Iraqi Couple Arrested in Texas For Allegedly Pouring Hot Oil On 16-Year-Old Daughter For Refusing Arranged Marriage

texasAbdulah Fahmi Al Hishmawi, 34, and Hamdiyah Saha Al Hishmawi, 33, have been arrested in another appalling case involving an attempted arranged marriage of a young Muslim girl.  This case however did not occur in Pakistan or Afghanistan but Texas.  They are accused of beating their daughter with a broomstick and the pouring hot cooking oil on her after refusing agree to the the arranged marriage.

Maarib Al Hishmawi, 16,  was pledged in the arranged marriage in return for $20,000.  The high school student  ran away after the alleged abuse by her parents who were irate at her refusal to relent to the arranged marriage.  The girl and her five siblings, between the ages 5 and 15, were placed under Child Protective Services custody.

Police are leaving open the possibility of charging the would-be husband — hopefully they will follow through in arresting the man.

The Iraqi couple has been in the United States for two years on visas.

124 thoughts on “Iraqi Couple Arrested in Texas For Allegedly Pouring Hot Oil On 16-Year-Old Daughter For Refusing Arranged Marriage”

  1. How about doing the same “punishment” to the parents? Better still, hang the Father (but not by his neck)!!!

  2. Who owns this? The purveyors of multiculturalism who sold this pair the idea that they could live in Texas as if they were living in Iraq. Any aspirant immigrants from the Muslim world should have to complete a mandatory orientation program which explains with brutal specificity what family courts and penal courts do not tolerate and what issues they are likely to encounter in re the discipline of adolescents.

    1. If the purveyors of multiculturalism were mostly just American college professors, then a more pertinent question would be exactly when was the last time an American college professor poured hot cooking oil on a sixteen year-old girl who refused to agree to an arranged marriage?

  3. The appropriate response to this type of child abuse is threefold:

    1. Prosecute the parents for aggravated assault.
    2. Pursue termination of parental rights in civil court as to all of the children.
    3. Upon completion of criminal proceedings deport the parents.

      1. You can’t deport them! That’s racisssst! Xenophobic! They have a right to be here! Everybody across the world has a right to be here! There are no illegal people!

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

  4. Fill in the blank. (Multiple choice.)

    “We’re gonna need a bigger ________.”

    A) boat
    B) wall

  5. Time to rescind the Visa. Why do we insist on importing people whose values are diametrically opposed to the values that underlie our legal system?

  6. Assault
    Trafficking of humans
    Attempted kidnapping
    Get creative and throw the book at these mutts.

    The founding fathers had in mind when they focused on religion, the ‘Freedom From Religion’. The law, ideally equally administered to all, is America’s god, in which we trust. Religion must not be allowed to act outside the law. That means no empathy for customs, etc., no ‘understanding’ of people from a different culture, etc.

    These two must do at least ten years each before parole. Their kids must not return to their perverted care. They must be monitored.

    1. “The founding fathers had in mind when they focused on religion, the ‘Freedom From Religion’.”

      Is that absolutely true? If it were then at that time state taxing would not have permitted that revenue to go to a state church.

      Tell us again why you left Canada for the US. I must have missed the answer.

      1. Maybe he fancies Anne Nicol Gaylor was one of the Founding Fathers.

  7. More proof of the “wisdom”of compassionate imported diversity. Just like the Incas and their open arms to the Pizzaro and his conquistadors. Not many Incas around anymore.

    1. Mespo

      Just answer cui bono and there’s the answer to the Mother of all questions: Why? That’s why JT won’t do more than point out incidents like this. Not smart to risk upsetting prospective clients doncha.

    2. There’s an ample population of Quechua and Aymara in the Andes. They don’t run totalitarian empires anymore.

  8. Not all religions are created equal. Islam has not left the Bronze Age.

    Freedom of religion means you can believe whatever you want. However, you are not (or should not be) allowed to harm your children in the name of that religion.

    Freedom of religion should not extend to Bronze Age rituals. Not by Jews, not by Muslims, not by Christians.

