UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Charles D. Swift, Esq. 

Constitutional Law Center for 

 Muslims in America 

833 E. Arapaho Rd., Suite 102 

Richardson, TX 75081 

Phone: (972) 914-2507 

Fax: (972) 692-7454 

cswift@clcma.org

Pro Hac Counsel for Defendant SALMAN 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

OAKLAND DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

NOOR SALMAN, 

 Defendant. 

No. 4-17-70058-MAG

DEFENDANT’S MOTION, NOTICE OF 

MOTION, AND MEMORANDUM 

OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF 

CONDITIONAL RELEASE

Date: February 1, 2017 

Time: 9:30 a.m. 

Judge: Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu 

TO: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF; BRIAN STRETCH, ACTING 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY; AND JAMES D. MANDOLFO, S. WAQAR 

HASIB, SARA SWEENEY, ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS 

 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that counsel for defendant, Noor Salman, hereby moves this 

Court for an order allowing for her Conditional Release from Custody, pending trial. The motion 

is based on this notice and motion, the following memorandum of points and authorities pursuant 

to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and accompanying exhibits, all other applicable constitutional, statutory 

and case authority, and such evidence and argument as may be presented at the hearing of this 

motion. 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 1 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

I. Introduction 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), Noor Salman, the Defendant, seeks to be released on 

bond into the custody of her mother, Ekbal Salman, or her uncle, Abdallah Salman, under any 

condition deemed necessary by this Court. The Defendant’s proposed custodians are each willing 

to pledge their residences as security for their performance. In the event that the Defendant is 

required to reside in the Middle District of Florida, the Defendant’s mother is willing to establish 

a temporary home in the Middle District of Florida and to serve as custodian while the Defendant 

awaits trial. In support of the Defendant’s request the following is submitted: 

II. Factual Background 

Noor Salman (Noor) is a thirty-year old American citizen of Palestinian descent. Noor 

was born in Richmond, California, grew up in Rodeo, California, and is one of four daughters of 

a small business owner.1 Although she was raised in a Muslim home, Noor did not grow up with 

strong religious convictions. She did not cover, attend services, pray regularly, fast, or observe 

Ramadan. Noor did not study Islam. She did not express any interest in politics.2 

In school, Noor struggled with learning disabilities and was enrolled in special education 

classes, but was able to graduate from high school.3

 After high school, she attended Heald 

College, earning an associate degree in medical administration.4 Despite completing an 

associate’s degree in medical history, Noor’s work history includes babysitting, working as a 

teacher’s aide, and working as a cashier at her father’s store and working at K-Mart. 

 

1

 Adam Goldman, Orlando Gunman’s Wife Breaks Silence: ‘I Was Unaware’, The New York 

Times (Nov. 1, 2016). 

2

See Declaration of Lauri Jaber 

3

See Declaration of Heather Hayden 

4

 Heald College, a for-profit college that provided educational classes to mostly low-income 

students, closed after “a U.S. Department of Education investigation found that the company 

overstated employment prospects for Heald graduates by exaggerating job placement numbers.” 

See Jill Tucker, Corinthian, Heald colleges shut down abruptly, San Francisco Chronicle (April 

26, 2015, 8:30PM). 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 2 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Noor is described by her family and friends as “simple,” “obedient,” “childlike,” and 

who, most in life, wanted to get married and have children.5

 Noor had an arranged marriage at 

age nineteen to a man from her father’s hometown.6 While he allowed her to work at a daycare, 

he was physically abusive towards her.7 In 2009, she was finally able to achieve a divorce and 

move back in with her mother, Ekbal Salman. During this time, Noor recuperated and began 

working at K-Mart. In 2011, Noor met Omar Mateen (Mateen) on an online dating site.8 After a 

short courtship, the couple agreed to marry.9

 After they married, Noor moved from California to 

Fort Pierce, Florida, into a condominium that had been purchased by Mateen’s mother.10 Shortly 

after the marriage, Noor became pregnant.11 

About six months into the marriage, and while she was pregnant, Mateen’s behavior 

towards Noor became violent and abusive.12 He was both verbally and physically abusive to her. 

He threatened to kill her if she left and that he would take custody of their son.13 He also began 

abusing steroids, resulting in a significant weight gain and further destabilization of his moods. 14

Faced with an abusive husband who was rapidly succumbing to steroid abuse, Noor dedicated 

herself to her son. Noor friends observed that she was a “dedicated mother who always puts her 

son ahead of herself.”15

 

5

See Declaration of Shifa Itayem; Declaration of Rana Omar; Declaration of Ekbal Salman. 

