Naveed Haq's Insanity Plea: Not Guilty By Reason of Islam? A get-out-of-jail-free card?

Submitted by James Vesce (United States), Jun 1, 2007 at 15:36

Will the Washington State legal standards for admitting/excluding evidence in cases involving an insanity defense exclude facts from evidence that would otherwise establish his motive as having been that of a young radicalized Muslim male engaged in violent jihad?

Will the defense attempt to explain away his statements to police about having an Islamist agenda as having been the products of his alleged bipolar disorder?

Did Haq previously use a bipolar disorder diagnosis to get off the hook with his father's mosque for having committed apostasy, since sharia excuses the "deranged" when they stray from the path pleasing to Allah and leave their faith?

Will this case provide an advantageous precedent for future jihadists wishing to exploit insanity pleas?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".