    Yes, believe whatever you want in private. However, expect the community at large to object to certain practices. In Catholic Christianity all (including child abuse) is forgiven.

    In Islam “honor” killings are routine. Female genital mutilation of children is often done.

    We allow ritual genital mutilation of children unable to consent by Jews. The act of adult-child oral-genital contact occurs in some of those rituals.

    Jehovah’s Witnesses are allowed to refuse whole blood for their children.

    1. Not all religions are created equal. Islam has not left the Bronze Age.

      ‘Bronze age’ is an archaeolgists convention which delineates a strata and period of the ancient Near East wherein you find Bronze artifacts. There was no Islam during the Bronze age. There was no Christianity either. There might have been a proto-Jewish folk religion then, but that’s all.

      1. A 7th century phenomenon. While we’re at it, the term ‘medieval’ is local to occidental civilization.

  9. A comment I made a minute ago “is awaiting moderation” from this blog. I am not in a Muslim territory and did not curse. This blog is in the United States.

  10. If you don’t like our laws, our culture, our traditions, our heritage. Then why did you come here. We are everything you are against. Just go back where you came from. We’ll just go along living the way we do, free speech and all.

    1. “If you don’t like our laws, our culture, our traditions, our heritage. Then why did you come here.”
      And the answer is … ding, ding, ding …. Money! They’re not against that.

    2. Well, life is full of trade offs. Iraq has had some severe quality-of-life issues in recent decades. Different authorities would have different opinions on when things began to go south there, of course.

      The problem, really, is that they were too stupid and too arrogant to take an accounting of what the trade-offs were. They either weren’t told or ignored what they were told. It was the responsibility of the authorities, of sponsoring philanthropies, and of any relatives they had already here to tell them.

  11. Bring in medieval people; get medieval behavior. Stunning. Now how’s about some medieval punishment to compete the circle? Thumb screws anyone?

      1. You’re an arrested development case. How does it feel?

        1. mespo – those were cool, but awkward to work with a patient. 😉

  12. I have read a number of stories of things like this going on (and even worse) in the Muslim communities near Detroit. Somebody has to tell these people that they are not in the Middle East anymore, and they have to abide by American laws and mores.

    The $20,000 dowry or “bride price” was just as disgusting as the physical punishments that had been inflicted on the girl.

    1. “Somebody has to tell these people that they are not in the Middle East anymore, and they have to abide by American laws and mores.”

      No, you are wrong in this case. We need to respect their culture and their decisions. No going back now.

  13. Jon Turley needs to get up to speed in Sharia Law. As a public service, I will educate the many Infidel Islamophobes on this message board.

    The parents are simply carrying out Islamic Law. According to Islamic Law, it is permissible for the male head of the Muslim household to arrange a marriage for his young daughter even if she had not reached the age of puberty. It was narrated that there was consensus on this point.

    Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

    The scholars are unanimously agreed that the father may arrange a marriage for his young daughter without consulting her. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah when she was six years old.

    End quote from at-Tamheed, 19/98

    Ismaa‘eel ibn Ishaaq (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

    The father may arrange a marriage for a young (daughter) according to the consensus of the Muslims, and that is binding on her.

    End quote from at-Tamheed, 19/84

    Ibn Shubrumah disagreed with that, as we shall see below.


    It is not prescribed to arrange a marriage for a young girl unless there is a clear and real interest to be served by doing so. The same applies to young boys, but the ruling is emphasized more with regard to girls because a boy has the power of divorce (talaaq).

    An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him).

    1. No doubt, but in the US, religious law is always subservient to constitutional law. Or is supposed to be.

    2. Ralph Adamo – I have no problem with the beating her with the broomstick, but the hot oil is not in the Quran,

      1. Not so, Paul. In Islamic Law, the use of hot oil is implied as a proper punishment under the circumstances, without too much interpretation. “These twain (the believers and the disbelievers) are two opponents who contend concerning their Lord. But as for those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them; boiling fluid will be poured down on their heads. Whereby that which is in their bellies, and their skins too, will be melted; And for them are hooked rods of iron. Whenever, in their anguish, they would go forth from thence they are driven back therein and (it is said unto them): Taste the doom of burning.” Quran (22:19-22).