6

 Adam Goldman, Orlando Gunman’s Wife Breaks Silence: ‘I Was Unaware’, The New York 

Times (Nov. 1, 2016). 

7

See id. 

8

Id.

9

Id.

10 Id.

11 Id.

12 Adam Goldman, Orlando Gunman’s Wife Breaks Silence: ‘I Was Unaware’, The New York 

Times (Nov. 1, 2016). 

13 See id.

14 Post mortem testing of Mateen showed that he was a long term steroid user. See Del Quentin 

Wilber, Orlando gunman was HIV-negative, and probably a long-term steroid user, autopsy 

shows, Los Angeles Times (July 15, 2016, 9:25AM). 

15 See Declaration of Rana Omar; Declaration of Shifa Itayem. 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 3 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

During the course of the couple’s marriage Noor witnessed Mateen being questioned on 

multiple occasions by the FBI. On the first occasion Mateen insisted that she stay in the couple’s 

bedroom with their infant son, and was only allowed out after Mateen’s parents arrived. Noor 

later learned that the FBI interview was about statements of support concerning terrorist 

organizations, which Mateen had made while working as a courthouse security guard. Mateen 

denied making these statements during the first FBI interview, but after learning from his father 

that the FBI had recordings of him making the statements, admitted to them during the second 

FBI interview. She was also with Mateen when an FBI agent texted Mateen and demanded that 

he come in for an interview concerning a community member who had gone to Syria. Noor also 

witnessed Mateen watching violent videos, from what appeared to be the Middle East, online.16

When Noor attempted to question Mateen about his activities, he threatened her that she should 

stay out of his business 

In the weeks immediately preceding the attack, Mateen’s treatment of Noor altered 

dramatically.17 For the first time in the couple’s marriage, he agreed to take a family trip to 

California so that Noor could visit her mother and family.18 He allowed her to get a driver’s 

license. He also purchased an engagement ring and earrings.19 He provided her with $500 in 

spending money with which she could purchase gifts for her family and clothes for herself.20

Prior to these expenditures, Noor had been provided an allowance of approximately $20 per 

week. When Noor questioned where the money was coming from, Mateen showed her a letter 

from the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission indicating that he was “now 

 

16 See id.

17 See id.

18 See id.

19 See Adam Goldman, Orlando Gunman’s Wife Breaks Silence: ‘I Was Unaware’, The New 

York Times (Nov. 1, 2016). 

20 See id.

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 4 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

eligible to enter a law enforcement basic recruit training program,” and told her that now things 

would be different.21

 

On June 11, 2016, Mateen came home from work as a security guard around 3:00pm.22

He informed Noor that he had purchased the tickets for their trip and that he wanted to take their 

son out for a treat.23 After going out, Mateen informed Noor that he was going out for the 

evening, but that she could use the family car because he was going to use a car that he had 

recently rented.24 Noor asked him to stay because she hoped that they could spend the evening 

together as a family.25 However, Mateen insisted that he had to see a friend.26 After Mateen left, 

Noor took her son out to Appleby’s for dinner, and bought a shirt and Father’s Day card for 

Mateen for Father’s Day, which was the following week.27 

On June 12, 2016, Mateen entered the Pulse Night Club with a semi-automatic weapon 

and killed forty-nine individuals, along with injuring fifty-three others.28 During the attack, 

Mateen is reported to have made statements that he was a member of Hezbollah, he was inspired 

by an American suicide bomber with al-Nusra, and that he was attacking the Pulse Night Club on 

behalf of ISIS.29 

 

21 See id.

22 See id.

23 See id.

24 See id.

25 See Adam Goldman, Orlando Gunman’s Wife Breaks Silence: ‘I Was Unaware’, The New 

York Times (Nov. 1, 2016). 

26 See id.

27 See id.

28 See Valerie Bauerlein, Cameron McWhirter, & Scott Valvert, Terror Shooting at Gay 

Nightclub in Orlando Leaves at Least 49 Dead, 53 Wounded, The Wall Street Journal (June 12, 

2016). 

