Should prosecutors who mislead judges about bail be jailed themselves?

This is about the Noor Salman case, who was found not guilty of aiding her husband in the shooting of 49 people in the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando.

Everybody knows about the shooting itself, but 7 months after the shooting the wife of shooter Noor Salman was arrested and prosecuted for helping her husband in the shooting death of those 49 people.

From what was heard at the trial, the shooter chose the night club by random. He had wanted to shoot up a Disney location in Orlando but there was good security and he got spooked by accidental police presence behind him and he chose to find a location with less security. And at another Disney location/another night club, that he also visited he did not execute his plan to attack. It seemed his choice for Pulse was a spur of the moment decision of convenience.

Now we come to the bail issue, the judge originally had decided Noor could be released on 500,000 dollars bail. But the prosecution, confession in hand appealed that decision and "convinced the judge" by claiming she was a danger to society, kept her locked up in jail.

That confession came after 17 hours of interrogation (first few hours with her child present, remember, a woman of lower IQ and easily led/persuaded to say things). The interview/interrogation, according to articles, took place immediately after the shooting and her husbands death, with her 3 year old child with her and it lasted 17 hours.

The confession itself was written by and FBI agent and signed by Noor Salman. Of the 17 hours she was interrogated at the FBI bureau (which has excellent camera and recording equipment at the ready) there is no footage of her interrogation and zero recordings. The only thing that proved she was interrogated was that confession of Noor Salman.

In her confession it is written:

When I went to Orlando with Omar last week we drove around the Pulse nightclub after we ate at the ...... restaurant. We drove around the Pulse night club for about 20 minutes with the windows of the car down. Omar was driving slowly, looking around and at one point stated "how upset are people going to be when it gets attacked!".

On Friday June 10th 2016, late night, Omar was looking at the website for the Pulse night club and when I saw what he was looking at he said "this is my target" I know that the time to attack the club was close

Click to expand...

https://media.clickorlando.com/document_dev/2018/01/05/EXHIBIT%2023%20-%20SALMANS%20VERBALL%20INTERVIEW%20-%20WRITTEN%20BY%20FBI%20AGENT%20-%20INITIALED%20BY%20HER_1515170363936_11448149_ver1.0.pdf

During the trial it came out that the FBI had determined within days that Salman had never been in the vicinity of Pulse, her husband had not visited the website of Pulse on the day she mentioned and that the choice for the Pulse night club had been taken at the last moment.

In fact the FBI knew this all those months later when they were angry with the judge for wanting to give her bail and convinced the judge to reverse his decision and keep her in jail because she confessed to having helped her hubby in casing the night club.

An FBI agent stated that days after the confession they knew Noor had never been near Pulse. The judge then asked the prosecutors why they had misled him when they asked to deny Noor bail (the jury had been excused at that point). The judge stated that he was very concerned by it.

But now this issue at hand. The FBI and hence the prosecution knew she did not case the night club with him when they asked for the judge to deny her bail, knew they had a very flimsy case, but still convinced the judge with that confession in hand to deny her bail and keep her in jail and away from her son for 14 months. All the while knowing that she had not gone to the night club and that it was a totally unprepared attack on the club.

Now should the prosecutors who did this, lied to the judge and caused a woman to be jailed for 14 months, be convicted and sent to jail for their false imprisonment of Noor Salman?

A little more about his choice for the Pulse night club:

A lot of wrong assumptions and claims have been made about the shooter and the shooting. A lot of media sources called it a hate crime (due to it being gays shot to death by a radicalized Muslim), but in the end it seemed to have nothing to do with it being a gay night club. It was not in the 2016 Hate crimes report in Florida. The police did not classify this shooting as a hate crime.

From what was heard at the trial, the shooter chose the night club by random. He had wanted to shoot up a Disney location in Orlando but there was good security and he got spooked by accidental police presence behind him and he chose to find a location with less security.


He first went to Disney Springs, just outside Orlando, there is a shopping and dining complex but Mateen did not want to risk it. Two hours after that first attempt he was pinged near Walt Disney Epcot. Then at 12 past midnight he googled from his car "downtown Orlando nightclubs". He got directions on his google maps how to drive to EVE, the first club he went to. He was pinged near EVE at 12.55am, but the defense will show that EVE was well secured, they had good security at the entrance and people are searched before they can enter.

At that time he did another google search for a downtown Orlando nightclub. This time his phone gave him directions to Pulse, the scene of his horrendous crime. He arrived there between 1:12 and 1:16 a.m. He drove around the area for a while, and around 1:33 a.m. he did the same Google search and got directions again to EVE Orlando. He started to head in that direction at 1:34 a.m. but then turned around one minute later and went back to Pulse.


Clearly a fluke choice that he picked Pulse so it seems. He may not have even known it was a gay club. A security guard (according to information, not sure it was presented at the trial) recalled that Mateen had asked "where all the women were". Which would indicate that he did not know it was a gay club at all.


Claims had been made that the shooter had been gay, but a long investigation did not turn up any evidence whatsoever.

In my opinion, Noor Salman was falsely accused, falsely imprisoned, a victim of prosecutorial misconduct, and illegally separated from her child. Some sizeable monetary damgaes to Noor and long jail terms for the prosecution. They should be incarcerated without bail, tit for tat, don't ya' know? Do unto thee what you have done to others.
/

Peter King said:

A little more about his choice for the Pulse night club:

A lot of wrong assumptions and claims have been made about the shooter and the shooting. A lot of media sources called it a hate crime (due to it being gays shot to death by a radicalized Muslim), but in the end it seemed to have nothing to do with it being a gay night club. It was not in the 2016 Hate crimes report in Florida. The police did not classify this shooting as a hate crime.

From what was heard at the trial, the shooter chose the night club by random. He had wanted to shoot up a Disney location in Orlando but there was good security and he got spooked by accidental police presence behind him and he chose to find a location with less security.


He first went to Disney Springs, just outside Orlando, there is a shopping and dining complex but Mateen did not want to risk it. Two hours after that first attempt he was pinged near Walt Disney Epcot. Then at 12 past midnight he googled from his car "downtown Orlando nightclubs". He got directions on his google maps how to drive to EVE, the first club he went to. He was pinged near EVE at 12.55am, but the defense will show that EVE was well secured, they had good security at the entrance and people are searched before they can enter.

At that time he did another google search for a downtown Orlando nightclub. This time his phone gave him directions to Pulse, the scene of his horrendous crime. He arrived there between 1:12 and 1:16 a.m. He drove around the area for a while, and around 1:33 a.m. he did the same Google search and got directions again to EVE Orlando. He started to head in that direction at 1:34 a.m. but then turned around one minute later and went back to Pulse.


Clearly a fluke choice that he picked Pulse so it seems. He may not have even known it was a gay club. A security guard (according to information, not sure it was presented at the trial) recalled that Mateen had asked "where all the women were". Which would indicate that he did not know it was a gay club at all.


Claims had been made that the shooter had been gay, but a long investigation did not turn up any evidence whatsoever.

Click to expand...

Aside from possible perjury, what crime could they have broken?

apdst said:

Aside from possible perjury, what crime could they have broken?

Click to expand...

False imprisonment by deceiving the judge about the evidence they knew was bogus from the get go.

I find it a stretch to believe that your signifigant other could do something like this and you have no idea. Just my opinion.

Peter King said:

False imprisonment by deceiving the judge about the evidence they knew was bogus from the get go.

Click to expand...

I don't think there's such a crime. But if true it certainly seems like she should never have been charged. Were was her attorney in all this? He's the one who's supposed to be looking out for her interests.

Slingshot Bob said:

I find it a stretch to believe that your signifigant other could do something like this and you have no idea. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

Well, what is a husband is very dominating, duplicitous, deceitful, secretive, closed, etc. etc. etc. and the other partner is an abused, lower intelligence individual who is very easy to deceive by someone who is as devious as this guy was.

Also, she does not seem to have had access to his electronic devices.

Also, this was a text communication she had with her husband during his crime:

"You know you work tomorrow," she wrote.

He responded: "You know what happened?"

She wrote, "What happened?"

