The End
This month, a motion for
court
I, Scott Harrison, am the Respondent and declare
as follows:
For one year now I have suffered major and
continuing emotional pain and suffering, economic hardship and a
legal affliction because my wife, Khadija Wahab, the Petitioner,
has methodically and deliberately and with the guidance,
assistance, and support of others, abused the processes of
justice. She has misused the law and this court to perpetuate a
serious miscarriage of justice against me for her personal gain.
She has committed repeated perjury both in written declarations
and in person, under oath before this court. I seek a remedy to
unjust sanctions against me and ask that the court take notice
and seriously investigate any exploitation of its authority and
powers made by the Petitioner Khadija Wahab.
I will remind the court that our case began when
the Petitioner, Khadija Wahab, applied for a restraining order
against me and this matter was heard before Hon. Charlotte W.
Woolard, on October 30th, of last year. At that
hearing, under oath I made three essential points and made a
request of the court. First I categorically denied the
allegations against me. I described for the court how the
Petitioner had broken dishes and a window in our home and
deliberately made false accusations against me to the police. I
stated unequivocally that the police report she submitted to the
court was entirely based on her words and those words were
false. Her written sworn statement repeating and embellishing
the false accusations against me were pure fabrications and her
confirmation of those written documents under oath in court was
deliberate perjury.
Second, I informed the court that I had evidence
to impeach the Petitioner's allegations against me but I was
unable to present that evidence because of a criminal case
against me at the San Francisco Hall of Justice, involving the
same issues, that was pending against me and I could not
jeopardize that defense. This was not my decision to delay
presenting evidence but was based on the counsel of my Public
Defender at the Hall of Justice who was handling my criminal
case.
Third, at the hearing of October 30, of last
year before the Hon. Charlotte W. Woolard, I stated I loved my
wife very much and felt police, courts and lawyers were the most
extreme and unsuitable method to communicate and
reconcile our differences. I even apologized to my wife for any
offense or hurt I may have caused her with my comments about her
religion, Islam. I did this despite her violent and illegal
actions against me. I did so because I did indeed love her.
The one request I made of the court was to
continue the matter until after the criminal case had been
resolved; at which time I would be ready and able to defend
myself. My request was denied and I was unable to present
evidence and a restraining order was put upon me. I feel that
when these orders are illegitimate they become indeed weapons of
abuse against innocent people.
Meanwhile the criminal case against me was
resolved. The final disposition of that case did not find me
guilty of ANY violence or abuse of my wife, the Petitioner. I
did plead "no contest" to a lesser charge to resolve the
litigation but that charge was P.C. 136.1, dissuading someone
from calling the police, a non-violent act. I did not plead
guilty to this count; I pleaded "no contest." When I was
compelled by a counseling program to make admissions of violence
against my wife as part of their treatment program, attorney and
San Francisco Supervisor Matt Gonzalez and an associate of his,
Michael Hinckley, working pro bono, contested this in court and
the issue was ultimately decided in our favor regarding the
admissions of violence. I had made no admission of being
violent, I had not been found guilty and I therefore did not
have to make any such admission in the program I was attending.
So today because a full year has passed and this
injustice remains I would like to ask of the court that I be
granted an evidentiary hearing where I can present evidence and
bring witnesses and be allowed to defend myself against false
and damning accusations against me. I would also plead with the
court to look with much greater seriousness at my allegations
that my wife, the Petitioner, Khadija Wahab, with the aid and
assistance of others, did in fact commit multiple perjuries and
orchestrated a full-scale and deliberate act of perversion of
justice,
I believe the first remedy for the wrongs done
to me is for the court to look more closely at the basis of the
restraining order placed on me October 30th, of last
year by granting my request for a longer hearing. Secondly, I
ask that the court dissolve that restraining order.
I would like to thank the court for its
patience, time and understanding on these matters.
I declare under the penalty of perjury under the
laws of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
[Signed] Scott
Harrison
Further court testimony to
be filed in San Francisco Superior court next week
I, Scott Harrison, declare as follows [in part]
…[my financial situation] dramatically changed
when I made arrangements to marry. At that time I began
liquidating part of my book collection to pay for the
considerable expense of traveling to Morocco twice, paying for
Khadija to come over here, presenting cash and gifts to her family
and setting up a household. Among the many expenses was a new
Sony laptop computer for her family, another new laptop for her
and a few thousand dollars to assist her father in his business.