    3. No doubt you are right. Sorry, but I don’t give a rat’s arse. Let them leave their medieval customs in the nation of their birth when they come here.

  14. Remember all cultures are equal and have contributed to world civilization except Western Culture which is uniquely evil and oppressive. If you disagree with this statement you are an incorrigible bigot who deserves to be outed, fired and eventually prosecuted for racism.

  15. Turley hopes for the arrest of the would-be-husband yet in the story (and attached links) there is no suggestion of a crime he may have committed. Those children should never be returned to their parents who should be punished severely.

    1. Darn, you are brilliant! You are right! Texas Law does not specifically criminalize pouring hot oil on your kid if she doesn’t agree with the arranged marriage! That fact flew right over my head!

      Have you ever considered a career in the Law???


      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. That was the parents, string them up or whatever they currently do in Texas. Turley said the would-be-husband should be jailed (who lived in Dallas and not San Antonio where the girl and her family lived. There is nothing in the story, comments from the girl, or her parents to suggest any crime.

      2. “Pouring Hot Oil On 16-Year-Old Daughter For Refusing Arranged Marriage”

        Wouldn’t that be a battery (assault and battery)?

          1. Lots of things fly over Enigma’s head. He is too busy thinking about how he can bring race into the issue.

    2. enigma – buying brides is still illegal in most parts of the United States. That is the crime I assumed he was going to be charged with or sex trafficking since she is unwilling to marry him. Maybe it’s picking his toes in Poughkeepsie. 😉

      1. PCS: My thoughts as well. I would think that purchasing a 16 y/o would be illegal in most states, and the Feds likely have some issues with it too…..

        1. TIN – 16 is below the age of consent in most states as well. Conspiracy to rape?

          1. Paul – In Texas the age o consent is 18 but one can marry as young as 14 with the consent of the parents. It doesn’t appear that consent was a problem in this case. Arranged marriages are not illegal and still practiced somewhat by the Amish and in other cultures. Consensual arranged marriages are not a crime, forced marriages is a bigger issue. I don’t find that they are illegal but in places like Britain are “voidable.” There is nothing in the story (unless Turley has inside information like he must have when making all the claims about Mueller’s lack of evidence) to suggest the would-be-husband either forced anything or even had knowledge of the forcing. Consanguineous marriages between close relatives are illegal.
            The story did speak of a net benefit to the girl’s parents of $20,000. Whatever the arrangements were, the husband-to-be apparently entered into a negotiation with the parents and made an offer. I don’t see a crime based on the evidence before us. For the person who asked about the Mann Act. This case involves neither Interstate or Foreign transport and does not apply.

            1. What does age of consent have to do with? Human trafficking is human trafficking at any age! In any case, she didn’t consent which is why she was dumped with hot oil and beaten.

              1. Suze – I am speaking to the specific point of, What crime is the husband-to-be guilty of that Turley wants to be charged? The parents of the girl are guilty of at least a few. The age of consent has to do with the criminality of a 16-year-old marrying in Texas which is legal with the parents’ consent. That is the law. If you can tie the husband-to-be to the abuse then he’s guilty as an accessory or active participant. We’ve not seen any evidence he was involved or even in the same city (he lives in Dallas, she in San Antonio). We can all feel a sense of outrage that such a thing happened. Specific to the husband-to-be, what was his crime?

              2. “Suze”, human trafficking is a species of prostitution. You’d have to have case law which equates brideprice with prostitution. I’m putting a wager down you cannot find it in Texas.

    3. “Turley hopes for the arrest of the would-be-husband yet in the story (and attached links) there is no suggestion of a crime he may have committed.”
      Ah purchasing people has been illegal in the US since 1863. We fought a war and everything about it. It was in all the papers. Some guy named Lincoln had something to do with it.

      1. mespo – He made an offer of marriage. The terms it seems are little different than a Dowry which is generally not recognizable in the US (except Louisiana) but also not illegal. Can the offer itself be illegal? There is no suggestion of any other action by the husband-to-be.

