New Mexico Compound Suspects Released On Bond

W

WhatInThe

SF VIP
Suspects of the raided New Mexico compound amidst reports of child abuse and terrorist training have released on bond.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/suspects-...-sheriffs-055907204--abc-news-topstories.html

Also note some these same suspects tested positive for explosives at a NYC airport in 2004, reportedly attended a mosque that one of the 9-11 hijackers did and were under NYC police surveillance for suspected terrorist activities. And keep in mind this whole thing started because a suspect's son was reported taken or kidnapped by the father.

https://pix11.com/2018/08/09/retire...mily-that-got-busted-in-new-mexico-post-9-11/

To get conspiratorial I think these suspects are involved in some kind of government 'intelligence' operation and their handlers want them back in play.
 

As a New Mexico resident I and thousands of others of us are continually disgusted with the way our courts continually turn hardened rdangerous criminals loose. I have a hard time believing that any government operation would allow 11 children to be starved and abused, and a disabled child taken away from any possible medical support & allowed to be killed or die of neglect.
 
Geezerette said:
As a New Mexico resident I and thousands of others of us are continually disgusted with the way our courts continually turn hardened rdangerous criminals loose. I have a hard time believing that any government operation would allow 11 children to be starved and abused, and a disabled child taken away from any possible medical support & allowed to be killed or die of neglect.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it's the judge, local practice or outside influence. It's like someone wants these guys out.

I wouldn't think government operation if it weren't for the positive test for explosives in 2004 (and destination Saudi Arabia) and continuously traveling in circles known for terrorist activity. Also people need money to travel in this case across the country and buy things like weapons. What is this group's source of income. Maybe government handlers didn't know about the conditions and abuse. These suspects seem to have history of getting off or away from charges and accusations that would break many legally, financially or socially.
 

Geezerette said:
As a New Mexico resident I and thousands of others of us are continually disgusted with the way our courts continually turn hardened rdangerous criminals loose. I have a hard time believing that any government operation would allow 11 children to be starved and abused, and a disabled child taken away from any possible medical support & allowed to be killed or die of neglect.
Click to expand...

I live in NM, too, and I could not agree more. Somebody in our state government, such as it is, has decided it is unfair to hold bad guys in pretrial confinement, regardless of the horrors of which they are accused. Makes me sick. And our CYFD, the agency with the responsibility to investigate child abuse and neglect, is a bad joke.
 
I saw it reported that the Judge was getting death threats, which is not the solution, of course.
 
From what I've read, the law there makes it very difficult NOT to allow accused defendants out on bail. But two of the adults from the compound were not released.
 
The District Attorney has appealed it. One of the men won't be released-he is wanted on kidnapping charges on the unfortunately deceased little boy. ICE has taken one of the women into custody who is Haitian & no papers. It doesn't look like the others are going anywhere as one of the conditions of release was "suitable housing " & none is being made available. But even the Gov is furious at the judge. State legislators are already talking about how to stiffen the law & not have this "revolving door" that citizens & law enf. alike are furious about.
 
Dismantled & taken away for further analysis. For further info see Albuquerque Journal, Santa Fe New Mexican, KKOB, KOAT, KRQE. I'm done. Not going to hang around to argue "What in the" s conspiracy fantasies.
 
Heard today that the original charges were dismissed. More here.

TAOS COUNTY, N.M. - A judge has dropped the initial child abuse charges that were filed against five suspects who were arrested at a compound in northern New Mexico.

District Judge Emilio Chavez made the decision Wednesday in the first hearing. He dropped the charges, which he said can be refiled, against Lucas Morten, Hujrah Wahhaj, and Subhannah Wahhaj saying the prosecution failed to hold a preliminary hearing to prove probable cause within ten days of their first court appearance.

About an hour later, Judge Jeff McElroy came to the same decision regarding Siraj Wahhaj and Jany Leveille.

Both judges blamed state prosecutors and District Attorney Donald Gallegos for failing to follow New Mexico law, which states defendants are entitled to a preliminary hearing within 10 days of an arrest.

“I’m just going to say once again that I am very disappointed," said Judge McElroy. "The court is being caught between very public, very shocking information and a complete failure to follow proper procedures prosecuting the case.”

Prosecutors tried explaining to the judge that they didn't hold a preliminary hearing because they expected the defendants to be released from jail. If that would have happened, prosecutors would have had a total of 60 days to hold a preliminary hearing.

“What I would argue is that every day we expected them to be released from custody because they’re on an unsecured bond,” said one of the prosecutors.
The suspects were not released because they couldn't find housing in Taos County, one of the conditions of release.

Minutes after Wahhaj and Leveille had the original 11 child abuse charges dropped, they had a 'first appearance' for new charges, of first-degree child abuse resulting in death and second-degree felony conspiracy to commit child abuse.

The defendants did not enter a plea.
Prosecutors filed a motion to keep Wahhaj and Leveille in jail until trial. They will remain locked up until at least September 4, when the motion will be heard in court. At that time, a judge can set conditions of release or grant the motion to keep the suspects in custody. A preliminary hearing for the pair is scheduled for September 7.

Wahhaj is accused of abducting his son Abdul Ghani Wahhaj from Georgia. The 3-year-old boy's remains were found at the compound days after the raid.
Click to expand...
 
Apparently the suspects also wanted to attack an Atlanta hospital because someone didn't like the way their mother was treated there. Considered a corrupt institution to attack.

https://www.ajc.com/news/crime--law...ospital-documents-say/QfR8CpoYrwPTSWHkFnVSQO/

With such a high profile case I can't believe prosecutors aren't more careful to avoid stuff like this. How often is the 10 day preliminary hearing rule actually applied by the courts.
 
The 10-day preliminary hearing requirement is avoided if the prosecution submits the case to a grand jury instead. We used to have grand juries sitting all the time (I served on one) to sort through stuff like this. BUT, somebody up the food chain here decided that grand juries cost too much, so there aren't nearly as many, if any, of them, now, and thus we get the 10 day prelim issue coming up.
 
Butterfly said:
The 10-day preliminary hearing requirement is avoided if the prosecution submits the case to a grand jury instead. We used to have grand juries sitting all the time (I served on one) to sort through stuff like this. BUT, somebody up the food chain here decided that grand juries cost too much, so there aren't nearly as many, if any, of them, now, and thus we get the 10 day prelim issue coming up.
Click to expand...

Did the grand juries have to vote on the entire set of charges as one or as long as they found a few to be worthy of a trial the case could proceed and 10 day rule waived?
 
WhatInThe said:
Did the grand juries have to vote on the entire set of charges as one or as long as they found a few to be worthy of a trial the case could proceed and 10 day rule waived?
Click to expand...

The standard for the grand jury to indict is fairly low; we just had to have a reasonable belief that a crime had been committed and that the suspect had probably committed it. We went through several cases in a day. I sat on that grand jury for 2 or 3 days a week for 6 months.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top