Talk:Ilan Halimi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] French Judicial Philosophy
Article says presumption of innocence applies, but under French law, it is instead presumption of guilt.ThuranX 18:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
see : "But the Paris public prosecutor, Jean-Claude Marin, told Parisian Jewish radio on Thursday that "no element of the current investigation could link this murder to an anti-Semitic declaration or action." The umbrella group of French Jewish secular organizations, CRIF, issued a statement Friday calling on the Jewish community "to keep calm, cautious and wait for developments in the investigation." see [1]. Moez 14:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've imported some of this into the article. Sandstein 22:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] modification 1 from main article : islam in the intro
[2]. The link between Islam and this sordid affair is only superficial. It is being used by some politician and activists in France for a political agenda, as the presidential elections are close in France. de Villier for instance is communicating using the "Islam menace to Europe" credo, which has a certain impact on some xenophobic people. He is basically conveting suffrage from the Front national voters. Neither the french prime minister, Sarkozy, nor le ministre des sceaux (justice) nor the prosecutor directly in touch with the file have implied Islam. Indeed, the only direct link to Islam is the testimony of the uncle to a newspaper who said he heard Koran recitation over the phone when negotiating the ransom. Ilan's parent have not made this testimony, nor did the police. the link with Islam is therefore tenuous and should not be presented in the introduction. The sentence "already marked by intense public controversy about the role of Muslim immigrants in its society" is just giving a background the way it is written now and is clearly a POV. Moez 01:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC).
- I totally agree. I changed it yesterday and removed "Muslim" from that last setence but it was changed back.TonyStarks 09:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Modification 2 : variation of the amount of the ransom as a link to Islam
[3]. Now this idea is really farfetched! The simplest explanation is that Ilan's family was not able to pay the exhorbitant lump money, more than half a million dollar. They simply are of modest origin. The antisemitism comes here : the gang said that, according to them, all the jews are wealthy and therefore they had money. This stupid stereotype led them to kidnap a jew, thinking he was rich. Moreover, the police was assisting them during the contact with the kidnapper, and their goal was to catch the kidnapper. All this does not make this allegation serious. Moez 01:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] source for the last edit
[4] : most on the info removed can be found here, for exemple : [5]. The family lawer noted the cynicism of Fofana.
I can't find the article(s) where I read the rest. I'll search my browser history tonignt.
Edit (couldn't wait): for the computer guy "moko" beeing the mastermind as well as Zigo beeing the torturer : [6]
You really should read this : [7]. Unbelievable! Moez talk 12:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] about the good conditions of detention in the Ivory Coast jail
Please see this article, where we learn that Fofana is eating a plate of fish in the compagny of his girlfriend, both wearing expensive sport uniform and visibly very decontracted. (in French) link
[edit] Uh...
How can one of the criminals deny having committed the crime and "show no remorse?" Wouldn't he have to admit to the crime before not showing remorse became a factor at all? I've never robbed a bank, and I show no remorse over it. --MattShepherd 21:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Fofana admits being involved in the kidnapping, not the murder. Moez talk 22:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Possible religious motivation for the crime per the article
Since there is distinct and discrete discussion and evidence that the crime may have been religiously (Islam) motivated, Category:Islam and antisemitism is appropriate regardless if the act was performed by laypeople. -- Avi 02:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Just because someone claims to use Islam as a motive, does not mean the crime has to do with Islam itself. Islam is a religion, defined by scholarly interpretations of its scriptures and other texts. The faith applies to 1.2 billion people worldwide and not just a small gang in France. Characterizing the murder as relating to "Islam" is grossly unfair.Bless sins 18:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- Don't tell me that just because the family thought they heard the Quran on a phone call, means that the Islamic faith is involved. Given the fact that a recitation of the Quran is easily obtainable from the internet, any Christian, Hindu, Buddhist and Jew can play a reciation of the Quran while making threats. THe same goes for "Islamic fundamentalist" literature. ALso, might I remind you that the category you are inserting is "Islam and anti-Semitism", not "Islamic fundamentalism and anti-Semitism".Bless sins 20:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- Please read the article; the idea that the motive was religious has gained support even from the Prime Minister of France himself. Since this reason is as supported as any other, the category is properly applied. You may not like it, but it does not change the facts. -- Avi 02:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with Avi. We don't need to determine whether Islam as such was involved with the crime itself. Rather, what counts is that the crime was widely perceived by the public to have been (partly) motivated by religiously motivated antisemitism, and had implications for the Muslim/Jewish relationship as a whole. Thus the category is accurate, even if the public impression should turn out be false. If so, this should be explained in the article, with reference to reliable sources. Sandstein 07:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- Please read the article; the idea that the motive was religious has gained support even from the Prime Minister of France himself. Since this reason is as supported as any other, the category is properly applied. You may not like it, but it does not change the facts. -- Avi 02:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- Don't tell me that just because the family thought they heard the Quran on a phone call, means that the Islamic faith is involved. Given the fact that a recitation of the Quran is easily obtainable from the internet, any Christian, Hindu, Buddhist and Jew can play a reciation of the Quran while making threats. THe same goes for "Islamic fundamentalist" literature. ALso, might I remind you that the category you are inserting is "Islam and anti-Semitism", not "Islamic fundamentalism and anti-Semitism".Bless sins 20:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)