa’s parent’s Muslim CAIR attorney objected and claimed that her parents were taking care of their entire family’s immigration situation, and this includes Rifqa.  The judge denied Angela Lloyd’s motion to address immigration.  Angela Lloyd objected due to the fact that Rifqa’s parents have no right to file for immigration status for her because she is not in their custody.  The judge again refused to address the immigration issue without a hearing regarding the Muslim attorney’s objections.  Angela Lloyd asked for an expedited hearing (due to the time factor regarding her immigration), and the judge said that she was not sure if she was going to even grant this hearing at all!  (There was a person in the court room that relayed this information to me.)  Basically, Rifqa’s attorneys were wrong yet again on the most important issue of this case. 

 

Many have predicted this very thing would happen, yet her own attorneys did not see this coming.  There has been absolutely no progress regarding Rifqa’s immigration.  She will be 18 in 4 months & has been in the court system for the last 8 months, yet the immigration process has not even begun yet!  This is unacceptable, and this puts Rifqa at undue risk for deportation when she turns 18.  Rifqa’s attorneys also refuse to file for Asylum for her. Each day that they wait puts her at greater risk.    

 

4.       The threat that Rifqa has faced as a result of abuse at home is unknown to the court because Rifqa’s attorneys have not demanded an investigation into her abusive past and home life.  This information is also needed for SIJS and is not there because there has been no investigation.    

 

5.       The threat that Rifqa faces as a result of her conversion from Islam to Christianity is unknown to the court because her attorneys have avoided a trial where the evidence would have come out.  Instead, they talked Rifqa into making a deal with the CAIR attorney to avoid trial by admitting to being an ‘unruly’ child and signing on to a case plan calling for reunification with her parents!  This is now the very reason why the judge refuses to declare that reunification is not possible.  This deal was simply to obtain a temporary dependency that does not help her in any way.

Many have asked if Rifqa can fire her attorneys.  The answer is yes.  They have been privately retained, and they can be replaced if needed.  Many have asked if there are Christian attorneys who understand the spiritual nature of this case and who have experience in these types of cases that would come alongside and give advice or become actively involved in her case.  The answer is yes.  Many great attorneys have offered their help free of charge and have expressed their grave concerns with the current strategy.  Many have asked if Rifqa can file for asylum now without a court order and as a minor.  The answer is yes.  This has been done by many people before.  Several immigration attorneys have said that she has a strong case for asylum, and they have offered to help Rifqa file for Asylum free of charge. 

I have said this before and I will say it again.  This case is entirely spiritual in nature.  I am convinced that Rifqa’s own legal team’s blindness regarding the threat that Rifqa faces, as well as their legal blunders, are endangering her life as much as the Muslim CAIR attorneys are.  Rifqa herself will have to be the one to take charge over her own defense if anything will change.  I ask all who read this to set aside time to fast and pray for Rifqa.  I also would like to ask all those who are in contact with her to speak the truth plainly and boldly about what is occurring.  The facts speak for themselves.  Sugar coating the truth, or avoiding speaking to Rifqa about these realities out of fear of upsetting her will only hurt her in the long run.  

UPDATE: Robert has this.

Sharia Law: Rifqa Bary Fights to Stay in US

Unbelievable -- Stemberger and his legal eagles threw Rifqa's real defense under the bus and everyone along with it (he banned Rifqa from talking to her good friend, Pastor Jamal Jivanjee) for special juvenile immigration status. 

CAIR and Rifqa's devout Muslim parents are running the clock on Rifqa. John Stemberger, who is still directing Rifqa’s legal strategy, recently wrote: “No lawyer who understands dependency law agrees that seeking political Asylum in the US makes any sense.…Rifqa’s immigration status can be resolved as a Dependent of the State of Ohio without any Asylum claims.”

Wrong. Rifqa is an apostate, and her life is in mortal danger because the penalty for apostasy is death.  Apostasy asylum should have been Rifqa’s safety. They should have applied for it last August or December or March ........... They should have applied for it yesterday.

What Tarazi is doing is running out the clock so that Rifqa is without immigration status when she turns 18 this August. Will authorities then deport her? There is no way of knowing for sure, but CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood have infiltrated senior levels at the State Department so deeply that it is a distinct possibility. Certainly that new office in the State Department devoted to outreach to the Islamic world and reporting directly to Secretary Clinton might deem it “helpful” to send her back. I think that’s what CAIR and the Barys want: for the whole family to go back to Sri Lanka, which was the plan after members of the Noor mosque spied on Rifqa and told her parents of the conversion. The bags were packed.

Notice the AP headline - as if Rifqa's deportation is a fair accompli and has been all along. Could the media be more contemptuous.

Ohio Christian convert fights to stay in US AP

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Attorneys for an Ohio teenager who converted to Christianity and ran away to Florida say her Muslim parents are standing in the way of her effort to fight deportation.

Of course they are. She will "disappear" in Sri Lanka, and the family honor will be restored.

Seventeen-year-old Rifqa Bary is an illegal immigrant and does not want to be returned to her native Sri Lanka.

Her parents are illegal and never presented their papers. They perjured themselves numerous times in front of the court, but neither the justice system nor the media will insult Islam by reporting the truth.

Her attorneys asked a judge in Columbus on Monday to sign an order stating that reunification with her parents is not possible by her 18th birthday in August. The order would allow Bary, who is in foster care, to apply for special immigration status without her parents' consent.

The judge declined to issue the order without first holding a hearing next month.

The attorney for Bary's parents says they have filed an immigration application for the whole family.

UPDATE: Much more info here:

A teenage girl who converted to Christianity and ran away from home is being blocked by her Muslim parents from fighting the possibility of deportation, her attorney told a judge Monday in an ongoing custody dispute.
[...]
Her attorney, Angela Lloyd, asked a judge to sign an order stating that reunification with her parents is not possible by her 18th birthday in August.

The order would allow Bary, who is in foster care, to apply for special immigration status without her parents' consent.

Omar Tarazi, an attorney for the parents, objected, telling the judge that he had been unaware of Bary's separate maneuver to apply to an immigration court. He said the parents previously filed an immigration application for the whole family.

Franklin County Juvenile Court Judge Elizabeth Gill declined to issue the order without first holding a hearing next month. She also declined to remove a gag order that prevents attorneys from discussing the case publicly.

Bary and her parents, Mohamed and Aysha Bary, have agreed to follow a counseling plan drawn up by a county child welfare agency to try to resolve the family's conflict. It requires both sides to work with individual counselors and to try to attend join counseling.

