Talk:Homaidan Al-Turki

few question
1: (Al-Turki and had her $150 dollar a week salary) it says in the article that she was a slave if he pay her that mean she is not a slve 2: (was sexually abused by Al-Turki)where is References 3: (and passport withheld by the family)i just want to point that most families 4: (one count of theft of services over $15,000) also most families does'nt pay the maid every month they pay them every 6 month —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arabian soul (talk • contribs) 13:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey genius, if she isnt getting paid than she is a slave, it's the same method used with Russian sex slaves, tell them they will get money but not right now, it's a way of giving them hope even when there isn't any. Heatsketch (talk) 17:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, one of the links on the bottom of the page are to Daniel Pipe's website...That's about as reliable (sic) as the KKK.

This article fails to convey just what a depraved son of a bitch Al-Turki is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.157.14 (talk) 06:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

As a juror on the case prosecuting Al-Turki in the Arapahoe County Court System, I agree with the assessment that this article lacks neutrality. First of all several of the facts were incorrectly reported, for example the picture of her bed shown in the case did not depict a "bare mattress", but a boxspring and mattress with ample bedding. The article also offers its opinion of the issue surrounding the question of a bias against Islam in the case as well. Comments like those above are not constructive and lack knowledge and respect for the mission of Wikipedia. No matter the personal opinions of the audience of this article it should be understood that the jury did not convict Al-Turki on the basis of religion, race, etc. The jury did their best to discern "beyond a reasonable doubt" the facts of the case, even when it was the personal opinion of a jury member that Al-Turki committed the highest degree of a charge, they only charged him for the level of charge they could prove beyond a reasonable doubt as is the duty of the jury. And while some reports note the fact that jury selected was all white, during the selection process, possible jurors that were of color were dismissed by both the prosecution and defense.Annamyers (talk) 19:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

You're a juror on the case? How to know if that is true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.43.166 (talk) 05:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Where to start
I have begun working through this article, and it seems to be a bit of a mess. I have removed some of the more egregious POV statements, WP:NOTE violations, and unsourced/poorly sourced material. However, much remains to be done. I am considering removing the entire "Statement of facts" section as it seems to be just primary source material that doesn't really belong here, and does not appear standard for pages like this. Also need to do something about the 2011 retrial section, it reads as if it were copied from a newsbrief (possibly was). Also updated some links for sources, will try to update and add more as my schedule allows, but anyone else wanting to help is more than welcome. UnequivocalAmbivalence (talk) 01:36, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Supreme Court Brief
The section that claims to present facts from a Supreme Court Brief is a big problem. To begin with, it is unreferenced. There isn't even a citation, much less alink. Secondly, there is no explanation of the sequence of appeals leading to this. This case started out in Colorado state court. To get to the US Supreme Court, al-Turki would first have had to file suit in US District Court. If unsuccessful there, he would then have to appeal to the Court of Appeal for the Tenth Circuit. If his case was heard by a three judge panel, as is usual, if he were unsuccessful he could request that his case be reheard en banc. Only if unsuccessful there would he have the opportunity to appeal to the Supreme Court. Third, it is not stated which brief this section is based on. There should be at least two, namely Homaidan's request for certiorari and the State of Colorado's opposition to it.Bill (talk) 09:36, 26 December 2020 (UTC)