          1. mespo – I’m not saying there is no crime. Clearly, the child was abused and the parents who inflicted the abuse should be punished. If you were to prosecute the husband-to-be, what evidence would you present. I don’t see the offer in and of itself as a crime and there is nothing else as it applies to him.
            I’m not suggesting this is a desirable thing, just not illegal as it applies to him. Someone else suggested we “get creative” and find something to charge him with. Hmmm.

                1. Marriage under 18 is a crime in Texas. Plain and simple. Only emancipated 16 and 17-year olds can marry. She was surely not emancipated.

                  1. Texas law permits individuals who have reached the age of majority (18) to get married without parental consent. However, those 14 and older may get married with the consent of their parents or legal guardians. In those instances, consent must be given within 30 days prior to applying for a marriage license.”

                    1. Enigma, you were entirely correct about Texas law, up until September 1, 2017. I wasn’t sure, since that not my area of the law, so I checked. Our version of a clown, Governor Abbott, signed a bill last year raising the age to 18. I would think the hillbillies in the hinterlands didn’t approve. The text of the controlling statute now holds:

                      A county clerk may not issue a marriage license if either applicant is under 18 years of age, unless each underage applicant shows that the applicant has been granted by this state or another state a court order removing the disabilities of minority of the applicant for general purposes.

                      Texas Family Code section 2.101.

                      Amended by Acts 2017, 85th Leg., ch. 934 (S.B. 1705), § 4, eff. Sept. 1, 2017.

                    2. Mark – Good information, I stand corrected on that point but there is still no charge against the husband-to-be. Making the offer is not a crime, there is no evidence of anything else as of yet.

                    3. enigma – ask the people who make an offer to have their spouses killed if there isn’t a crime involved. I see a conspiracy to traffic in the sex trade in the least.

                    4. Paul – The act of murder is an illegal act, in and of itself. The act of marriage does not have that distinction and does not automatically involve trafficking. The element that would have to be proved against the husband is that he compelled her to participate. There is no such evidence.

                    5. enigma – he is involved in a conspiracy against her will. Even I could make that case to the jury. 😉

                    6. There was no marriage, and while this proposed one was certainly against her will, many arranged marriages are with the full consent of both parties.

                    7. enigma – beating her with the broomstick would have been a tip-off.

                    8. enigma – we don’t know at this point if he participated or not. Probably not, but he knows about it. So, he is an accessory after the fact of child abuse. So, I have him for conspiracy to sex traffic and accessory of child abuse. That will get him some time.

                    9. Paul – Let’s imagine he learned about it after the fact, which we don’t know. Perhaps the parents only told him the girl ran away without confessing the throwing burning oil and beating with a broomstick. But let’s say they told him everything after the fact.
                      There are ways he could have perhaps become an accessory, he could have aided in a cover-up or went along with a lie that the girl got any burns in a kitchen accident or repeatedly fell on a broomstick. There is no evidence he did anything at all to conspire. He made an offer and the transaction was never completed.

                    10. enigma – he is the proximate cause of everything. I would charge him and let the jury decide.

                    11. The problem with your analogy is that the brideprice is a component of a marriage contract. It’s not a component of an ongoing series of fee-for-service transactions.

                      Dowries appear in Alexandre Dumas fiction. That’s 19th century France. Millard Fillmore and his last wife had a formal written marriage contract which guaranteed her a fixed share in his estate and guaranteed him a certain share of hers. Seems awfully crass, but there was provision for it in New York law ca. 1860.

                    12. So, he is an accessory after the fact of child abuse. S

                      Under which state’s law code? In New York, this is what you have to demonstrate:

                      As used in sections 205.55, 205.60 and 205.65, a person “renders
                      criminal assistance” when, with intent to prevent, hinder or delay the
                      discovery or apprehension of, or the lodging of a criminal charge
                      against, a person who he knows or believes has committed a crime or is
                      being sought by law enforcement officials for the commission of a crime,
                      or with intent to assist a person in profiting or benefiting from the
                      commission of a crime, he:
                      1. Harbors or conceals such person; or
                      2. Warns such person of impending discovery or apprehension; or
                      3. Provides such person with money, transportation, weapon, disguise
                      or other means of avoiding discovery or apprehension; or
                      4. Prevents or obstructs, by means of force, intimidation or
                      deception, anyone from performing an act which might aid in the
                      discovery or apprehension of such person or in the lodging of a criminal
                      charge against him; or
                      5. Suppresses, by any act of concealment, alteration or destruction,
                      any physical evidence which might aid in the discovery or apprehension
                      of such person or in the lodging of a criminal charge against him; or
                      6. Aids such person to protect or expeditiously profit from an
                      advantage derived from such crime.