But a face-to-face meeting remains unlikely any time soon.

Jim Zorn, a children's services attorney, told the judge that Bary continues to believe that a reconciliation with her parents is impossible. Bary's counselor has indicated that contact with her parents would be premature, he said.

Bary has also complained that her parents have not responded to an emotional letter sent to them through a counselor that explains why their relationship broke down, Lloyd said.

The letter was more like a list of 20 questions that felt like a backdoor interrogation prepared by attorneys, Tarazi said. It included questions such as, "Why don't I have happy memories of my childhood?" he said.

The parents want to respond but also want assurances that Bary's attorneys are not interfering with the process, Tarazi said.

Judge Gill ordered both attorneys to stay away from the counselors.

UPDATE: Eyewitness on scene Atlas reader Heartland Patriot reports:

The status conference for Rifqa Bary’s case started at 9:44 AM in Franklin County Juvenile Court hearing room 63, Judge Elizabeth Gill presiding. While Mr. and Mrs. Bary attended, Rifqa was not present.

Judge Gill states that while she normally attempts to make prompt rulings, she has not done so on the motion regarding the gag order. She realizes they are waiting for the ruling, but says she will not yet make a ruling on the order. Jim Zorn, Franklin County Children Services attorney, gives an update on the counseling. He said the parents had sent a letter to Rifqa, and that Rifqa had replied with a lengthy response. He said that Chris Neumath was the counselor for Mr. and Mrs. Bary, and Jennifer Dorn was counseling Rifqa Bary. While the parents desired a face to face meeting, he quoted Dorn: “The suggestion of face to face contact is premature.” Zorn said Rifqa is adjusting to foster care, attending school, getting good grades, will graduate in two weeks, and is seeing friends.

Omara Tarazi says their impression is that this would be a back and forth shuttle diplomacy with the parties in different rooms. Says Rifqa’s letter to parents was not written, but rather dictated and delivered verbally. Says it was a list of complaints about childhood (why don’t I remember being loved, hugged, etc.). Says it was very lengthy and personal, and while the parents had composed a lengthy letter in reply they had not sent it as they felt Rifqa’s letter better suited to a response verbally in person by the parents to Rifqa. Tarazi said the parents have cooperated in every way and are ready for a face to face meeting. Says the process is too slow week by week. He alleged that Rifqa’s lawyers were reviewing the correspondence.

Angela Lloyd states that Rifqa has been doing everything the court required. She says Rifqa struggled to write the letter with Jennifer Dorn. Says Rifqa has tried and it is a struggle to talk about what has happened and that it is very hard when there is no response from her parents after she poured out her heart. She says Rifqa doesn’t understand the silence from her parents. Lloyd said that she did not review or discuss with Rifqa any of the correspondence between Rifqa and her parents.

Lloyd says Rifqa is on an immigration timeline, and that Jennifer Dorn sent a letter suggesting she doesn’t see reunification by 18. Lloyd says that Rifqa is running out of time; that by the time she turns 18 she will not have any immigration relief.

Lloyd wraps up by saying Rifqa has communicated in good faith, and asks Judge Gill to address Lloyd’s oral motion regarding Rifqa’s immigration status.

Judge Gill asks Tarazi if he has seen Lloyd’s motion. Tarazi responds that he has. Tarazi says that before Rifqa came back from Florida Rifqa’s parents had retained an immigration attorney and filed an application for the whole family. Tarazi says the application required fingerprinting, and claims Lloyd had objected to Rifqa doing it on the same day as her parents. Tarazi goes on to further detail other claims of objections by Lloyd to aspects of the process. Tarazi says they received a letter from immigration last week wanting additional information for June 14.

Tarazi charges that Lloyd believes she is Rifqa’s immigration attorney; that while he knows Lloyd is a dependency attorney, he doesn’t know if she is also an immigration attorney. As far as he is concerned he states his belief that Rifqa already has an immigration attorney.

Lloyd asks for permission to respond to Tarazi’s statement. Judge Gill denies her request and asks for Zorn’s views. Zorn states that Franklin County Children’s Services has no position on Rifqa’s immigration status. Judge Gill asks for input from Bonnie Vangeloff, Rifqa’s guardian ad litim. Vangeloff said it was her belief that it is in Rifqa’s best interest to attain legal immigration status.

Judge Gill then stated she was not accepting Lloyd’s motion today.

Lloyd interjects, stands up and addresses the judge in response to Tarazi’s earlier charges. Lloyd said that she had called Tarazi to discuss immigration, but he refused to return her calls. Lloyd states that she is an immigration attorney. She says an application for a family cannot include a child unless the child is in the custody of the parents.

Judge Gill says she does not sign entries, and she will not make a finding without a hearing. Lloyd asks for an expedited hearing. Judge Gill says she isn’t sure she will grant that.

Judge Gill then proceeds to order that none of the attorneys except Zorn and Vangeloff will have contact with the counselors and that the lawyers should not be screening contacts between Rifqa and her parents. She expresses her understanding after reviewing what was filed in the courtroom as to why Rifqa would not want her parents to have a physical letter from her. She tells Lloyd to go down to assignment to get a date for her oral motion; instructs that it be a basic motion only, without any attachments.

The judge then reiterates her point that the only people who should be advising Rifqa and her parents regarding the reunification counseling are the counselors.

The conference ends at 10:09 AM.

A Question for the Media

The media's coverage of the Rifqa Bary case has been so incompetent it borders on criminal. It's dhimmi media, for sure. For example,  the case of the immigration question, I must ask, why isn't the media asking?

If the parents' immigration status is "unclear" (which it is not, as I broke the story of their illegal paperwork here), how can Rifqa be illegal? How can her parents be one thing and not another and why haven't those tax evaders been deported? And why hasn't the media ONCE pursued the immigration question? Look at this:

The Columbus Dispatch, the home of hijabed Heagney:

Her attorney, Angela Lloyd, said Rifqa is an undocumented immigrant and expressed concern about her legal status.

Lloyd said Rifqas parents are pursuing what she called their own immigration relief. The family is from Sri Lanka, and their immigration status has been unclear.

CBS News reports:

The immigration status of the parents is unclear but they say they are fighting to stay here.

Ironically, Rifqa Bary may not like her parents' faith, but she may need them for their papers.

Columbus Dispatch (notoriously anti-Christian, pro-jihad newspaper) - home to hijabed Heagney:

Rifqa's attorney, Angela Lloyd, said Rifqa does not have the proper documents to be in the United States; Lloyd is concerned about what will happen when Rifqa turns 18 on Aug. 10. The Barys are from Sri Lanka.

