NOT GUILTY WA - Parents try to kidnap daughter over forced marriage - November 3, 2024 (NG of attempted murder; Guilty of lesser charges)

[turaj]

above post indicates there was a question yesterday. I can't find what that question was? Does anyone know? I see a lot of x comments but what was the question. This trial is really hard to follow with Court TV's coverage. I think it is a very important case. This is the second case I ihave seen lately with the attack right on video and jury having trouble convicting. Most agree it is the mother's involvement in question.

 

[shotgun09]

above post indicates there was a question yesterday. I can't find what that question was? Does anyone know? I see a lot of x comments but what was the question. This trial is really hard to follow with Court TV's coverage. I think it is a very important case. This is the second case I ihave seen lately with the attack right on video and jury having trouble convicting. Most agree it is the mother's involvement in question.

Regarding your question, the question from the jury yesterday was about " legal authority". The jury wanted a definition. The judge wrote back to them that there is information in their jury instructions. No additional info was given.

 

[turaj]

Regarding your question, the question from the jury yesterday was about " legal authority". The jury wanted a definition. The judge wrote back to them that there is information in their jury instructions. No additional info was given.

anyone read anything into this? Are they debating if one or both parents were within their "legal authority" to restrain her. Without context hard to sort out what they are thinking. wonder if this was before or after the walk?

 

[shotgun09]

anyone read anything into this? Are they debating if one or both parents were within their "legal authority" to restrain her. Without context hard to sort out what they are thinking. wonder if this was before or after the walk?

I would like to see what was written in the jury instructions regarding legal authority. I recall the judge vehemently stating in court, that parents do not have the right to restrain with deadly force, ( strangling ) although I do not remember if she said it in front of the jury.

 

[IQuestion]

Yes, "my daughter" is so infuriating, and they both (IA & ZA) use this when referring to FA.

Why not call her by her name, Fatima, or if they insist, Ibna, which means daughter, but I think they intentionally call her "my daughter" to show possession, hoping to intimidate her! Their parenting style is all about fear, control, and intimidation.

The parents believe they own FA like IA owns his truck! They showed no concern for the health of their child, but IA was very concerned about his truck, and that it not be left in the school parking lot! Fearing it would be stolen!

#FATIMASTRONG

SEATTLE1 You have hit the nail on the head.... got to the point with a sledgehammer's blow!
I hope the prosecutor brings all your points up in the sentencing of this tyrannical beast. Fatima was just another asset, something to barter, traded like chattel. I hope the perp is given the choice of a 20 year sentence for attempted murder and abuse of a minor OR permanent relocation to Iraq.
(Neither would be cruel or unusual punishment, IMO.)

 

[nodamselindistress]

Sure did not expect them to be out this long.

 

[IQuestion]

Holding my breath!!!

 

[Izzylizzy]

Sure did not expect them to be out this long.

The clock just stopped with a question from the jury.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Deadlocked somewhere is my take.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Deadlocked somewhere is my take.

On Mommy Dearest's top 2 charges.

IMO

edit: I was wrong!

 

[arielilane]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1950940012012261887

 

[Seattle1]

7/31/25

LIVE: WA v. Ali & Ali, Day 12 - VERDICT WATCH | Attempted “Honor Killing” Trial​

 

[Seattle1]

2nd question from the Jury was related to the protection order by FA's boyfriend IW. (Count 5 for ZA).

Response by Judge: Refer to jury instructions.

 

[shotgun09]

It seems to me that the jury is close, and are on instruction number 46 ( of 49 ). This in regards to Isiah W's temporary protection order. (Violating the order, for Zahra Ali ) We should be close to a verdict, hopefully.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Yesterday the jury questioned about ZA's kidnapping charge so since they're now down to #46 instruction on 2nd degree burglary then they're done deciding with the attempted murder/kidnapping.
I think..
Close to being done.

imo

 

[Izzylizzy]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1950940012012261887

I find it so strange seeing and listening to Michael Brown after 2 yrs of only seeing him defend Rex Heuermann.

imo

 

[Izzylizzy]

Since the jury is down to the protective order for ZA does that mean that they came to a consensus on the attempted murder and attempted kidnapping?

So no hung jury on either of those charges?

 

[Izzylizzy]

When a jury gets no help from their judge on instructions and remains confused I don't see how they can convict the person of that charge being unsure w/o being clear on the definition to find them guilty.

imo

 

[Izzylizzy]

7/31/25

LIVE: WA v. Ali & Ali, Day 12 - VERDICT WATCH | Attempted “Honor Killing” Trial​

I was wondering about this too because there was a protective order for her to stay 1,000 ft away from Isiah.

 

[Seattle1]

I would like to see what was written in the jury instructions regarding legal authority. I recall the judge vehemently stating in court, that parents do not have the right to restrain with deadly force, ( strangling ) although I do not remember if she said it in front of the jury.

The "charging conference" was held on Day 8- summarized below, outside the presence of the jurors, who had the day off. It was a pretty intense day-- they amended the indictment with an additional assault charge, and attorneys entered not guilty pleas.

"Jury Instructions"

The Judge read aloud the Jury Instructions to the jurors (as required) following the closing arguments, but I've not seen them published anywhere for us to review. Per the summary below, the existing jury instructions were not changed.

"Legal Authority"
During the closing arguments, one of the statements by the prosecutor included " ... Without legal authority, you cannot strangle your child to restrain them...it seems really obvious, but apparently, it needs to be spelled out." (See Court TV tweet/X posted upthread).

Per the Statute: using strangulation to restrain a child is considered child abuse and is illegal.

While parents are generally allowed to use "reasonable and moderate" force for discipline or restraint, strangulation or any act that interferes with a child's breathing is explicitly listed as a method that is presumed unreasonable and thus unlawful.

RCW 9a.16.100: Use of force on children—Policy—Actions presumed unreasonable.

app.leg.wa.gov

DAILY TRIAL HIGHLIGHTS​

DAY 8 – 7/24/25​

• VIDEO: WA v. Ihsan & Zahrra Ali, Day 8 | Attempted ‘Honor Killing’ Trial
• . Attorneys met to discuss jury instructions and verdict form.
  • Both sides debated Zahraa Ali’s knowledge of her husband’s actions during the incident
  • Judge found sufficient evidence for second-degree assault and revised instructions to include Fatima’s name.
  • Disagreements arose regarding the inclusion of accomplice instructions for Ihsan Ali.
  • There were discussions surrounding the definition of assault, with video evidence referenced by counsel.
  • Judge allowed instructions for assault in the fourth degree after reviewing relevant case law.
  • Multiple jury instructions were reviewed and approved, with various name changes made.
  • The state attempted to amend the indictment after the presentation of evidence concluded.
  • A motion was made to add a notice of Domestic Violence to the Unlawful Imprisonment charge.
  • The Judge permitted the amendment to charges despite the defense’s objections.
  • The existing jury instructions remained unchanged following the amendments.
  • Defense attorneys entered not guilty pleas on behalf of their clients following revisions in the indictment.