Tripp's 'Without Honor': Prejudice And Stereotyping

Imagine you are that diver, the diver that goes into the water and brings up four dead bodies. Imagine seven years later the people convicted of the crime are saying that they were victims. Victims themselves, even though they are in prison serving their first-degree murder charge, even with evidence stacked against them. It all boils down to two things that have haunted the world for years and years: stereotyping and prejudice.

Stereotyping and prejudice have been confused with one another but they are similar, according to Kimberly Clow, an associate professor at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT). Stereotyping is when you judge somebody based on something that is different from you. A person can be judged by their

Tripp said that he worked on the book for the better part of three years.

“I was surprised by many other elements of the backstory of the Shafia's lives and the criminal case - not surprising given that I spent most of three full years researching the case, writing newspaper stories and my book about it,” said Tripp.
The murders and the trial was highly publicized with the courthouse being filled each day with journalists, according to Tripp who sat everyday on a public gallery bench, just a few feet away from the accused.

The evidence stacked against the three Shafia’s included inconsistencies from testimonies, the wire tap in the Shafia’s van and there were also internet searches from Hamed’s computer, as well as when the police obtained Rona’s diary.

Hamed’s computer searches included things like ‘where to commit a murder.’ This raised some red flags with the police department because the searches occurred not long before the murders. The computer search also pulled up Rona’s diary also chronicled years of abuse at the hands of Mohammed and the verbal abuse she suffered at the hands of

In a document of over 100 pages the lawyers of the three convicted said that they were victims of ‘cultural stereotyping’ at their trial. The lawyers for the three Shafia’s claimed that Dr. Shahzrad Mojab, an honour killing expert, had the jurors think about a completely unrelated case in connection with the Shafia murders to make it seem like the cases were the same regarding homicides related to different cultures. Thus subjecting the Shafia’s to cultural stereotyping.

However, Rob Tripp, the author of the Shafia murder book and somebody who has researched the whole case, believes that the appeal will be rejected.

“I believe the main arguments will be rejected because the trial judge was thorough, accommodating and took pains to limit the scope of Mojab's (the Crown’s honour killing expert Dr. Shahzrad Mojab) testimony. His charge to the jury was carefully constructed after lengthy deliberation with Crown and defence counsel,” said Tripp. “I think the Court of Appeal is unlikely to interfere with a jury verdict in a case so complex that was handled so carefully by an experienced trial judge.”

When the Shafia’s verdict was announced in the courtroom, the judge gave each of the convicted a chance to say something. Mohammed said, “We didn’t commit the murder and this is unjust.” While Tooba said, “Your honourable justice, this is not just.