29 See Ben Norton, Orlando shooter supported conflicting Islamist groups that are fighting each 

other, FBI says, Salon (June 13, 2016, 6:00PM). 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 5 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

While Mateen was at the Pulse Night Club, Noor was at home, sleeping with her three 

year old son.30 She was awoken by a phone call from her mother-in-law. Her mother–in-law told 

Noor that Mateen had promised to stop by their house that night because it was Ramadan but had 

failed to do so. She then inquired if Noor knew where he was. Noor responded she did not know 

where Mateen was but she would try to call him.31 Noor then attempted to call Mateen but got no 

answer, so she texted him “Where are you?” to which he responded “Do you see what’s 

happening?”32 She responded “No?” to which he responded “I love you, babe.”33 That was the 

last communication she had with Mateen. 

Within minutes of receiving the last text, she was ordered outside of her home by the Fort 

Lucie Police Department.34 She was searched and then placed, along with her son, in the back of 

a squad car. She was later transferred to the FBI’s headquarters where she was questioned for 

approximately 18 hours.35 Following the questioning, she was released by the FBI. After her 

release, Noor was kept under constant observation by the FBI.36 

Initially Noor stayed with her in-laws.37 Four days after the shooting, however, her aunt, 

Emtiyaz Adieh (Emtiyaz), came to Florida to take Noor to her home in Mississippi.38 Prior to 

taking Noor to Mississippi, Emtiyaz informed the FBI of her plan and was told that the FBI had 

no objections.39 While en-route to Mississippi, Emtiyaz realized that members of the news media 

 

30 Adam Goldman, Orlando Gunman’s Wife Breaks Silence: ‘I Was Unaware’, The New York 

Times (Nov. 1, 2016). 

31 Ayman Mohyeldin, Pete Williams, & Ohil Helsel, Orlando Gunman Omar Mateen and Wife 

Exchanged Texts During Rampage, NBC News (June 17, 2016). 

32 Id. 

33 Id.

34 Id. 

35 Counsel has repeatedly requested but not been furnished with copies of Noor’s written and 

recorded statements. 

36 See Declaration of Abdallah Salman; Declaration of Emtiyaz Adieh. 

37 Declaration of Emtiyaz Adieh. 

38 See Declaration of Emtiyaz Adieh. 

39 Id.

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 6 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

were following her, so she called the Oxford, Mississippi FBI Office (Oxford FBI Office) and 

was instructed to go straight to their office and not go home.40 When Emtiyaz and Noor arrived 

at the FBI Office, they were met by Emtiyaz’s husband and three children.41 Emtiyaz and Noor 

then drove home with Emtiyaz’s family.42 

In early September 2016, Emtiyaz called the Oxford FBI Office to inform them that she 

would be moving Noor to California so that Noor could stay with her mother.43 The Oxford FBI 

Office informed Emtiyaz that she had clearance to do so, and that it had contacted the San 

Francisco FBI Office to let them know that Noor was moving to Rodeo, California.44 Thereafter, 

Emtiyaz and Noor traveled to California accompanied by two FBI cars—one in front of their car 

and one behind—with a total of four FBI agents.45 

When Noor arrived in California, she resumed living with her mother. However, at the 

FBI’s request, her family continued to inform the FBI of all of Noor’s movements outside her 

mother’s home.46 Noor’s uncle, Abdallah Salman (Abdallah), met with three San Francisco FBI 

agents and was asked to report all of Noor’s movements to them, citing their concern for her 

safety.47 Abdallah agreed and provided constant phone and text messages regarding Noor’s 

movements to the FBI until she was arrested on January 16, 2017.48

 

Noor was charged by way of indictment, in which the United States charged her with 

aiding and abetting her husband, Mateen, with material support of terrorism, in violation of 18 

U.S.C. §§ 2339B(a)(1) and (2), involving the loss of life, and obstruction of justice, in violation 

 

40 Id.

41 Id.

42 Id.

43 Id.

44 See Declaration of Emtiyaz Adieh. 

45 Id.

46 See Declaration of Abdallah Salman. 

47 Id. 

48 Id.

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 7 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(3). At her initial hearing, the government sought detention of Noor, 

proffering the seriousness of the crime and that she had foreknowledge of Mateen’s intent to 

attack the patrons of the Pulse Night Club. Noor now comes before this Court seeking 

conditional release. 

