About Us

Contact Us

Friday, November 8, 2002


My Wife, the Trojan Horse

By Scott Harrison




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."