Second U.S. woman probed in plot to kill Swede: report

WASHINGTON Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:08pm EST

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Authorities in Ireland are investigating whether a second American woman was involved in a suspected international plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist for mocking the Prophet Mohammad, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

According to the Journal's online report, a 31-year-old mother from Colorado named Jamie Paulin-Ramirez was one of seven people detained in Ireland on Tuesday.

Irish police said they were arrested in connection with a plot to kill cartoonist Lars Vilk because of his 2007 drawing depicting the Prophet Mohammed with the body of a dog.

The U.S. Justice Department said on Tuesday it had charged a Pennsylvania woman, Colleen LaRose, who went by the pseudonyms "Fatima LaRose" and "JihadJane," with plotting to kill a Swedish man.

Officials at the Justice Department were not immediately available for comment on The Wall Street Journal report.

The Journal said one of the people detained in Ireland was an Algerian man who was the main contact for LaRose. That man "has a relationship with Ms. Paulin-Ramirez according to a person close to the matter," the newspaper reported.

The arrests in Ireland included two more Algerians, a Croatian, a Palestinian and a Libyan, according to the story.

Paulin-Ramirez announced nearly a year ago she had embraced Islam and last September 11 left her home in a small Rocky Mountain town to marry a Muslim man in New York she had made contact with via an Internet website, the newspaper said.

The Journal interviewed Paulin-Ramirez's mother, Christine Holcomb, in Colorado. "I'm angry with her right now," she was quoted saying. "I'd like to just choke her. But I'm worried about her, too. I love my daughter."

The newspaper said Paulin-Ramirez gave her mother an address in Waterford, Ireland.

The Justice Department also has accused LaRose of trying to recruit fighters to commit violent attacks overseas.

(Reporting by Richard Cowan; Editing by Anthony Boadle)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (6)
daniwitz13 wrote:
At some point our Govt. courts and law enforcement will have to clarify what is free speech and expression in regards to thoughts and intentions. One might argue that plotting, planning, intending, can be only thoughts in ones mind. So how can one be convicted for thoughts in the mind? Our Govt. does it with a life sentence even though nothing is ever accomplished. This means that there is no freedom of thinking and thoughts. No freedom of expression of thoughts. Why then say in other crimes, we couldn’t convict because of lack of evidence and in this case, we can read his mind, his thoughts and what he “intended” to do. Why not use this in every case then, and never lose a case? This I strongly believe should be corrected for justice and rights.

Mar 13, 2010 2:20am EST  --  Report as abuse
trailrunner wrote:
To daniwitz:

The courts, not government thought police, must prove intent. Yes, determination of guilt is subjective, and the process can always be refined. Overhaul of the judicial system sounds like a good project for you. Voting might also be something for you to think about.

Brush up on the facts of this case. It involves conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, conspiracy to kill in a foreign country, false statement to a government official, and attempted identity theft. These laws, however subjective, are about crime prevention, and the security of a free nation.

Mar 13, 2010 4:14am EST  --  Report as abuse
seems like US govt hired pre-cogs (like in Minority Report) specifically for muslims converts.

Mar 13, 2010 11:16am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.