NJ judge OK’s rape of wife by Muslim, citing religious belief; overturned on appeal

July 28, 2010 | Filed under: Featured Block,Judicial | Posted by: Mike Daniels

A trial judge in NJ refused to issue a restraining order in a case of domestic violence and marital rape because the defendant, a Muslim, claimed that his religion gave him the right to sex on demand and complete control of his wife. An appeals court overturned the verdict.

A New Jersey Superior Court judge heard the case of S.D., a 19-year-old woman, against M.J.R., her husband. The couple, from Morocco, were wed in an arranged marriage in 2008, when S.D. was 17. They came to the United States because her husband had work in New Jersey as an accountant.

S.D. described abuse at her husband’s hands in great detail in the recently-released court documents. Abuse included corporal punishment and marital rape. He first punished her for not knowing how to cook. He then prepared a list of things for her to do, promising to punish her for anything not done. The abuse continued; please review the record for yourself for details.

S.D. sought a divorce and a restraining order.

From the appellate court decision noted above (original case has not been released, nor the name of the family court judge), the family court judge ruled:

This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.

The appellate court determined:

After acknowledging that this was a case in which religious custom clashed with the law, and that under the law, plaintiff had a right to refuse defendant’s advances, the judge found that defendant did not act with a criminal intent when he repeatedly insisted upon intercourse, despite plaintiff’s contrary wishes.

Having found acts of domestic violence consisting of assault and harassment to have occurred, the judge turned to the issue of whether a final restraining order should be entered. He found such an order unnecessary, vacated the temporary restraints previously entered in the matter and dismissed plaintiff’s domestic violence action….

As the judge recognized, the case thus presents a conflict between the criminal law and religious precepts. In resolving this conflict, the judge determined to except defendant from the operation of the State’s statutes as the result of his religious beliefs. In doing so, the judge was mistaken.

Thanks to The Freethinker.

16 Responses to NJ judge OK’s rape of wife by Muslim, citing religious belief; overturned on appeal

boob August 12, 2010 - 5:44 am

Ah..religion..

Guest October 20, 2010 - 8:12 am

Muslims need to get the hell out of here! It looks like the day may come that I need to take my daughter and leave this country if we don't stop this out of control train!

- Kalene October 20, 2010 - 9:44 am
  
  Please don't stoop to the level of the ignorant faithful. The majority of Muslims do not support these practices. Stop fueling Islamophobia. It is fine to disagree with a religious tradition, but it is NOT okay to stereotype the entire faith based on some of its extremists (which are the minority). That being said, we have specific expectations of gender equality and rights of the individuals in a marriage here in the states. If the husband did not want to conform to those standards, he should have stayed in Morocco where he could keep his power over his wife. In this country, she has every right to a divorce and to file a restraining order.
  
  - Guest November 11, 2010 - 6:02 am
    
    I talk to a Muslim man everyday, I am not sure where he lives (Canada I think), but he said there is no such thing as marital rape in islam and any married woman that claims otherwise should be beaten and/or killed for disrespecting her husband's authority. Not saying that all muslims are that way, but it is the mindset of every muslim I know [about], so it makes me a bit skeptical.
    
    - Uly November 22, 2010 - 9:19 pm
      
      Of course, only a generation ago the law in the US said the same thing. Heck, I've heard Christian men claiming it's not rape if you're married. I yelled at them, too!
      
  - William November 11, 2010 - 8:37 am
    
    The majority of Muslims may not support these practices, but that's only because the majority of Muslims don't really know their faith and their tradition (just like the majority of Christians). As Muslims become more aware of the "official" interpretation of Islam (or as official as it gets, in a system without an easily identifiable final authority), they become "radicalized" (i.e. they get to the roots of their system) and are more likely to support these and other violent practices.
    
guest again October 21, 2010 - 11:40 am

By the way, if muslims don't agree, why aren't they speaking out?

- Neha January 30, 2012 - 11:37 am
  
  They're too busy beating and torturing their disobedient wives to bother with blogs.
  
guest October 21, 2010 - 12:39 pm

Who was the Judge. He is not upholding United States law. He needs to be removed from the bench. Our laws are for everyone even every religion. Practice whatever religion you want but obey our laws.

Friend in Justice October 21, 2010 - 8:34 pm

They are allowed and even encouraged to kill their daughters for dating and or marrying outside the Muslim faith….is that okay too>? Do all of America's laws go out the window for the Muslims? Skin heads? If they immigrated here and don't agree, go home. Are we so PC that we no longer stand up for ourselves, our laws, and our legal system? Next we will state educating oneself in terrorism is okay since it is a religious belief system….here ya go Jim Jones types! Free to use and abuse. I want to start a church that doesn't believe in paying taxes!

- neha January 30, 2012 - 11:39 am
  
  *On October 20, 2009, near Phoenix, Arizona, Noor Almaleki’s father, Iraqi-born Faleh Hassan Almaleki, ran over his 20-year-old daughter with a two-ton jeep. He struck down her female companion and protector as well. His daughter died. *On February 12, 2009, after savagely battering and psychologically tormenting his third wife, Aasiya, Pakistani-born Muzzammil Hassan (who weighed twice as much as his wife), beheaded her in Buffalo; he also stabbed Aasiya sixty times. *On New Year’s Day 2008 in Texas, Egyptian Muslim man — Yaser Abdel Said — who shot his two teenage daughters multiple times. Sarah identifies her Dad as the murderer in a 9-11 call – her dying words.
  
Bhazor June 20, 2011 - 1:27 pm

…. I am speechless.

edwords June 20, 2011 - 8:22 pm

Most Muslims in "civilized" countries water down the Koran, as believers in the Bible do to their holy book ( which tells them to kill those who work on the Sabbath).

Samuel Adams September 5, 2011 - 3:05 pm

"In doing so, the judge was mistaken" I know that's what appeals are for, but this is more frightening to me than the rest of the story. What if the appellate courts were wrong as well? Take care of yourself the best you can, court decisions are made by men, and men are fallible…

RWO June 23, 2012 - 7:59 am

The lower court ruling endorsed a religious entitlement claim made by an Islamic defendant that is little, if any, different than the religious entitlement claim the Catholic Church proffers to exempt its business endeavors from providing health insurance coverage for any service or provision the Church deems to be inconsistent with its religious practices. This justification proposal is already also claimed by Protestant’s for any insurance provisions that conflict with their personal beliefs, e.g. dispensing RU-486 from pharmacies. If these religious opt-out provisions are sustained for health care policy, it is likely that the principle will be cited to claim additional religiously justified exemptions from complying with public policy.

sheldon June 23, 2012 - 9:38 pm

OK Then Christians should be able to kill their children if they curse at them or strike them, kill all Gays, fortune tellers etc etc as prescribed by THEIR religion.