Mohamed and Aysha Bary are "pursuing their own immigration relief," Lloyd said. Their immigration status has not been made public.

And this from The Associated Press (AP):

Tuesday's hearing also touched on Bary's immigration status, with Lloyd confirming in court that the girl is an illegal immigrant.

"Unlike her parents, if reconciliation fails, at 18 then she is without legal status," Lloyd said.

The immigration status of the parents is unclear, although Lloyd said in court that the couple are "pursuing their own immigration relief." Attorneys have been under an order not to talk about the case.

Over at Belief Net:

Tuesday's hearing also touched on Bary's immigration status. Her attorneys raised the issue in a recent court filing that noted federal law allows "an undocumented immigrant minor" to receive permanent resident status when placed in long-term foster care by a judge. In court, Lloyd confirmed that the girl is an illegal immigrant.

"Unlike her parents, if reconciliation fails, at 18 then she is without legal status," Lloyd said.

The immigration status of the parents is unclear.

The Huffington Post:

Bary's immigration status, with Lloyd confirming in court that the girl is an illegal immigrant.

"Unlike her parents, if reconciliation fails, at 18 then she is without legal status," Lloyd said.

The immigration status of the parents is unclear.

Pamela Geller, Big Journalism: In Rifqa Bary Case, Dhimmi Media Cheers on Sharia Law in Ohio

Check out my Rifqa Bary piece in today's Big Journalism:

In Rifqa Bary Case, Dhimmi Media Cheers on Sharia Law in Ohio

Mounting injustice in the pursuit of sharia:

An Ohio minister accused of driving a teenage runaway to a bus station last year has retained a lawyer as police say they’re investigating whether anyone broke the law in helping the Christian convert leave home for Florida.

And why did she flee to Florida? Because, she says, when her devout Muslim father found out she had become a Christian, he said to her, “I will kill you.” And with Islam’s death penalty for apostates, she had to take that seriously. But her father is not in danger of being prosecuted. Brian Williams is. (more…)

Pamela Geller, Newsmax: Rifqa Bary Facing Shariah, Deportation

Check out my latest at Newsmax today: Rifqa Bary Facing Shariah, Deportation

Here's an excerpt. Read it all:

Rifqa’s legal strategy has been reactive, not pro-active. They are being kept busy responding to motions Tarazi, who was allegedly chosen for the Barys by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group under suspicion of funding the terrorist group Hamas.

The worst example of how Tarazi fooled Rifqa’s lawyers was that he compelled them to have Rifqa plead guilty to “unruliness” to secure dependency, and then reneged on his part of the deal once the guilty plea had been entered.

The guilty plea continues to have negative ramifications for those who love Rifqa and helped her. Using the “unruly” plea as a pretext, criminal investigations are proceeding and charges are pending against Brian Williams and Blake and Beverly Lorenz, who helped Rifqa when she fled from her home.

Why hasn’t Rifqa’s legal team demanded an investigation by child services into the abuse and death threats in Rifqa’s home? The eligibility requirements for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status demand it. The immigrant minor must not be able to reunite with her parents “due to abuse, neglect, abandonment, or a similar basis found under state law.”

All Rifqa’s lawyers have is a guilty plea to unruliness from Rifqa, and no establishment of abuse at all. In fact, in the stipulation to dependency, the lawyers on both sides were at pains to put on the record before the court the fact that the stipulation was not based upon abuse or neglect.

To support Rifqa’s abuse claim they’d have to get into Islamic apostasy law, and they don’t want to do that. 

UPDATE: The Washington Rebel has an excellent piece on this here.

And of course, our favorite legal eagle, John Jay, vets it here.

Running the Clock on Rifqa

Rifqa's entire legal strategy hinged on obtaining for her Special Immigration Juvenile Status (SIJS). This was the objective, the end run. If they could keep Rifqa out of her dangerous home environment and secure immigration status, then it didn't matter how they did it, as long as the goal was achieved.

Understood.

But. What was not understood was the nature of the threat and the enemy Rifqa faced. They were playing by a set of rules that were inapplicable to the challenge they faced. By pretending that sharia was not the 800 lb. elephant in the room, they were out-strategized.

I remember back last September when I spoke to John Stemberger on the phone and asked him why apostasy was not being introduced. It defined the threat to her life. Without the motive, there was no threat. He insisted that it wasn't necessary. He said there was no way she would be sent back to Ohio. "No way," he said. In order to send her back to Ohio the parents would have to open a court case, and in order to do that they would have to admit to some kind of abuse. And Stemberger said they would never do that. My point is, no matter how sure a thing is, there's no such thing as a sure thing.

Fast forward to Ohio, February 2010.

Rifqa's legal strategy has been reactive, not pro-active. They are kept so busy responding to CAIR-appointed attorney motions. Rifqa's lawyers agreed to have Rifqa plead guilty to "unruliness" to secure dependency, but "reunification" is still the goal. The guilty plea continues to have ramifications for those who love and helped her. Criminal investigations are proceeding and charges are pending against Brian Williams and the Lorenzes.

Among the concerns for "unruly" Rifqa that are related to SIJS:

.....that each case be scrutinized carefully because the filing of an application for SIJS will alert the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (US CIS) of a child’s unlawful presence in the U.S.  If the child has ever been arrested or  convicted of any crime, an expert in the complex area of the intersection between immigration law and criminal law should be consulted immediately. Many crimes that are not deemed serious under state law have dire immigration consequences. The Immigrant Defense Project is an excellent resource for this purpose. www.immigrantdefenseproject.org

More on the SIJS and how the Stemberger strategy was out played by CAIR. Why hasn't Rifqa's legal team demanded an investigation by child services into the abuse and death threats in the home to Rifqa? SIJS demands it:

Eligibility for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status

[...]

In order to demonstrate eligibility for SIJS status, one must be an immigrant present in the United States:

1. Who is under age 21 at the time the SIJ petition is filed;14
2. Who is unmarried;
3. Who has been declared dependent on a Juvenile Court located in the United States (in New York State this is family court); or whom a Juvenile Court has legally committed to or placed under the custody of, an agency or department of a state, or an individual or entity appointed by a state or Juvenile Court located in the United States 15, and whose reunification with one or both16 of the immigrant’s parents is not viable due to abuse, neglect, abandonment, or a similar basis found under state law 17
4. For whom it has been determined in administrative or judicial proceedings that it would not be in the alien’s best interest to be returned to the alien’s or parent’s previous country of nationality or country of last habitual residence.18

[...]

