Assistant Summit County prosecutor Kassim Ahmed has resigned after a truly bizarre controversy over what appears a slight bump in the hallway that led Ahmed to file an assault charge against court employee Holly Trivett. The videotape below does not support the claim and Ahmed complained that he has “taken unfair criticism as a result of these negative articles.”
As reported first in the Beacon Journal, Ahmed filed a complaint against Trivett after what he called an “unprovoked physical assault” by Trivett on Oct. 10th at the Summit County Courthouse. He described the alleged assault in a letter to court officials who immediately sought to review security videotapes. What they saw was Trivett brushing by Ahmed in a narrow hallway where Ahmed was standing in the middle of the passageway.
The court assistant executive officer, Susan Sweeney, then raised the issue of whether Ahmed falsely accused Trivett and said that the court was “troubled and concerned about these inaccurate statements by an officer of the court against another court employee.”
However, Summit County Prosecutor Sherri Bevan Walsh has defended Ahmed and said that the surveillance video was misleading. However, it is hard to see how the encounter could have been viewed as anything more than a passing glance or bump. It certainly does not seem to warrant an assault charge.
Even if Ahmed viewed the bump as rude, it showed exceptionally poor judgment to convert that moment into a criminal matter, particularly for a prosecutor. If this is assault, a standard trip on the metro at rush hour would be a criminal melee.
Notably, this film would not support even a tort action for battery, in my view, under the lower standard of proof. Battery in tort is tied to an objective standard of an unconsented to touching that is offensive or harmful.
What do you think?
A friend and I went skiing at Copper Mountain. While we were there a guy collided with my friend’s car.. My friend filed a claim and eventually his insurance company sued the guy. We had to go testify at that courthouse. Our side won.
Kassim Ahmed should have been fired and not allowed to resign. He’s a vile injustice-collector, as all Muslims are. (Islam is a hate-cult, not a religion.) So Ahmed blocks the hallway to cause problems for others. Years ago, the psychoanalyst Edmund Bergler, MD wrote a book called “Curable and Incurable Neurotics.” Ahmed and others of his ilk are of the incurable type.
And in related news:
“Path-blockers” used to drive me nuts at my (former) office. People would stand in the middle of a corridor and even if they saw others coming, they wouldn’t budge, forcing people to squeeze around them. Sometimes it ticked me off enough to walk between the people talking, because that was the widest opening.
If I was able to continue my conversation with someone I was walking with, it was considered a bonus, because then I wouldn’t acknowledge or apologize to the people blocking the corridor.
On the other hand, I have had occasions on narrow sidewalks when a group of people walking towards me would continue in a group, taking up the whole sidewalk, oblivious to my presence. I used to get off the sidewalk onto the grass, to avoid colliding with this rolling roadblock. But not anymore. Why should others have more rights to the sidewalk than I do? So when I see this situation approaching, I now just stop walking (on the righthand side of the sidewalk) and stand still, awaiting developments. Most of the time, the oncoming scrum will rearrange into single file, so everyone can stay on the sidewalk. Sometimes, however, one or more people will just barge into me, and then glare at me as to why **I** was in their way. I have even said, “Why do you think you own the whole sidewalk?”
An interesting public etiquette problem. What if a group of 4 walkers meets a group of 3 walkers. Does the group of 3 have to get entirely off the sidewalk?
The individual, with whom he was speaking, in the hallway, was, undoubtedly, a witness to the entire event. Pretty brazen to file such a charge, even if he didn’t believe that this was caught on tape. There is an eye witness to what transpired. Is this prosecutor, so delusional, that he believes that his version, of the incident, would be repeated and supported by the witness? Quite often, those granted these positions, within government, take these jobs and use them as a stepping stone to pursue other endeavors. In my experience, many of the prosecutors–not the public defenders–are those I would refer to as somebody’s somebody. Somebody’s nephew, niece, cousin, brother, sister, child, etc. They get these jobs, and, more importantly, keep these jobs, due to their connections and ties, which protect them, at all costs. Locally, there is a prosecutor who comes to mind, and the example underscores what I previously mentioned–her repeated, bizarre antics and strange outbursts, over the years, with defendants, other attorneys and judges, clearly indicate that she is an unbalanced individual, unsuitable and unfit for such a powrrful position. So much so, the office has removed her from any duties which would entail her working or interacting with defendants, attorneys or judges. She has been relegated, to a back room, in the office, to simply deal with paperwork. Gone are the days of her interacting with defendants, attorneys or judges. She is, simply, too unpredictable. In the real world, where unstable individuals, suffering from frequent outbursts and tantrums, would simply be terminated and shown the door, she remains. Yes. Remains. Remains in the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney because a close family relative made sure that she had this job. She will continue to remain there as long as his power and influence can keep her there, even if it means that she is confined to a padded room, in the back of the office, and separated from any and all contact with outsiders.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he wasn’t unethical and overzealous as a prosecutor. I also wouldn’t be surprised if he wasn’t a pompous ass in the courtroom. If usually carries over.
Good riddance to this pompous ass! He man-spreads in front of the ladies room entrance and then waits for a woman to brush him so he can exercise his “power” and charge her with a crime. Thank God for surveillance cameras. Bet he thought they’d just take his word for it!
Graceless woman – she lumbers along and she brushed him because she is clumsy. Ahmed is a jerk – good riddance.
This episode is really weird. I must have brushed against zillions of people in crowded situations, in my lifetime, and haven’t been sued or punched out yet.
Looking closely at the video, I did not see the woman physically move Ahmed at all. Is it a cultural problem, that a woman **touched** him without showing abject deference?
Is it a cultural problem, that a woman **touched** him without showing abject deference?
Exactly.
