Skip to main content

California Man Charged with Conspiracy to Provide Material Support to al Shabaab

SAN DIEGO—An indictment was unsealed today in the Southern District of California charging Anaheim resident Ahmed Nasir Taalil Mohamud, 35, with conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization, conspiracy to kill in a foreign country, and conspiracy to launder monetary instruments, U.S. Attorney Laura E. Duffy announced.

Mohamud appeared today in federal court in San Diego, where U.S. Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler arraigned him on the indictment and ordered him held without bail pending a detention hearing on Dec. 7, 2010, at 2:00 p.m.

According to the indictment, returned on Nov. 19, 2010 and unsealed today, Mohamud conspired with Basaaly Saeed Moalin, Mohamed Mohamed Mohamud, and Issa Doreh to provide money to al Shabaab, a violent and brutal militia group in Somalia. In February 2008, the U.S. Department of State designated al Shabaab as a foreign terrorist organization.

The indictment alleges that al Shabaab has used assassinations, improvised explosive devices, rockets, mortars, automatic weapons, suicide bombings, and other tactics of intimidation and violence to undermine Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government and its supporters.

According to court records, Moalin, Mohamed Mohamed Mohamud, and Issa Doreh are charged with the same offenses in a separate indictment already pending in federal court in San Diego.

The arrest of Mohamud arises from an investigation that involves the Orange County Joint Terrorism Task Force, the San Diego Joint Terrorism Task Force, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection.

The charge of conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The charge of conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The charge of conspiracy to kill in a foreign country carries maximum penalty of life in prison and a $250,000 fine. The charge of conspiracy to launder monetary instruments carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $500,000 fine.

An indictment itself is not evidence that the defendant committed the crimes charged. The defendant is presumed innocent until the government meets its burden in court of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.
Post a Comment
Read more

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...
3 comments
Read more

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...
Post a Comment
Read more