Additional money was given for her family to have a summer
vacation. I also sent money for medical bills for her sister and
mother, English school for her two sisters and cellphones for
each among other things. It was my expectation that with time
the petitioner would financially participate in the marriage and
my assets would be restored so that at some later date we might
improve our book business, maybe buy a house and have the
resources to support a family. At no time did the Petitioner
contribute financially despite my suggestions she get a
part-time job. Instead, the petitioner proved a steady drain to
my resources.
… In January of this year the court ordered
Spousal Support to be retroactive to November of last year. With
my payment for November of this year I will have paid thirteen
monthly payments. Out marriage before separation was nineteen
months. So, for all these reasons, I again, respectfully ask the
court to terminate all future Spousal Support and make the order
permanent.
Because I loved and supported my wife, in a
general way her personal beliefs were her own private matter.
This was especially true about religion. I wanted my wife to
feel accepted and happy. In earlier documents submitted to this
court I explained in detail how I changed my life and
accommodated my wife's Muslim beliefs.
However, yes, the events of September 11th
altered the balance between us. Immediately after the attacks my
wife the Petitioner checked out all the videos she could about
hijacking commercial airliners; she said the hijackers were not
Muslim but framed by the American government. On the morning
before she attacked me she said it would be fine if ten million
Americans died if Iraq sent poison gas because then America
would get some of what it has done to others. Later that night
on the night of the incident, as she has admitted in court, she
said, "I love Bin Laden I wish I had married him instead of
you." I did try to show my wife quotes from the Koran that bin
Laden represented an extreme violent sect of Islam which she was
being pulled into because he covered his acts with the banner of
Islam. We have the same thing in the Christian world, but KKK
members do not represent the whole. The Petitioner by greatly
inflaming and distorting what actually occurred has attempted to
outrage and anger other Muslims who do not know the truth.
Furthermore her false testimony against me flies in the face of
Muslim belief and practice. Surah 3, #61 of the Koran states,
"…We will summon our sons and your sons, and our women and your
women, and ourselves and yourselves, then we will pray humbly
(to our Lord) and (solemnly) invoke the curse of Allah upon
those who lie."
Surah 4, #112 states: "And whoso committeth a
delinquency or crime, then throweth (the blame) thereof upon the
innocent, hath burdened himself with falsehood and a flagrant
crime."
The Petitioner's false testimony to the police
to detectives and to this court is an insult and an injury to
all honest Muslims. Just as her false domestic violence claim is
an insult and injury to all genuine domestic violence victims.
I will remind the court that my wife, the
Petitioner took several years training in martial arts; she has
a black belt in Taekwando which she also practiced while here in
San Francisco. I would like to draw attention to the fact that
the injury occurred to her hand, actually her fist; the same
fist that she is trained to make taekwando blows. This should
suggest something quite out of the ordinary for usual domestic
violence victims who generally report being hit, slapped,
kicked, choked and so on. My wife's cut to her hand was
self-inflicted. She broke the kitchen window (which was
reinforced) as a deliberate act to attack the person who would
attempt to thwart her fraudulent marriage and so she could
illegitimately obtain American residency using INS rules.
The Petitioner says in paragraph two [of her
sworn statement]: "he restrained me physically, grabbing and
bruising my arm, and finally pushing me so hard that my hand
went through the kitchen window." This sworn account is at odds
with the original account Petitioner gave to the police and at
odds with the sworn account given to this court and is
totally and entirely a deliberate fiction. It is the lie
which has devastated my life, cost me thousands of dollars and
which gives the green light to all and any other immigrants that
would like to seize residence by exploitation of INS rules meant
to protect genuine victims of domestic violence.
This case is very complex and considerable
deceit is occurring but despite this I will try to get to the
other essential points quickly.
Truly I think none of us should forget where the
Petitioner has come from. Morocco, from where my wife was born,
raised and spent her entire life is similar to many third world
nations. The economic conditions are so severe, so pervasive and
so unremitting that people, particularly young people resort to
often-desperate measures to get to Europe and the wealthier
nations. Morocco for example has hundreds of deaths each year
caused by attempts to reach Spain, across the Strait of
Gibraltar, by Moroccans traveling in small boats. The average
Moroccan laborer earns $2 a day; yet despite this around the
country are stories such as the one Khadija told me. Several
people wishing to get to Spain paid a woman in the neighborhood
of $2,000 each (one thousand days work) to be taken to Spain.
After collecting the money from many people she disappeared with
all the cash.