III. Analysis 

In order to obtain a detention order, the government must demonstrate either: (1) by clear and 

convincing evidence that no conditions other than detention will reasonably assure the safety of 

any other person and the community, 18 U.S.C.S. § 3142(f)(2); or (2) by a preponderance of the 

evidence that detention is necessary to reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant at 

future court proceedings.49 

In cases where “there is probable cause to believe that the defendant has committed an 

offense identified as a ‘[f]ederal crime of terrorism’ under 18 U.S.C. § 2332b(g)(5)(B) for which 

a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed, there is a rebuttable 

presumption that ‘no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the 

appearance of the person as required and the safety of the community.’”50 In this case, Noor has 

been indicted on a federal count of aiding and abetting a listed crime of terrorism. Accordingly, 

the government enjoys at the onset a rebuttable presumption that no conditions will reasonably 

assure the appearance of Noor and the safety of the public.51 That presumption “shifts a burden 

of production to the defendant,” however, “the burden of persuasion remains with the 

government.52 In short, the burden is on the Defendant to provide evidence that there are 

 

49 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f); United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63, 75 (2nd Cir. 2007). 

50 18 U.S.C.S. § 3142(e); United States v. Hir, 517 F.3d 1081, 1086 (9th Cir. 2008) (citations 

omitted). 

51 Id. 

52 United States v. Hir, 517 F.3d 1081, 1086 (9th Cir. 2008) (citations omitted). 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 8 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

conditions which reasonably assure her appearance and assure the safety of the public.53 Once 

she has done so, the burden shifts back to the government to persuade this Court that those 

conditions are nevertheless insufficient.54 

The factors the Court is to consider in analyzing whether each side has met its burden of 

persuasion are set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3152(g). These factors include: (1) the nature and 

circumstances of the offenses charged; (2) the weight of the evidence against the person; (3) the 

history and characteristics of the person, including family ties, the person’s character, ties to the 

community, and criminal history; and (4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person 

or the community that would be posed by the person’s release.55 

(1) Nature and circumstances of the offenses charged 

Noor concedes that the primary charged offense, aiding and abetting the material support of 

terrorism, weighs against finding that any conditions absent detention ensure the safety of the 

public and her presence for trial. See United States v. Sheikh, 994 F. Supp. 2d 736, 740 

(E.D.N.C. 2014) (“Congress itself recognized the serious nature of terrorism by specifically 

compelling courts to consider whether the alleged crime is a "Federal crime of terrorism." The 

allegation of such a crime weighs heavily against the defendant.” (citations omitted)). 

Apart from the serious nature of the allegations, which in and of themselves are not 

conclusive, the remaining factors support finding the conditions proposed by the defense are 

sufficient to protect the public and ensure Noor’s presence for trial. 

 (2) Weight of the evidence against the person 

The return of the indictment conclusively determines the existence of probable cause. See 

United States v. Sheikh, 994 F. Supp. 2d 736, 739 (E.D.N.C. 2014) (“It has long been settled by 

 

53 See United States v. Sheikh, 994 F. Supp. 2d 736, 739 (E.D.N.C. 2014). 

54 See id.

55 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 9 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

the Supreme Court that a grand jury indictment conclusively determines the existence of 

probable cause.” (citations omitted)). Apart from the presumptive existence of probable cause, 

the indictment in this case provides no indication of the strength of the government’s case. 

In order to establish that Noor aided and abetted Mateen’s violation of 18 U.S.C. § 

2339B(a)(1) and (2), the government will have to prove that (1) Mateen provided himself as 

personnel for ISIS; (2) Noor aided, counseled, commanded, induced or procured that person with 

respect to at least one element of Mateen’s provision of material support to ISIS; (3) Noor acted 

with the intent to facilitate Mateen’s providing himself to ISIS; and (4) Noor’s actions occurred 

before Mateen completed providing material support to ISIS.56 Apart from securing an 

indictment, the strength of the government’s case is questionable. 

The government necessarily alleges that Mateen, in providing material support to ISIL, 

furnished himself as personnel. The government maintains this even though its investigation 

could not establish direct ties between Mateen and ISIL prior to the attack. See James B. Comey, 

Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Press Briefing on Orlando Mass Shooting at the FBI 

Headquarters (June 13, 2016) (stating that after combing through Mateen’s past, “we see no 

indication that this was a plot directed from outside the United States, and we see no indication 

that he was part of any kind of network”). Moreover, Mateen reportedly attributed his actions to 

multiple terrorist organizations—those even in conflict with one another. 

