Nour Hadid is accused of beating her 2-year-old niece Bhia Hadid to death over four days at her home on the 9000 block of West 140th Street. The child had 55 separate bruises and was beaten "from head to toe," according to prosecutors, who say Hadid confessed.

But Alaeddin Hadid - who insists his wife is innocent - said Orland Park police are "really going to be in big trouble" for releasing the woman's booking photo to the news media after she was charged with first-degree murder.

The Hadids are Muslims and Nour "never leaves the home without covering up," said Alaeddin, who's vowed to sue.

By custom, some practicing Muslim women wear the hijab, or headscarf, and cover their arms and legs when in public.

In the mug shot, a bare-headed and obviously emotional Nour appears to be protecting her modesty with her hands.

"It is against our religion; we do not do this in our culture," Alaeddin said.

"People have been calling me about this all day." http://www.southtownstar.com/news/1520478,041009mugshot.article

The idiot is more concerned about the murderer's dress code in a police mug shot than the innocent 2 year old she beat to death.

how pathetic!

aren't mug shots public property sef?

This is my former neck of the woods o. So she can kill a child but not wearing that thing is what will condemn her and send her to hell?

Is she for real?

Are the courts going to take this serious?

*Toyinrayo:

Is she for real?

Are the courts going to take this serious?

for where? doubt it. the judge prolly will be more concerned about finding justice of the poor gal rather than listening to some BS complains

It's her civil right to have her face covered, the police should have respected that, wait till the ACLU gets on this case.

OgidiBoy:

It's her  civil right to have her face covered, the police should have respected that, wait till the ACLU gets on this case.

how is it her civil right to be covered while the main purpose of mug shots are for identification purposes? how can police be able to identify her while she is covered up? this is a normal procedures with all defendants that police usual follow. so why should she get special treatment?

OgidiBoy:

It's her civil right to have her face covered, the police should have respected that, wait till the ACLU gets on this case.

She lost her civil/personal rights when she was convicted of a crime.

There's no way anyone is/should take this serious

~Sissy~:

how is it her civil right to be covered while the main purpose of mug shots are for identification purposes? how can police be able to identify her while she is covered up? this is a normal procedures with all defendants that police usual follow. so why should she get special treatment?

In the article it says a matron was with her all the time her picture was taken so the police knew it was against her culture to have her picture taken without the covering thing, so they should never have released her picture to the news media.

Please who ever is reading what I'm posting don't prosecute me. I've seem the ACLU take on very strange cases her in the states and I won't be surprised if you see them come out tomorrow and sue the police for violating this woman's civil rights.

*Toyinrayo:

She lost her civil/personal rights when she was convicted of a crime.

There's no way anyone is/should take this serious

 

You can never loss your civil right as long as you legal, even someone on death row can not loss their civil rights.

Oh the lady in the article was accused not convicted big difference.

OgidiBoy:

You can never loss your civil right as long as you legal, even someone on death row can not loss their civil rights.

Oh the lady in the article was accused not convicted big difference.

Oh yea, that's voting right. oops

Accused, right. So which do you think the judge would be more concerned abt? Justifying the death of a baby or this one?

OgidiBoy:

In the article it says a matron was with her all the time her picture was taken so the police knew it was against her culture to have her picture taken without the covering thing, so they should never have released her picture to the news media.

but mug shot can be obtained by anyone through the Freedom of Information Act unless in sealed document which wasnt the case in her own and i still don't see anything wrong with her taking her things off. did you even see how she covered every bit of her face in the pic, how can she be identified with such dress code.

OgidiBoy:

In the article it says a matron was with her all the time her picture was taken so the police knew it was against her culture to have her picture taken without the covering thing, so they should never have released her picture to the news media.

Please who ever is reading what I'm posting don't prosecute me. I've seem the ACLU take on very strange cases her in the states and I won't be surprised if you see them come out tomorrow and sue the police for violating this woman's civil rights.

 

You can never loss your civil right as long as you legal, even someone on death row can not loss their civil rights.

Oh the lady in the article was accused not convicted big difference.

That mug shot is public records. Anybody can get it. As to weather the civil rights groups will make a big deal about it? Yes some idiot probably will.

All I'm saying ladies is that if the ACLU  get into this case, they will find loop holes to get this lady acquitted, I've seem some very obvious murder cases dismissed just on very simple technicalities like that.

OgidiBoy:

All I'm saying ladies is that if the ACLU  get into this case, they will find loop holes to get this lady acquitted, I've seem some very obvious murder cases dismissed just on very simple technicalities like that.

maybe the AcLU will get involved if her civil right were violated during the trial but at this early stage, i think they will definitely steer clear at least till the trial starts

Looking at the picture though I am wondering if she is just wearing a camisole. Did they make her take off anymore clothes than she needed to take off. You can see she is trying to cover her body with her hands. If he face was all that was needed for the mug shot then her shoulders need not be exposed. I hate to see her get away with it but this is America. I hope the police don't blow this one too because they got too emotional

Outstrip:

Looking at the picture though I am wondering if she is just wearing a camisole. Did they make her take off anymore clothes than she needed to take off. You can see she is trying to cover her body with her hands. If he face was all that was needed for the mug shot then her shoulders need not be exposed. I hate to see her get away with it but this is America. I hope the police don't blow this one too because they got too emotional

i think with the look of her dressing, would probably mean that she has to remove the whole thing, at least another woman was in there so it wasnt like they were doing some fishy things. i hope really so too, i see nothing wrong with this. it is the normal procedure, i wonder what would happen if everyone started bringing up their cultural/religion bs in cases like this, then i dont think the law would still stand

BS!

while I respect her right to be covered,but here we are talking about the murder of an innocent toddler.
If she were photographed naked I couldn't care less.
she deserved every atom of disgrace on her person

The ACLU will stay clear if she is likely guilty of murdering the toddler.
Your civil rights are as defined by the constitution and the law. I wonder if her face was covered in her traveling passport or drivers license

biina:

The ACLU will stay clear if she is likely guilty of murdering the toddler.
Your civil rights are as defined by the constitution and the law. I wonder if her face was covered in her traveling passport or drivers license

I wonder if she murdered the child while covered
she should have been stripped naked like the animal she is

LOL @ osisi!!! U r so right!