Every step of the way I always made it clear to
the Petitioner that I could not and would not participate in any
scheme to illegally or illegitimately bring her to America. She
asked me to marry her five days after I met her and after three
years we did get married. The greater substance of this and all
the events are a matter for our Nullity Trial and are not at
issue at this point but the point I wish to make is that
conditions are heartbreaking and the need is extreme. There are
some poor nations that have legions of people who know every
sentence of Immigration law in all wealthy industrialized
nations so that every law can be exploited to the maximum. V.S.
Naipaul writes about this in Pakistan in his recent book,
"Beyond Belief." Every string will be pulled to successfully get
immigrants residence in wealthy counties. This is the chemistry
that caused my wife to lure me into a bogus marriage then later
stage a very carefully planned domestic violence incident to
remain in this country.
The importance of this particular case lies in
the fact that people would know our legal system in such detail
that they, in groups would create bogus, counterfeit domestic
violence events. Just like counterfeit money or fake I.D.'s, the
fake can look almost exactly like the real thing. It is meant
to. It is designed to. I think the way for the court to
distinguish the difference is only by careful and close
examination. That is why I am requesting a longer hearing. At
that hearing I can bring forth witnesses and examine the
Petitioner who has falsely accused me and present documentary
evidence which can both impeach her written sworn statements to
this court and also can shed serious doubt about what she claims
occurred, during our marriage, during the so-called domestic
violence incident and the year that has passed since.
My own opinion is that those individuals who
fraudulently obtain entry into our country, by illegally
crossing borders, by lies, or exploitation of affections, by
hook, rook or ruse, are squarely and firmly in violation of U.S.
Immigration law. However I do think they have a legitimate moral
foundation to have taken the actions they have. I personally
feel anyone who works hard and is honest and would make painful
and dangerous sacrifices to make a better life for their future
and that of their family, I am not the INS but I salute them and
I personally welcome them, I feel our nation is enriched by
their presence. Various amnesty programs America has offered
suggest many people feel the same way.
But, in a particular case, such as mine, where
an innocent person [myself] who had deep affection for an
immigrant and took such pain trouble and expense to give of
himself, in love and in trust and resources, when that person is
shamelessly exploited, constantly lied to, is publicly
humiliated, legally persecuted, financially damaged, his friends
and family members are harmed, he is emotionally afflicted, and
when the immigrant does all of this without remorse, shame or
accountability because she feels she is rightfully conducting
Islamic Jihad, when she deliberately plans with others a
deliberate set-up, your honor, this is something the court
should not and must not ignore. I am not the first person this
has happened to but I do believe my case is an excellent one for
examination and study to see that this might not happen to
others.
I do swear that what I have written here is true
and that at no time was I ever domestically violent with the
Petitioner, Khadija Wahab. Never, even by accident did I push her
or pull her or cause her to break a window in our kitchen. She
did this entirely of her own calculated volition. I swear under
penalty of perjury that the Petitioner has deliberately and
knowingly lied for her own personal gain and profit.
I have read and am familiar with California
Penal Code section 118a. Which states: "Perjury defined:
Every person who, having taken an oath that he or she will
testify, declare, depose, or certify truly before any competent
tribunal, officer, or person, in any of the cases in which the
oath may by the law of the State of California be administered,
willfully and contrary to the oath, states as true any material
matter which he or she knows to be false, and every person who
testifies, declares, deposes, or certifies under penalty of
perjury in any of the cases in which the testimony,
declarations, depositions, or certification is permitted by law
of the State of California under penalty of perjury and
willfully states as true any material matter which he or she
knows to be false, is guilty of perjury."
I have also read and am familiar with California
Penal Code section 126: which says: "Punishment. Perjury is
punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three or
four years."
Knowing both of these California Penal Code
sections and the penalty for perjury I, Scott Harrison declare
under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of that
the foregoing is true and correct.
[Signed] Scott Harrison, the Respondent
Motion heard before Commissioner Marjorie
A. Slabach, November 12, 9:30 am, Courtroom 404. Motion denied.
---------------
A final note: Just last night my friend
Maria came into the bookstore. I hadn't seen her in a few
months. She said she had spoken to Khadija. Maria said,
"Apparently Khadija's younger sister Laila will be coming here.
She found someone to marry. When the two years are up and she
has her Green Card she won't have to go through anything like
Khadija went through. She can just move directly in with her
sister when she's done with her husband."