Then he sent his last text: "I love you babe."

Click to expand...

Why on earth if she knew what was happening would she text him to remind him he has to work the next day? That sounds very illogical.

Gaius46 said:

I don't think there's such a crime. But if true it certainly seems like she should never have been charged. Were was her attorney in all this? He's the one who's supposed to be looking out for her interests.

Click to expand...

Well, the judge also only found out the FBI knew the confession was (at least in an important part) false and untrue during the trial.

Peter King said:

Well, what is a husband is very dominating, duplicitous, deceitful, secretive, closed, etc. etc. etc. and the other partner is an abused, lower intelligence individual who is very easy to deceive by someone who is as devious as this guy was.

Also, she does not seem to have had access to his electronic devices.

Also, this was a text communication she had with her husband during his crime:



Why on earth if she knew what was happening would she text him to remind him he has to work the next day? That sounds very illogical.

Click to expand...

In light of the text, that could change my opinion, also possible the text was a red herring.

Slingshot Bob said:

I find it a stretch to believe that your signifigant other could do something like this and you have no idea. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

I would imagine that since terrorists and other mass murderers want their attacks to be successful then they would not tell anyone else about their plans if they can help it.

Peter King said:

Now should the prosecutors who did this, lied to the judge and caused a woman to be jailed for 14 months, be convicted and sent to jail for their false imprisonment of Noor Salman?

Click to expand...

Yes. They should be convicted and sent to jail. I am pretty sure that if an average citizen lied to law enforcement then they can be charged, tried in a court of law of possibly sent to jail or prison depending on the severity of that lie. The same thing should happen to law enforcement who lie to judges and so on.

jamesrage said:

Yes. They should be convicted and sent to jail. I am pretty sure that if an average citizen lied to law enforcement then they can be charged, tried in a court of law of possibly sent to jail or prison depending on the severity of that lie. The same thing should happen to law enforcement who lie to judges and so on.

Click to expand...

Yep. It's illegal for citizen to lie to any law enforcement, even if not under oath. It's not illegal for LE to lie to citizens. In truth it's something they do all the time.

Peter King said:

False imprisonment by deceiving the judge about the evidence they knew was bogus from the get go.

Click to expand...

If they lied to the judge, that would be perjury.

apdst said:

If they lied to the judge, that would be perjury.

Click to expand...

And in this case their perjury cost this woman 14 months in jail, without any justification (or so it seems).

Peter King said:

And in this case their perjury cost this woman 14 months in jail, without any justification (or so it seems).

Click to expand...

It's not perjury unless it's under oath. When a prosecutor makes a bail argument, they aren't placed under oath.



However, they could be disbarred or have their license suspended for a long time. I say "could". It almost never happens as a result of prosecutorial misconduct. (In fact, prosecutorial misconduct rarely leads to a defendant who has been convicted getting a new trial).

As I do not "Know" the details I must reserve judgement and go with the authorities on this. I admit a part of my reasoning has to do with a dislike of anything Islamic and a desire for vengeful retribution...Basically guilt by association does not allow for any pity whatsoever.

Peter King said:

And in this case their perjury cost this woman 14 months in jail, without any justification (or so it seems).

Click to expand...

You would have to prove they lied. Plus, there are definitely exstenuating circumstances.

apdst said:

You would have to prove they lied. Plus, there are definitely exstenuating circumstances.

Click to expand...

What would those circumstances be? That they did not have any actual evidence of guilt? Other than a false confession for which they have been able to prove the opposite of happening?

Peter King said:

What would those circumstances be? That they did not have any actual evidence of guilt? Other than a false confession for which they have been able to prove the opposite of happening?

Click to expand...

She was married to a terrorist. They don't take chances with that stuff now days.

apdst said:

She was married to a terrorist. They don't take chances with that stuff now days.

Click to expand...

But she was free for 7 months after the crime before she was arrested. If she was such a danger that they could not take chances, they should have arrested her there and then after the "confession". But they did not, there was no reason to assume she was dangerous. This was a strange action by the prosecution. And they got their heads handed to them by the jury who did not buy/believe their deceitful case.