Atlas readers, remember in the stipulation to dependency, both Tarazi and Lloyd were at pains to put on the record before the court the fact that the stipulation was not based upon abuse or neglect. Until that issue is addressed, I don't think that Rifqa can make the showing before the INS, to establish that her status as a dependent was as a result of abuse, neglect or abandonment. I don't think that she can make the application for SIJS because abuse or neglect has been established as a matter of law, not to be the cause of the dependency. I don't think the judge will issue the i-360 verification required to make the application.

Applying for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status

[...]

Among the items required for the I-360 petition is the court order from the Juvenile Court judge. The court order must establish the child’s dependency on the Juvenile Court or his or her being committed or placed under the custody of, an agency or department of a state, or an individual or entity appointed by a state or Juvenile Court.27  It is preferable though not essential for the order to also establish the requirements that (a) it would not be in the child’s best interest to be returned to his or her (or parent’s) previous country of nationality or country of last habitual residence and that (b) reunification one or both of the immigrant’s parents is not viable due to abuse, neglect, abandonment, or a similar basis found under state law.28  The US CIS has a strong preference that the Juvenile Court incorporate a finding regarding return to the child’s home country into the order, but it does recognize that the requirement can be satisfied  through a determination made by an administrative proceeding.29

Now read what Stemberger wrote. Try to avoid the sophomoric rantings and look at what he contends is Rifqa's strategy, a failed strategy.

CORRECTING THE TOP TEN FALSE RUMORS AND MISINFORMATION ABOUT RIFQA'S ATTORNEYS AND HER LEGAL CASE

By John Stemberger February 1, 2010

It is highly unfortunate, but there are a handful of people who claim to be leading Rifqa advocates are spreading inaccurate, highly sensational and outright false information about matters surrounding Rifqa Bary, her attorneys and Rifqa's legal case. It is necessary to respond to these statements because the amount of ignorance, misinformation, and slander being spread is causing disunity and confusion among those people who really do truly love and support Rifqa and are looking for accurate information.

Highly unfortunate, indeed. But not for the reasons Stemberger describes.

1) RIFQA’S DOES NOT NEED NEW LAWYERS AND SHE HAS SOME OF THE FINEST LAWYERS IN THE STATE OF OHIO REPRESENTING HER. Representing Rifqa are two legal experts, one in the area of dependency (which most lawyers have never even heard of) and one in criminal law. Kort Gatterdam is a board certified criminal defense lawyer who is well respected in the greater Columbus, Ohio Bar, partner in a major Ohio law firm and he has tried hundreds of cases before juries and judges. Angie Lloyd is a clinical law professor at Ohio State University with a long history as a child advocate and is one the state’s leading experts in the area of dependency and child immigration. The legal strategy and plan agreed to by all lawyers involved in both Florida and Ohio from the beginning has been to get Rifqa declared a “Dependent” by the state and therefore in a situation where she would never have to be forced to return to her parents or her homeland Sri Lanka unless she wanted to. The dependency status also allows her to apply for a status where she would never be forced back to Sri Lanka where she would surely be killed in time by the Muslim extremists in that country. [...]

[...]

If Rifqa's lawyers demanded a child services investigation of the threat in the home, apostasy and sharia law would have to be introduced.

3) RIFQA DOES NOT NEED TO GO THROUGH AN ASYLUM PROCESS. Dependency is a highly specialized area of the law that most persons have never heard of and that even most lawyers have no idea about. No lawyer who understands dependency law agrees that seeking political Asylum in the US makes any sense. Those that have advocated for Asylum are either not lawyers and have no idea what the law says, or are simply ignorant about the dependency process. It is stunning to hear the arm chair commentators talk about what they think should happen legally when they are completely ignorant about what the law says or how courts, evidence or trials work. Rifqa's immigration status can be resolved as a Dependent of the State of Ohio without any Asylum claims.

I disagree. Apostasy asylum should have been Rifqa's safety. They should be applying now. Yesterday.

6) THE RECENT MOTION FILED BY RIFQA’S PARENTS LAWYERS TO REVERSE THE DEPENDENCY AGREEMENT IS TOTALLY FRIVIOLOUS AND NOT A MAJOR THREAT. The motion filed last week by the Bary parents lawyer and “Islamic Scholar” Omar Tarazi to undo the Dependency agreement previously made in Court is a complete sham and is likely not to have any effect at all on the court. The ridiculous motion also seeks to try and fire all of Rifqa’s lawyers and her Guardian. The court is likely to dismiss it at the hearing without even serious consideration and there is a 95% chance this dismissal will occur. In the highly unlikely event the court grants the parents motion there is a chance a  trial could take place but an even greater chance a settlement agreement would take place again because the Bary parents lawyers appears to be completely inexperienced and has never tried a case.

No, what Tarazi is doing is running out the clock so that Rifqa is without immigration status when she turns 18. Will they deport her? Who can say, but CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood have infiltrated senior levels at the State Department so deeply, it is likely. Certainly that new Muslim Outreach to the Ummah department at State that reports directly to Clinton might deem it "helpful" to send her back. I think that's what CAIR and the Barys want -- for the whole family to go back to Sri Lanka, which was the plan after members of  the NOOR mosque spied on Rifqa and told her parents of the conversion. The bags were packed.

Stemberger continues:

7) IT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO TAKE LEGAL ACTIONS THAT WILL ENSURE RIFQA’S SAFETY THAN IT IS TO TAKE ACTIONS WHICH EXPOSE RADICAL ISLAM. There are many people who want to see Rifqa undergo the risk involved with a full blown trial with the sole motive to expose radical Islam rather than to secure agreements which would guarantee that Rifqa will be safe. I am totally against radical Islam and want to see them exposed and want the power of Rifqa’s story to be heard. But not at the expense of risking Rifqa’s safety [...]

8) IN ANY LEGAL CASE, A SETTLEMENT WITH THE SAME RESULT IS ALWAYS BETTER THAN BEARING THE RISK OF A TRIAL WHERE THE ULTIMATE RESULT IS NOT IN YOUR HANDS BUT THE HANDS OF A JUDGE. An agreement properly recognized by the Court and which gives you the same result you would seek at a trial, is always a better option than a full blown trial. In a trial, the judge (no jury trial in this type case) would make the final decision. In a settlement agreement the parties have control over the terms. If for whatever reason the judge ruled against Rifqa at trial, or the delay caused Rifqa to age out of the Ohio foster care system at age18 without being declared a Dependent, she could be immediately sent back to Sri Lanka. This is a risk that her legal counsel does not appear willing to take, but one which some other “friends” of Rifqa are foolishly advocating for because they do not understand the process.