The man is clearly a liar about the assault, but why are you and others trying to use his religion against him personally? Who is to say this women may or not be a Trump supporter that just hates the fact this man is in power? If he is to be questioned about his feelings then I would like to know her feelings.
why are you and others trying to use his religion against him personally?
I say cultural and you say religion. Why are you assuming it must be attacking his religion?
Because you are linking the two together. If his name was John Smith would you be using the word cultural?
Because you are linking the two together. If his name was John Smith would you be using the word cultural?
Yes. Because there is nothing professional about it. Secondly, Jay S. is the individual that posted the comment. I merely said, exactly. Lastly, no mention was made of religion until you injected it. For all we know this man could be a Christian or an Atheist. Maybe he’s a more extreme version of Vice President Pence, and in his culture women aren’t allowed to touch him. There could be many explanations for his odd claim. It is interesting you immediately linked his behavior to an expression of his religion. Why is that?
There are some religions where the culture and religion are inextricably linked. Amish, Muslim, Buddhism, Hinduism are 4. Some other religions influence the culture. If a religion tells you what you can’t eat then it certainly influences that persons culture.
Agreed Nick. But when I refer to culture, I’m talking about anything that would influence this man to behave as he did.
If he is to be questioned about his feelings then I would like to know her feelings.
Then go ask her.
I’ll wait when she’s on “FOX NEWS”
Maybe he was following sharia law.
Ahmed’s body language registers dull witted shock at being touched by a woman. Unquestionably a cultural Muslim neurosis conflated by the awesome power of being a prosecutor.
His arrogance is on full display. Standing in the middle of a narrow hallway and forcing others to walk around your chosen place of meeting is a power play. He would be a good fit for a seat in Congress, even President. Perhaps he too has a pen and a phone.
Thank you Olly for mentioning the fact that he was essentially blocking passage in the narrow hallway. It is annoying to have to continually say, “pardon me, I need to get by” to individuals who are so obtuse that they ignore the fact that corridors are designed to get to a particular destination, not for loitering. Your comment is absolutely on point !
Thank you faith.
Prosecutors across the country are and feel they are entitled. They can break disclosure laws and know damn well they will get away with it. In small town America they are Gods. They help cover up police misconduct and their political friends, as a stepping stone to bigger things.
It’s amazing to me he was hogging 1/2 of the busy hallway. And then after the swipe, continued to hog 1/2 the hallway. There is way to much self worship going on.
Ter ber – didn’t you find it odd that his feet did not move while he was being assaulted? Has he no shame?
THAT’S for sure!
Send the dork back to Morocco.
Uncalled for reply. Try to keep this on a legitimate level.
Off his medz…
I’m surprised he did not charge her with attempted murder! How long was he in the hospital? That looked like some real stuff there, don’tcha think? Race riot, man! Watch out!
/sarc off
This is a classic example of letting stupid stuff mushroom into a major problem. A prosecutor should rightfully know this would not constitute a prosecutable crime, and had they received such a report sent in by a law enforcement officer, certainly they would decline prosecution on someone else.
That said there is the possibility that the woman scuffed him intentionally with the mindset to be rude but unless she admits to having intent to causing injury, her acts are not criminally actionable since proving an injury is nearly impossible.
Yet, the prosecutor destroyed his credibility by engaging in hyperbole in his statements. I believe he allowed himself to be sucked into a career limiting move by being so headfast and resolved to either prove she was wrong or do damage control through the belief that if he proffers the action to be of greater significance he will eventually convince others of his position.
I have no proof that she had but if her intent was to wreck Mr. Ahmed through a slight nudge she caused his downfall and could win victimhood in the process, she is a very cunning individual.
He never moves but was brushed. It is clearly not a crime and he is right to resign. Besides, he is blocking the corridor. He should apologize.
It may have been an intentional bump, because the court employee admitted that she was annoyed that he was standing in the hall and she had to “step over his feet” to get to the womens’ restroom, and that when she came out, he was still blocking her way. So she may have given him a bump because she thought he was being a jerk. The defense attorney that he was talking to said he thought it looked intentional, but there was nothing harmful about it. So Ahmed did himself in by lying about the severity of the incident. In a letter circulated to the sheriffs dept and judge, he said she “slammed” into him, and that she delivered a “forceful jolt that almost knocked [him] to the ground.” When the sheriffs dept reviewed the security tape, it was obvious he was lying. He appears to be an arrogant, pompous a** who is willing to falsify official reports for personal revenge. Had he simply complained that the woman was rude because she bumped into him and did not apologize or say “excuse me,” he would still have a job. Good riddance. Someone like that should not be allowed to wield the power of a prosecutor.
It’s frightening to think that such unbalanced individuals, like Ahmed, can be hired and employed as prosecutors in the various courts–positions which wield so much power and authority over the lives of others. Perhaps, the only way to prevent the Ahmeds of the world, from gaining access to such powerful positions, would be to administer mandatory personality tests to any and all applicants desiring to work as a prosecuor or judge. Yes. I know. Wishful thinking, in a system that grants such positions to those who must only need to mantain the proper contacts and connections within the legal community to snag such jobs. As such, people, like Ahmed, will continue to be thrown into the mix, where any sort of vetting, based upon mental stability, is considered insulting to those possessing a JD. Attorneys believe that they are above such trivalities. Common people need to have their mental fitness tested–not them. Plenty of prosecutors and judges are off the rails and shouldn’t be in said positions of authority–this just happens to be one, small glimpse of one, particular individual, caught on tape. Imagine all of the episodes not captured on tape.
25 years ago my brother in law was administered a psychological testing to be hired for an executive position in a large home building company. I thought this would be common practice by now. Hmmmm.
He deserved much worse by standing in the middle of the hallway.
You mean that wasn’t a smart space to occupy? Wow, do you hate all Muslims?
/sarc off