Seifullah Chapman, one of several Washington DC area Muslim men arrested and convicted in the infamous “Paintball Jihad” case, was freed on Friday, July 20, 2018, by the federal judge who sentenced him to 85 years in prison in 2004 (later reduced to 65 years) although she admitted the sentence was “draconian” and was “sticking in [her] craw.”
Chapman, from Northern Virginia, was arrested and tried along with 10 other young Muslim men mostly from the Washington DC metropolitan region for what the government alleged was a conspiracy to gain military training and join the struggle against the Indian occupation of Kashmir.
Of the 11 Muslim men charged, six defendants pleaded guilty and two were aquitted; only Chapman and co-defendants Masoud Khan from Gaithersburg, MD and Hammad Abdur-Raheem from Northern Virginia went to trial. At the time of sentencing in 2004, federal judge Leonie Brinkema told a courtroom packed with Muslim supporters of the defendants that "what Mr. Chapman has been found guilty of is a serious crime, but there are murderers who have served far less time … I have sentenced al Qaeda members who were planning attacks on these shores to far less time.''
The case was called the “Paintball Jihad” because part of the government’s allegations were that the young men play paintball in Virginia in order to prepare for “jihad.” The government alleged that Dr. Al- Al-Timimi, a well known Islamic personality and lecturer from Northern Virginia, was the spiritual leader of the group, although he did not know most of the defendants; Al-Timimi was convicted and found guilty of conspiracy to commit treason along with firearm related charges. The FBI admitted that the entire "Paintball Jihad" case was brought with the intention to arresting and convicting Dr Al-Timimi.
Last week’s ruling to free Chapman after he served about 14 years of his 65-year sentence in conditions that were often abusive and severely restrictive came about due to a Supreme Court ruling on April 17, 2018 involving the definition of a “crime of violence.”
The Supreme Court ruling in the case of Sessions v. Dimaya made it clear that the term “crime of violence” was too vague to use when prosecuting a defendant, because such a vague term would violate the defendant’s right to due process. The charges against Chapman which carried the longest sentences involved “crimes of violence.” Chapman attorneys and legal advocates argued that, given the Supreme Court ruling, Judge Brinkema should purge the convictions related to “crimes of violence” from Chapman's charges. Doing so would leave Chapman with convictions carrying sentences which were less than the 14-years he has already served, and hence he should be freed.
Brinkema asked the government to make a case for why she should not release Chapman. Not convinced of their argument, Brinkema ordered Chapman released. The government said they would appeal her ruling, and asked her to keep Chapman – a former U.S. Marine incarcerated pending appeal. She refused, and Chapman, now 45-years old, reunited with his family in Northern Virginia after traveling from Indiana where he was incarcerated.
At his sentencing in 2005, Chapman addressed Brinkema. "I know the court does not believe that this case is about Islam,'' Chapman said. "I believe it is. My entire community believes it is.'' Chapman's trial attorney, John K. Zwerling, called the case and the sentences imposed yesterday "the greatest miscarriage of justice I have ever been involved in.”
Comments powered by CComment