Yes, this has been Stemberger's position all along. He is investing everything in this. He put all of Rifqa's eggs in one basket. But Rifqa is still not eligible for Special Immigration Juvenile Status, and the clock is ticking.

I believed that then and I believe that now. Despite those who got very nasty with my advocating for Rifqa. Or worse yet, backpedaled.

Here is Jamal Jivanjee's careful opinion (Stemberger has banned Rifqa from talking to Jamal -- effective last week):

RIFQA BARY’S DEFENSE- EMERGENCY ACTION NEEDED IN 3 AREAS: Dear friends and supporters of Rifqa Bary,After my article last week regarding Rifqa Bary’s hearing in Columbus on March 2’nd and some of the troubling news that came out of those proceedings, I have discovered more alarming information, some of which requires what I would consider immediate emergency action.  I do not wish this article to be an evaluation of Rifqa’s attorneys as much as I whish this article to be a call to action to her attorneys, and others, regarding urgent matters in relation to Rifqa’s defense that have been neglected and are in need of immediate action.  I urge you to take a few minutes and read thoroughly.  Some of these specifics are legal matters, but please read the entire article.  This is of the utmost importance.  I have been deeply concerned about Rifqa’s defense for some time now.  Because of these ongoing concerns, I hoped that Rifqa would be able to consult with some other well qualified attorneys to hear their assessments of the case because there have been many attorneys who have also been very concerned about how this case has been handled thus far.  So far, Rifqa has not been able to consult with any other attorneys other than the ones who have been involved in the case thus far.  After last week’s developments both in and out of court, I have become even more alarmed about what is happening regarding her case.  As a result, I have consulted with a couple of well qualified attorneys who gave me their honest assessment of what has been occurring.  Let me remind you, these attorneys are not attorneys seeking to represent Rifqa in any way, but are well qualified attorneys who are Christian, and who have been following her case with great concern and prayer.  Based on the assessment that I received, there are a couple of issues that need to be addressed immediately without delay.  Let me list them here:

I. There needs to be an immediate Child Protective Services (CPS, or Ohio’s equivalent agency) investigation into Rifqa’s family and home life.     

There have been some serious allegations made against Rifqa’s family and the nature of her family life at home.  This is in addition to the serious threats that she faced as a result of her conversion from Islam to Christianity.  Rifqa has suffered abuse by her family in the past.  This abuse is very serious.  These allegations have been made, but since this case has started, there has yet to be any investigation of her parents and subsequent past home life. This is an absolute outrage concerning the nature of the allegations made and the circumstances surrounding the case.  When Ohio says that they found no evidence that her life was in danger, keep in mind that there was no investigation done regarding the allegations of abuse that Rifqa has alleged, nor were her parents investigated in any way.  Ohio’s division of Child Protective Services has an obligation to look into these things.  Since Child Protective Services in Ohio has not done their job, it is incumbent upon Rifqa’s attorneys as her legal advocates to demand that such an investigation be done.  The attorney that I spoke with told me that this should be done immediately and without delay.    Keep in mind that such an investigation by Child Protective Services of the parents and home life is standard procedure when allegations as serious as Rifqa’s are made.  Rifqa has been back in Ohio for almost 5 months and her attorneys have demanded no such action.  The fact that her attorneys have not filed a motion, nor have they successfully persuaded authorities that such an investigation be done is unconscionable and an outrage. 

This is important because Juvenile courts are always inclined to reunify families unless there are reasons known to the court why it would not be safe to reunify the family.  Since Rifqa has not had a trial for dependency, in which the nature of the threats that she was facing as a result of her conversion to Christianity from Islam would have come out, this CPS investigation would be very important.  This investigation would also slow the push for reunification that the Franklin County Children’s services case plan explicitly calls for.  Because there has been no investigation of Rifqa’s parents, Rifqa has been made to look as the one who has done something wrong which makes following the case plan that, Rifqa’s attorneys and her parent’s attorneys have signed on to, the only logical conclusion.  I was told that it did not help Rifqa in any way to plead guilty to the ‘unruly child’ charge, and was extremely bad advice from her attorneys.  This furthers the false impression that she is the one who did something wrong, and it further ignores the real issues in this case.   While no one expects that the case plan leading to reunification can be completed in 5 months, there are other reasons why the case plan should not be followed at all, and should not have been agreed to by her attorneys.  This has everything to do with her immigration status which leads me to the second and most serious step of action that needs to be taken immediately.

II.  Rifqa’s Immigration and Naturalization Case needs action taken immediately.

As you may know by now, Rifqa is not in this country legally.  In order for Rifqa to be able to stay in this nation, Rifqa has at least two options available to her.  The first option is a special dependency proceeding that minors are eligible for called Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS), which will allow Rifqa legal permanent residency in the U.S.  This Second option is pursuing an Asylum process. 

Rifqa’s attorneys have decided to base their entire legal strategy on the first option called SIJS.  They have decided to put all their eggs in this one basket, so to speak, and not seek Asylum concurrently with SIJS.  This has been a HUGE mistake for the following reasons:

The likelihood of SIJS succeeding is looking very unstable now.  If Rifqa is denied SIJS, there is nothing left to fall back on as a result of her attorneys’ decision to not apply for Asylum for Rifqa as well.  A leading organization which acts as an advocate for human rights had this to say about the SIJS process:

“ If the juvenile applies for this status and is successful, s/he may remain in the U.S., work legally, qualify for in-state tuition at college, and in five years apply for U.S. citizenship. However, if the application is denied, the child might be deported.”

Because of this risk, I was told that prudent attorneys always cover their bases which is why the asylum process should be pursued concurrently with SIJS in case there is a problem with SIJS.  Based on what occurred in last week’s hearing, we now know that there is a major problem with Rifqa’s attorney pursuing SIJS.  Consider the following statement from the above mentioned Human Rights organization regarding SIJS:

In order to qualify for SIJS, a juvenile court in the U.S. must have declared the child a court dependent, or have legally committed the child to a state agency or department. The court must have found the child "eligible for long-term foster care" (which in this context means that parental reunification is not possible), and that it is not in the child's best interest to be returned to the home country. The child should have proceeded to long-term foster care, adoption, or guardianship and the court must have made its findings based on the abuse, neglect or abandonment of the child.  

According to this statement, only children who are in “long term foster care” are eligible for SIJS.  This means that the court must have declared that reunification is not possible.  What we found out from last week’s hearing, however, is that Rifqa is currently forced to follow the case plan which on paper calls for the eventual reunification with her parents!  That is why Angela Lloyd, Rifqa’s attorney, is not yet able to move forward with SIJS for Rifqa.  The judge in the case is mandating that the case plan be followed for now and this makes Rifqa currently ineligible for SIJS because the court has not yet found that reunification is out of the question! (This means that the March 02 hearing was NOT good news for Rifqa)   

Because there has been no Child Protective Services investigation into Rifqa’s family life as mentioned above, the court has not been able to rule out reunification based on “abuse, neglect or abandonment of the child.”   Basically speaking, there has been no progress on SIJS and there cannot be until the court rules that reunification is not possible.  Now, time becomes Rifqa’s biggest enemy because Rifqa turns 18 in 5 months. This might not seem like an issue because minors can apply for SIJS until they are 21, but there is another factor that weighs heavy in all of this.  When applying for SIJS, two applications are required.  One of these applications is called an I-360 (petition to be qualified as a Special Immigrant Juvenile).  In order for an I-360 to be filed, it will require an order from the juvenile court judge stating that the child is a dependant of the state due to reunification being impossible.  The judge overseeing Rifqa’s case will not give the order, however, until the case plan is tried for a period of time that satisfies her and she determines that reunification is not possible.  The court loses jurisdiction of Rifqa when she turns 18 in 5 months, which means that if she does not get the court order by then, she cannot apply for SIJS at all.  In addition to this, I was told that it is highly recommended that the juvenile court judge include in the court order for the I-360 an explanation as to why the child returning to their native country (Sri-Lanka for Rifqa) would not be desirable, or why returning to their parent’s custody is not possible.  Since the threat that Rifqa has faced due to her conversion from Islam to Christianity has not been introduced to the court, it is impossible for the court to have a grasp about the nature of the danger that Rifqa would face in Sri-Lanka.  Also, since Rifqa’s attorneys have not demanded a Child Protective Services investigation of her parents and home life, it is impossible for the court to determine that she cannot be reunified with her parents based on abuse, neglect, etc…  As you can see, this information is very important for SIJS and adequate work on Rifqa’s behalf has simply not been done.  It is an outrage!     

The entire strategy of depending on SIJS in this case has been ‘misguided’ to say the least.  For the last seven months that Rifqa’s case has been in court, there has been absolutely no progress on her immigration status!  An Asylum process should have started 7 months ago in addition to the pursuit of SIJS and things would not be in the situation they are currently in.  Now that we know these things, an Asylum process should be started immediately!  Not one more day should be wasted.

We need to remember that there is much at stake here.  This case is about the rescue and redemption of Rifqa, and I believe millions of others as well.  We must not allow pride or professional reputations to get in the way of the truth. This is not a political campaign in which the truth can be spun.  In order for situations to be corrected, they at least have to be acknowledged and defined.  I am convinced that it is for such a time as this that Rifqa and this case has been elevated to the national stage.  In light of this, I would like to ask you to contact Rifqa’s attorneys and implore them to take these emergency steps immediately.

Please contact Kort Gatterdam (614)-365-4100 or gatterdam@carpenterlipps.com

Please contact Angela Lloyd: Lloyd.148@osu.edu

Please contact  Judge Elizabeth Gill (614)-462- 4445 and (firmly and respectfully ) request that a Child Protective Services investigation be launched into Rifqa’s abusive past home life. 

In conclusion, the immigration statute requires a finding that the dependency order is based upon the court having ruled that the dependency judgment was based upon factual finding of "abuse, neglect or abandonment."

When Tarazi and Lloyd and Chris Julian said upon the record of the proceeding that this was not "... an abuse ... " case, then the judge's finding of dependency could not have been made on a finding of "abuse, neglect or abandonment."

You cannot made a finding of law about something, e.g., "abuse, neglect or abandonment," unless it is supported by a sufficient and necessary finding of real facts that support the legal finding. When the parties stipulated that it was not factually an abuse case, they stipulated that legally it was not an abuse case. Apostasy and the sharia punishment would have supported that finding. Contrary to Stemberger's denunciation, I did not want to put Islam on trial for the hell of it. I wanted to spare Rifqa.

I don't think Rifqa meets the statutory requirement for SIJS  finding before the federal courts. Nor do I believe that the state court judge will issue the necessary I-360 document to support her application before the immigration courts, based upon a finding of law, and an adjudication, not based upon abuse or neglect or abandonment.

It appears that the SIJS procedure is not available to her.

Her only shot now is apostasy asylum, and that they better get off their asses and start applying for it. My opinion is that they should go hat in hand to the Pepperdine clinic, and see if they can get help.

Rifqa Bary: Legal Incompetence and a Ticking Clock

The whole objective of the Stemberger strategy of not addressing the threat to Rifqa's life and not entering into evidence apostasy and death fatwas/threats was to get dependency, so as to secure special immigrant juvenile status. That strategy is an abject failure. There has been no progress on that. Every "deal" for dependency made with Rifqa's parents' allegedly CAIR-appointed legal team was broken. The intent was never to honestly broker a deal with the infidels for an apostate's safe harbor. Stemberger never understood who and what he was dealing with.

Removing the religious aspects of the case (and that would be to remove the whole of the case) validates the claim made by Florida and Ohio law enforcement that there was no threat to Rifqa's life. Law enforcement admitted that the religious threat was not investigated. Rifqa's defense strategy (or lack of it) backs that up.

Instead, Rifqa's lawyers had her plead guilty to "unruliness" for a dependency deal. Where is it? Why does she still have only temporary dependency? Worse, the "unruly" plea is now being used to pursue criminal charges against her friends Brian Williams, the Lorenzes, and the International House of Prayer -- the good Samaritans who helped Rifqa after she ran away from home, when her devout Muslim father said he would kill her after spies at the Noor mosque told the Barys that Rifqa had converted to Christianity. Mohamed Bary waved her laptop over her head and said he would kill her if she had "this Jesus in her heart." According to the hijabed Heagney, on-staff shill for CAIR at the Columbus Dispatch, Omar Tarazi, the Barys' attorney, told the court yesterday that the Lorenzes are under criminal investigation in Florida. Heagney says, "a spokeswoman for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement confirmed that Monday." Well, it's not surprising. The CAIR-directed strategy has been pushing for this for months. Punish the Christians who helped an apostate escape Islam. 

