Skip to content

Shooting victim Rais Bhuiyan works to spare his attacker’s life

Rais Bhuiyan is working to spare the life of Mark Stroman, who shot Bhuiyan and murdered two other people on a post-9/11 shooting spree.

Rais Bhuiyan is working to spare the life of Mark Stroman who shot Bhuiyan and murdered two other people on a post-9/11 shooting spree.

A report from WKYT about the family members of a murder victim were satisfied when the Kentucky Supreme Court upheld the death sentence of David Lee Sanders last week. KCADP makes no judgment about these family members who have suffered a terrible loss, but KCADP does know there are other survivors who hold out a different path for punishment.

KCADP calls your attention to it in case you are in conversations with friends or family members or members of your faith community who question your opposition to the use of the death penalty and argue that this is something the survivors need for justice to be done.

Here is a link to a editorial in the Dallas Morning News that also surfaced last week about Rais Bhuiyan, a native of Bangladesh, who does not want Mark Stroman executed. Bhuiyan was a victim of Stroman’s post-9/11 shooting spree that killed two other people.

We wish to give that campaign voice. It delivers a potent message to a nation still torn by the loss of 9/11. It resists the cycle of revenge that doesn’t stop until someone has the courage to say enough.

That’s Bhuiyan’s message: enough. He attributes his conviction to his Islamic faith and his willingness to forgive. Ironically, it was that religious faith that Stroman targeted when he started staking out shopkeepers he assumed to be believers in Islam after Sept. 11, 2001.

You might forward that link to those who may be wondering whether or not we really need to kill people to show people that killing people is wrong.

It bears repeating the our YouTube Channel also contains several fine statements of opposition to the death penalty from family members of those who were murdered.

Photo: Courtesy Execution Chronicles

Tagged with , , , , , .

One Response

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Dudley Sharp says

    None of Mr. Bhuiyan’s efforts, inclusive of his baseless lawsuit against Gov. Perry and the Parole Board, should result in Stroman’s commutation.

    The real goal is to publicize another anti death penalty effort, which will have little effect on the discussion.

    Some points:

    Has Mr. Bhuiyan avoided the obvious?

    Has anyone (the media or Bhuiyan?) confirmed any of Stroman’s claims, that his parents treated him in a horrible way or that his half sister was murdered on 9/11 in the World Trade Center attack?

    False claims by death row murderers and their supporters are quite common. Let’s try to fact check the claims. The claims, if true, offer no excuse for Stroman’s crimes.

    The greatest violator of vicitm’s rights in this case is Stroman.

    The only one exhibiting hate in this case is Stroman. His hatred resulted in him murdering two innocent people and the attempted murder of Mr. Bhuiyan, based upon his hatred of Muslims, a hatred allegedly hightened by the 9/11 attacks.

    Mr. Bhuiyan has forgiven Stroman for that attempted murder.

    Such forgiveness is important.

    For clear reasons, both Gov. Perry and the parole board should reject Mr. Bhuiyan’s petition to commute Stroman’s death sentence to a life sentence.

    Considering Mr. Bhuiyan’s position, the commutation request should be rejected, because the foundation for Stroman’s death sentence is justice, not hatred.

    Mr. Bhuiyan has, simply, invented that the death sentence was based in hatred, just as many other anti death penalty activists do. Therefore, there is not foundation for the commutation request, as it is wrongly based upon false allegation of hatred. (1)

    Mr. Bhuiyan’s believes that his forgiveness should provide enough to commute Stroman’s sentence to life.

    First, Stroman is not on death row for the attempted murder of Buiyan, but for the capital murder of Vasudev Patel.

    In addition:

    1) Mr. Bhuiyan has the moral authority to forgive Stroman for the attempted murder. Mr. Bhuiyan does not have the moral authority to forgive for crimes committed against others.

    2) Anyone can forgive someone for the crimes committed against themselves and still find that a proper sanction, justice, is appropriate in that case.

    3) Importantly, forgiveness cannot preclude punishment. In fact, punishment can be an important part of forgiveness.

    Both parties, the victim and the perpetrator, can give and seek forgiveness, respectively, and both can understand that a proper sanction should be a part of the forgiveness process. The criminal should take responsibility for their crimes, confess to them, accept the sanction given and seek forgiveness based upon true sorrow and repentance.

    Hopefully, that is what Stroman will do.

    4) The only one who can forgive the perpetrator for the crime is the victim of that crime. Stroman’s two murder victims cannot offer their forgiveness. They’re dead. Mr. Bhuiyan asserts that the families of Stroman’s two murder victims back his efforts and also forgive Stroman. Has that been confirmed and do all family members agree?

    As Mr. Bhuiyan’s commutation efforts are solely founded on the wrongful charge of hatred and his erroneous understanding of forgiveness, both offer no foundation for commutation.

    As time goes by, it is clear that Mr. Bhuiyan’s crusade is, strictly, an anti death penalty effort.

    Mr. Bhuiyan’s is not trying to end all sanctions against Stroman, but is making a plea to commute Stroman’s death sentence to a life sentence – meaning that Mr. Bhuiyan does understand that sanction and forgiveness have no conflict and that hatred need have no connection to sanction, as is evident in this case and realized by Mr. Bhuiyan.

    The death penalty is given by juries for the same reason lesser sanctions are, that is that they are a just, appropriate and proportional sanction for the crime committed. (2)

    There are, more solid reasons to deny commutation in this case, but I was only addressing Mr. Bhuiyan’s effort.

    Stroman’s crimes

    Stroman, a white supremist, additionally, confessed to the Sept. 15, 2001 Dallas murder of Wagar Hasan, an immigrant and Pakistani Muslim. The two murders and the attempted murder were all hate crimes, committed from September 15, 2001 to October 4, 2001, based upon Stroman seeking revenge against Muslims for the 9/11 attacks.

    Stroman, previously, served a two year sentence for one count of burglary of a building and one count of theft of property; released on parole in absentia; returned from parole in absentia with an 8 year sentence from Dallas County for two counts of credit card abuse and one count of robbery; released on parole on 08/26/1991.

    Thank you for your consideration. With these cases, there are very weighty issues to reflect upon.

    1) “The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge”

    2) “Death Penalty Support: Christian and secular Scholars”

    NOTE Any violation of vicitm’s rights should be condemned, with a pursuit of remedy, inclusive of legal action, if merited.

%d bloggers like this: