It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran Hangs Former Soccer Player's Mistress

page: 1
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Iran Hangs Former Soccer Player's Mistress

Source


TEHRAN, Iran – Iran on Wednesday hanged a former soccer player's mistress — known as a "temporary wife — who was convicted of murdering her love rival in a case that captivated the Iranian public for several years.

Shahla Jahed was hanged at dawn, after spending more than eight years in jail for the slaying of the player's wife, the official IRNA news agency reported.

Jahed had become what is known as a "temporary wife" of former soccer star Nasser Mohammad Khani. She was charged in 2002 with stabbing his wife, Laleh Saharkhizan, to death and convicted of murder in 2004 and again in 2009, after her appeal was denied.

Contracts with "temporary wives" are a legal way for Iranian men to have mistresses outside marriage, with the agreements lasting from between several hours to a few years.





edit on 1-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   
I fail to understand how Iran thinks it has any right to criticise any nation on their internal laws aftr seeing these types of stories coming out of their country.

What gets me is the absolute authority of the Quran in their way of life, and the ability for people to interpret what they want from it to justofy actions.

This:

Contracts with "temporary wives" are a legal way for Iranian men to have mistresses outside marriage, with the agreements lasting from between several hours to a few years.


So while its forbidden to have any type of relationship outside of marriage, with the result being death if you do, its permissable to get around that by having a temporary wife. How is that not a violation of the Quran?

This is right up there with jailers being allowed to "marry" females who are sentenced to death so they can "legally" rape them before sentece is carried out.

There are time I wish they would apply the Quran to their religious leaders to see how quickly they make their own interpretations of islamic law so they can avoid there own executions.

And people wonder why Iran was blocked from being appointed to UN comissions dealing with this area.

What really stands out though, if people google the guys name, you can find this info:


Mohammadkhani was involved in a very public court case in Iran, after his wife was found murdered in her apartment in 2002. His mistress, Shahla Jahed, was convicted of the murder, and was executed in 2010, following the completion of the appeals procedure after Supreme Court judges ruled that her initial conviction (based as it was on a confession she made under duress) was unacceptable.[3]



edit on 1-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


"The former soccer striker, Khani, also attended the hanging."

Okay... That's just sadistic.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
She was executed for committing a murder. I am totally against the death penalty, but if this woman had been put to death by lethal injection in the US for killing a love rival, this thread would not exist.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by redhorse
 


Many people view the executions of the person who killed their loved one. I don't understand it, but it happens often.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
She was executed for committing a murder. I am totally against the death penalty, but if this woman had been put to death by lethal injection in the US for killing a love rival, this thread would not exist.


I added more to my second post. After her execution the judges said her confession was thrown out because it was aquired under duress.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by redhorse
 


Many people view the executions of the person who killed their loved one. I don't understand it, but it happens often.


I am not attacking the fact she was "convicted of murder" although I am sure we can find issues from top to bottom on that. I am referring to the fact of the "temporary wives" which is the cause of this. I fail to understand how Islam, which we have seen as being very strict in these areas, is able to be interprested in such a broad manner when it comes to men in their society.

Ever think that if they were not allowed to have a temporary wife under islamic law that this would have happened? The only difference being is the male could possibly have been in trouble as well, but from eveidence of the way its works, would be highly unlikely as well.

Since there is no danger to the men in this area, its acceptable. For all we know the soccer player could have led the temproary wife on, forcing the issue.

So many variables can come to play in this its not even funny. I cannot get how this is considered justice.
edit on 1-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:37 AM
link   
errrm I see your from the USA, unless something has changed your guilty of killing prisoners too



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ashwhy
errrm I see your from the USA, unless something has changed your guilty of killing prisoners too





Ah, another expert on US law, and judging by the comment I am assuming you are not American, which explains the blanket comment about the US while placing it in the wrong context to divert. Yes we have executed convicted criminals. After something called due process, the ability to face the accuser, the ability to not be required to make statements against themselves, being allowed access to legal counsel, and being charged under law, and not religious doctrine that is open to interpretation.

I do enjoy though instead of adding a comment to the article I posted, that you would throw the US into this, which has nothing to do with the topic, which is Iran executing a female for murder, and after the fact the court says her first confession was invalid because it was obtained under duress.

A lot of good that did her.
edit on 1-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


The cause of this was the murder. I know you are looking for a way to attack Islam, but Christians do it too. Look at the members of the LDS church that practice polygamy. They too claim that their holy book allows it. Both are wrong, but twisting the words of the holy book happens in all religions.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


The cause of this was the murder. I know you are looking for a way to attack Islam, but Christians do it too. Look at the members of the LDS church that practice polygamy. They too claim that their holy book allows it. Both are wrong, but twisting the words of the holy book happens in all religions.


I am not attacking Islam. I am attacking the manner in which Islamic Law is applied to people. I fail to understand how Islam can be so detailed in terms of how things work in that society, only to be open to a very broad interprestation from people in positions of authority.

And before you level an accusation like that at me, find out my view first. The attack is on the people who were involved in this case and how they arrive at their conclusions, not the religion.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Your addition doesn't work. You make a statement about Iran being blocked from the human rights commission. Do you really think they have been blocked because they allow men to cheat on their wives? Or because they execute prisoners? By this logic, the US is a terrible violator of human rights.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


After she was executed, her confession was thrown out. Sadly this happens in the US too; many times, prisoners were found innocent after execution. The poster you are replying to is right.
edit on 1-12-2010 by InvisibleAlbatross because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
She was executed for committing a murder. I am totally against the death penalty, but if this woman had been put to death by lethal injection in the US for killing a love rival, this thread would not exist.


Then go do some research and you can find the files on people that have been put to death in the US. Again though it has nothing to do with the post, which is the manner in which this all of this took place.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I have only seen Iran criticize internal laws of any country while on CNN's Larry King Live, when Larry pressed him about certain human rights issues in Iran.

Mahmoud held his ground, and was prepared for this. He walked all over Larry and took control of the interview.

He responded with factual figures about the American justice system and poor old lil Larry had to call for commercial break a few times each time Mahmoud made a fool of Larry and the direction his questions were going.

I am not defending Iran's practice of the death penalty, but I also do not support the American policy.

He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones...



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


It has nothing to do with Islamic law. If this had happened in the US (a woman killing a love rival), depending on the state it occured in, she may well have been executed.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Your addition doesn't work. You make a statement about Iran being blocked from the human rights commission. Do you really think they have been blocked because they allow men to cheat on their wives? Or because they execute prisoners? By this logic, the US is a terrible violator of human rights.


I was referring to Iran being blocked from the UN comission on Womens rights. I will gladly place our legal system and treatment of prisoners against IRans any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Its easy to get stats for the US because they are available to the Public, which is something not done in Iran, so its a guess in terms of what info Iran feels like releasing with no way to verify.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


After she was executed, her confession was thrown out. Sadly this happens in the US too; many times, prisoners were found innocent after execution. The poster you are replying to is right.
edit on 1-12-2010 by InvisibleAlbatross because: (no reason given)


No its does not. Provide evidence to back this claim up please.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


It has nothing to do with Islamic law. If this had happened in the US (a woman killing a love rival), depending on the state it occured in, she may well have been executed.


I love it.. It does not matter what topic is brought up on these forums, it always comes back to people complaining about the US.

If a women in this country kills someone, their is an investigation. The difference betwen our legal system and IRans is we dont beat confessions out of people. We dont force them to sign documents they are not allowed to read, and we dont put them on tv and force them to confess.

She would have been presumed innocent until porven guilty by her peers, and not some judge who is using personal opinion to pass judgment.

The sonner you understand that, the less your argument about the US legal system makes sense in this thread.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
This thread is based on the events surrounding the females execution and the controvery surrounding it. It has nothing to do with the US legal system so stop trying to drag that in to change the topic.

To the experts posting in this thread, can you shed light on how the system in IRan works to either disprove the article, or shed light on the inner workings that justifies it?

It has everything to do with Islamic Law, because it is the foundation of the elgal system of Iran, and invoked in criminal cases. How can the Quran, which is specific in terms of how Muslims live their lives and treat others, yet be interpreted by people in such a broad manner it almost appears to be contradictory.

My prediction though will be further posts that ignore the question and the topic, only to concentrate on the US and how evil we are to the world.


edit on 1-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join