Stemberger (who is still controlling and directing the case) wrote here on February 1:

IN ANY LEGAL CASE, A SETTLEMENT WITH THE SAME RESULT IS ALWAYS BETTER THAN BEARING THE RISK OF A TRIAL WHERE THE ULTIMATE RESULT IS NOT IN YOUR HANDS BUT THE HANDS OF A JUDGE. An agreement properly recognized by the Court and which gives you the same result you would seek at a trial, is always a better option than a full blown trial. In a trial, the judge (no jury trial in this type case) would make the final decision. In a settlement agreement the parties have control over the terms. If for whatever reason the judge ruled against Rifqa at trial, or the delay caused Rifqa to age out of the Ohio foster care system at age18 without being declared a Dependent, she could be immediately sent back to Sri Lanka. This is a risk that her legal counsel does not appear willing to take, but one which some other “friends” of Rifqa are foolishly advocating for because they do not understand the process.

Is that what is now happening as the clock tick tocks?

Instead, they made a deal for "reconciliation," so that permanent dependency seems out of the question. How can you get the state to grant permanent dependency (necessary for the special juvenile immigration status) when "reconciliation" is the goal? What is the strategy behind that? And if Rifqa is not a dependent of the state, she can't get special immigrant juvenile status. So what happens when she turns 18 in August and she has no immigration paperwork working for her? Judge Elizabeth Gill said yesterday:

"We're all going to take a deep breath; you're going to work with these counselors," she said.

"What I've seen from the three of you, particularly you," she said, pointing at Rifqa, "you're strong enough to achieve these goals."

Gill was clear that counseling, not the legal case, should be the tool used to reunite the family. Both sides agreed to that on Jan. 19 and that 17-year-old Rifqa would stay in foster care for the time being.

"The only individuals that are going to be able to repair it are the three of you, with professional help," she said.

Indeed, and previous reports exposed that only Rifqa was being required to attend individual counseling. The parents were apparently not mandated to take the normal parenting classes, drug tests, anger management and individual therapy required of most families who end up in the system.

Other lawyers have publicly questioned the legal strategy here: 

"Proceeding in the Bary case in such reverse fashion of what generally occurs in a family court, and what is needed and required for the best interests of a child is chilling, at best."

And other lawyers have privately weighed in.

On more than one occasion, Professor Einhorn offered Stemberger assistance in making a case for apostasy asylum. Why not file the application concurrently, in the event that the dependency status wasn't granted? Why put all of Rifqa's eggs in one basket? Einhorn's legal group was turned down more than once, as were a number of litigation specialists in sharia law.

Worse, Stemberger has forbidden Rifqa from talking to Jamal Jivanjee. She was given an ultimatum. Stemberger and his team or Jivanjee -- either she stops talking to her friend Pastor Jamal Jivanjee, or he and his legal team stop talking to her.

Bullied, Rifqa acquiesced.

Is that the act of a concerned patron, lawyer, or friend? I wrote of Stemberger's other skulduggery here.

And while he claims to be "pro bono," he keeps billing Rifqa's trust fund. Shouldn't that trust be for college? Pro bono legal help is what Robert Spencer and I helped secure for Brian Williams when the Thomas More Law Center unhesitatingly agreed to take on the heresy case of Brian Williams.

It stinks. All of it.

Here Jamal Jivanjee gives us his thoughts:

RIFQA BARY UPDATE: VERY TROUBLING DEVELOPMENTS FROM COURT IN COLUMBUS (MARCH 2, 2010)

Dear supporters and friends of Rifqa Bary,

I have had several requests for an update regarding Rifqa’s hearing in court on Tuesday (March 2nd, 2010).  I have taken the last several hours to process and pray about the news, and after some conversations about this latest hearing, I unfortunately must tell you that there are some very bad developments from today’s court hearing in Columbus that I am shocked are not being reported.  There are several reasons why I am convinced that Rifqa’s defense continues to be on an entirely wrong trajectory in this landmark case. 

Before I get into the very troubling developments that occurred, the one positive development that occurred in Tuesday’s hearing is the fact that the court upheld Rifqa’s temporary dependency.  Rifqa’s parent’s C.A.I.R. (Council on American Islamic Relations) advised attorney filed motions requesting to withdraw from the temporary dependency that they themselves agreed to several weeks ago.  The Judge denied this request thereby upholding the temporary agreement for dependency for Rifqa.  The negative aspect about all of this is the fact that it is still TEMPORARY.  She has NOT been declared a permanent dependent of the state for the next 5 months like we all would have liked.  Remember, Franklin County Children services has put together a case plan that calls for the reunification of Rifqa and her parents.  While this is standard procedure regarding juvenile cases, this is obviously a horrendous proposition considering the very real and dangerous threat that Rifqa faces if this were to happen due to her conversion from Islam to Christianity.  While I am told that this call for reunification is simply standard procedure for juvenile cases and does not have much chance of being carried out, it does show that the true nature of this case is not understood, nor being taken seriously.  Because the truth about the threats facing Rifqa are continuing to be hidden, this allows authorities in Columbus to continue to attack those that helped Rifqa flee her home on the night her life was endangered. 

Last week, Rifqa’s attorneys filed a motion declaring that reunification was no longer possible and thereby was attempting to withdraw from following the horrendous Franklin County Children Services case plan recommendation of reunification with her parents.  I was very happy that Rifqa’s attorneys finally saw the light, so to speak, but unfortunately it was too late.  Just like Rifqa’s parents, Rifqa’s own attorneys have already agreed to this horrendous case plan!  In addition to denying Rifqa’s parents motion to withdraw from the agreement to dependency, the motion by Rifqa’s attorneys to reject the case plan and its call for reunification with her parents was rejected by the judge today as well.  Basically speaking, the judge in this case is mandating that the Franklin County Children Services case plan be followed, and that is why Rifqa and her parents are being pressured to undergo counseling.  I am told, however, that because Rifqa will be 18 in August, it is unlikely that the case plan that eventually calls for her reunification will have time to be carried out in 5 months.  So, why is there cause for concern? 

RIFQA’S IMMIGRATION STATUS IS IN JEOPARDY!

The AP and the Columbus Dispatch is falsely reporting that Rifqa’s parent’s legal status is unknown while at the same time they are reporting that Rifqa herself is not in this country legally!  Wow, this is some of the worst reporting I have ever observed in my life.  If Rifqa is here illegally, then wouldn’t that mean her parents are also here illegally?  It was Rifqa that came to the U.S. from Sri-Lanka on her own parent’s visa.  She was a young child when her family immigrated here.  Rifqa’s parent’s visas have since expired.  This has been known for some time now, and now the danger that Rifqa faces from being an illegal immigrant is coming out.  The media’s assessment that Rifqa’s parent’s legal status is unknown is blatantly misleading and false.  (This should be eye opening to all those who get their information about this case from the media.)  