                      1. to a person who intends to commit a crime, he engages in conduct
                      which provides such person with means or opportunity for the commission
                      thereof and which in fact aids such person to commit a felony; or


                      For purposes of this article, such conduct shall include, but not be
                      limited to, making available, selling, exchanging, giving or disposing
                      of a community gun, which in fact, aids a person to commit a crime.
                      “Community gun” shall mean a firearm that is actually shared, made
                      available, sold, exchanged, given or disposed of among or between two or
                      more persons, at least one of whom is not authorized pursuant to law to
                      possess such firearm. “Dispose of” shall have the same meaning as that
                      term is defined in section 265.00 of this chapter. “Share” and “make
                      available” shall, in the case of a firearm, be construed to include
                      knowingly placing such firearm at a location accessible and known to one
                      or more other persons.

                2. You have a point. AFAIK, neither dowry nor brideprice are practices which run afoul of the Penal Law of New York. I’d wager the relevant case law does not equate these practices with prostitution or promoting prostitution. The question vis a vis the aspirant husband is whether he can be charged with conspiracy or charged as an accessory. I think that would require more granular data than casual readers of the newspaper are likely to acquire at this point.

                  1. I just read an entire handbook about trafficking in persons. I submit that perhaps a case could be made against the girl’s parents who attempted to compel the marriage. There is as yet no evidence with which you could charge the husband-to-be.

                    1. As far as we know he didn’t supply any cash. Be careful of that analogy because there are $130,000 and $150,000 payouts on the behalf of an individual that you might support with his personal attorney involved in making both transactions happen.

                    2. According to the newspaper article linked to by Turley, there was an agreement that would have netted the parents $20K but there is no indication any money changed hands.
                      “The alleged abuse began in May when discussion of the marriage to a man from Dallas began in a deal that was supposed to net her parents $20,000, the publication reported.”

                    3. Your original response was to a statement that he didn’t supply any cash. Your answer was, “It said it was $20K.” Now you learn no cash changed hands and the new answer was “It doesn’t have to change hands.”
                      I think any reasonable definition of supplying cash means it has to be… supplied. You’re changing the goalpost.

                    4. Not really. In the law an attempted kick at the goal is just as culpable as a completed kick at the goal. That’s why the cop getting you to agree to buy oregano when you think it’s marijuana is still a crime.

                    5. Buying marijuana is a crime, arranging for a hit on your spouse is a crime. There is an intent to do something illegal. There is no knowledge the prospective husband had any such intent. We don’t know the proposed date of the marriage and whether she would have been of age. We don’t know if he knew anything of the coercion. Turley thinks he should be charged and I still don’t know what for.
                      For those who don’t like the foreign customs of arranged and even forced marriages. Thank God we don’t live in a country that allowed shotgun marriages and the like, oh wait, we do.

          2. That response mespo is why we refer to you as a concerned lawyer and Enigma as an enigma.

        1. the story of child abuse is awful. i hope the girl makes a good recovery.

          also, i think the point is interesting, that the child abuse was illegal, but as enigma? user stated, arranged marriage is not per se illegal nor is dowry. in fact as we recall from lawschool MYLEGS statute of frauds states that marriage contracts must be in writing…. just an observation

          1. Anthropology is not my hobby. I think the practice followed here is brideprice, not dowry. A dowry a woman carries with her. Brideprice is compensation for her family.

    1. Squeeky – would have never thought that King Cobras bite. I would have thought they contracted that work out. 😉

Comments are closed.