Rifqa’s attorney’s entire legal strategy has been to secure dependency of the state for her so that she can remain in foster care until she is 18 and pursue permanent residency status as a minor.  According to a law passed during the Bush administration, minors who are declared to be a dependent of the state are eligible for a very special dependency proceeding.  The official name of this dependency proceeding is called Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS), which will allow Rifqa legal permanent residency in the U.S.   If Rifqa turns 18 without this, she can be deported to Sri-Lanka where her life would be in grave danger.  (It is now also documented that Rifqa’s mother has admitted to having had plans to take her back to Sri-Lanka due to her conversion.  It is widely understood that her parents will attempt to do this should reunification ever occur before she is 18.) 

Obviously, C.A.I.R. does not want her here in this country talking about her conversion from Islam to faith in Jesus Christ, as well as shedding light on the threat that she faced due to numerous Islamic teachings in the Qur’an and the Hadith that past leaders at her family’s mosque in central Ohio openly held to.  Because of this, the C.A.I.R. advised attorney representing Rifqa’s parents are opposed to Rifqa being allowed to pursue this special immigration proceeding keeping her here in the U.S. 

This is where there is much cause for concern.  Because the case plan has been agreed to by both parties, the judge is now saying (in agreement with the C.A.I.R. attorney) that the case plan (which calls for reunification) must be attempted before Rifqa’s attorney (Angela Lloyd) can even begin with this special immigration process!  Make no mistake about it, this is not good news in any way, shape, or form, and this is what we found out from Tuesday’s hearing.  I am outraged and shocked that this is not being reported!  The fact that Rifqa’s attorney is not yet able to begin pursuing her immigration status fits right in with the ‘stalling’ tactic being used by C.A.I.R.  

Rifqa’s attorneys have had 2 objectives thus far.  Their first objective has been to attempt to secure permanent dependency for Rifqa thereby keeping her safe in foster care until she is 18, and the second has been to secure permanent residency status for Rifqa by employing SIJS.  They have failed to achieve the first objective because they agreed to a case plan that calls for reunification and have made deals to avoid a trial.  This makes the dependency only temporary while the case plan is put into action.  The fact that there has been no trial for dependency has only made matters worse by keeping the threat that she faced a secret. 

The second objective that her legal team was supposed to pursue regarding permanent residency status, (SIJS), is now on hold and is in jeopardy because of the agreement to follow this horrendous case plan.  SIJS has been the entire crux of their legal strategy and we found out from Tuesday’s hearing that the Judge is simply not allowing Rifqa’s attorneys to move forward on this because they want to give the ‘case plan’ time to work.  The closer to Rifqa’s birthday that we get without her immigration status being settled, the more danger she faces.  Rifqa’s legal team has decided to not pursue Religious Asylum for Rifqa as well because they have put all their eggs, so to speak, in the (SIJS) basket.  Many others have asked why (SIJS) and Asylum cannot be pursued concurrently, however, in case there is a problem with one of these approaches as there now appears to be.  This situation has been going on since August and it is now March.  Rifqa is no closer to having her immigration status resolved now than she was 7 months ago.  The two objectives that Rifqa’s attorneys have said they could get easily have yet to be achieved at all!  Correct me if I’m wrong, but I am at a loss to see how this is good news. 

So why am I saying this, and what is my objective?  Let me tell you clearly.  Coming to this conclusion to stand opposed to Rifqa’s legal strategy has not been easy for me at all.  It has come with a cost, let me assure you.  Rifqa has been told to stay away from my advice because of the stand that I have taken.  Obviously, this has caused much stress, heartache, and hardship as a result.   I am not an ‘angry blogger’ as it has been suggested.  I am one who loves Rifqa dearly and I feel an unction by God to continue to tell the truth as I see it unfolding.  None of this has been easy for me or our family, but I must be obedient to God and not to man.  It is not faith to deny reality and become ignorant of the enemy’s schemes.  I am confident and I am not afraid for Rifqa.  I believe that in the end, Rifqa will be ok.  She will be victorious because the truth is proclaimed, however, and not because it is silenced with a premature and false declaration of peace and victory.  It is simply not possible for me to sit by while I see these things unfolding.  With that said, I would like urge you to pray for the following:

1.       Pray that eyes would be opened to the enemy’s strategy. There is a pervading blindness, so to speak, that is preventing us from seeing and understanding what is actually happening in this case.  Please pray that Rifqa herself would be given wisdom about all of these things, and that she would have access to a wider variety of counsel than she currently has.  Proverbs 24:6 says: “For by wise guidance you will wage war, and in abundance of counselors there is victory.”    

2.    Pray for Rifqa’s testimony of faith in Jesus and the threat that she faced from Islam to come out and be made public.  There is no doubt in my mind that this is why the Lord has caused this case to be elevated to the national stage.  As you can see, there is much opposition to this from many different angles.

Thank you for considering this plea,

Jamal Jivanjee

Unbelievable, right?

I thought I ought to rerun the immigration documents of the Bary parents in a story I broke on October 14, 2009. Where is the media?

The AP lied today when they said:

Unlike her parents, if reconciliation fails, at 18 then she is without legal status," Lloyd said.

The immigration status of the parents is unclear, although Lloyd said in court that the couple are "pursuing their own immigration relief."

Muhammad and Aysha Bary: ILLEGAL ALIENS

Check out Mohamed Bary's missing immigration documents. Mr. Bary lost his application for amnesty. He lost his appeal for reconsideration of the administrative law judge's denial of that amnesty application, (or, application for change of status to temporary resident legal alien, to be more precise.) Mohamed Bary made contradictory allegations as to his residency, and he obviously committed perjury.

He and his family are subject to immediate deportation and further exclusion. He claimed he came to America to tend to Rifqa's eye, when in fact he came illegally through Mexico (according to the document), and the "doting" father never got Rifqa medical treatment.

For several months the attorneys for Rifqa Bary's parents have been promising to produce their immigration documents. And yet they still have failed to produce them. First, Craig McCarthy (since  discharged) and then the new, improved, CAIR-approved Shayan "Shaytan" Elahi repeatedly promised to produce them here and here and here and here. The Barys have ten days before they are in contempt of court. My money says they are going to say the documents are lost.