Even more tenuous is the government’s proffer that Noor was aware of Mateen’s plan to 

attack the Pulse Night Club. The government’s proffer of knowledge is belied by Noor’s actions 

on the night of the attack. After Mateen left she called her family and told them that she, along 

with her son and Mateen, would be coming to California. She then took her son out for dinner, 

 

56 Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the Ninth Circuit, 5.1 

Aiding and Abetting (last updated Dec. 2016), available at http://www3.ce9.uscourts.gov/juryinstructions/sites/default/files/WPD/Criminal_Instructions_2016_12_0.pdf. 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 10 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 11

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

and bought her husband a Father’s Day card and a gift. She took her son home, put him to bed 

and went to sleep. When she was awoken by her mother-in-law’s phone call, Noor had no idea 

where Mateen was. In an effort to discover his whereabouts she first tried to call him and when 

he did not answer, she texted him asking “Where are you?” These are not the actions of someone 

with knowledge of her husband’s murderous plans. 

Finally, even if the government can establish knowledge, they must also establish that Noor 

aided Mateen. However, it was Mateen, and not Noor, who determined to attack the Pulse Night 

Club, Mateen who chose to drive to the club, Mateen who purchased the weapon and 

ammunition, and Mateen who alone carried out the attack. News sources have erroneously 

reported that Noor drove Mateen to the Pulse Night Club on a purported scouting trip sometime 

before the attack.57 The defense proffers that the evidence will show that the purported scouting 

trip occurred while the family was on their way home from babysitting the children of a relative, 

that Mateen chose to drive into Orlando and to pass by the Pulse Night Club, and that Noor, who 

did not possess a driver’s license at the time, was at most a reluctant passenger who wanted to go 

home. The news media has also reported based on sources from the FBI, that Noor was present 

when Mateen bought ammunition at a local Walmart. The defense proffers the evidence will 

show that Noor believed they were going to Walmart to get copies of keys made for their condo, 

and she was shopping for a toy for their son when Mateen went to the sporting goods section to 

purchase the ammunition. When Noor found Mateen in the sporting goods section, she asked 

him why he was purchasing the ammunition. Mateen explained he needed it to train for his job as 

a security guard. Although Noor may have been present when Mateen was possibly making 

 

57 Matt Apuzzo & Eric Lichtblau, After F.B.I.’s Inquiry Into Omar Mateen, a Focus on What 

Else Could Be Done, The New York Times (June 14, 2016). 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 11 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

preparations, mere presence alone is insufficient to establish aiding and abetting.58 In sum, 

although the weight of the evidence is the least important factor, it nevertheless weighs in Noor’s 

favor. 59

(3) History and characteristics of the person, including family ties, the person’s character, 

ties to the community, and criminal history 

Noor has been described by her family and friends as “respectful” and “well mannered.”60

She has also been observed to be a dedicated mother to her son, spending much of her time 

caring for him.61 Noor’s marital life has been the antithesis of this, as she has suffered two 

abusive husbands, one of whom she could not escape. Noor has no history of alcohol or drug 

abuse, and has no criminal history. 

Noor has strong family and community ties. She and her family have made the United States 

their home. Her family, including her mother, sisters, and uncle, live in California. Noor has 

shown herself to have strong family ties because after difficult periods in her life, most notably 

after the divorce from her first husband, she moved back in with her family. Noor has also shown 

herself to have strong ties to the community, as she did not flee the country once her marital 

status came to light after the Pulse Night Club attack. Instead, she moved in with her family and 

continued caring for her son.62 It would be unreasonable to assume that an individual, who would 

not leave an abusive relationship due to her commitment to her son, would suddenly abandon 

him in order to protect herself from incarceration.63 Indeed, Noor knew and understood that the 

 

58 United States v. Natel, 812 F.2d 937, 941 (5th Cir. 1987); Seriales v. Harrington, No. 1:09-cv00355-BAM (HC), 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11814, at *103 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2012). 

59 United States v. Motamedi, 767 F.2d 1403, 1408 (9th Cir. 1985). 

60 See Declaration of Ekbal Salman; Declaration of Shifa Itayem; Declaration of Rana Omar. 

61 See Declaration of Rana Omar. 

62 See Declaration of Emtiyaz Adieh; Declaration of Lauri Jaber. 

63 See Declaration of Rana Omar; Declaration of Shifa Itayem. 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 12 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 13

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

government was investigating and surveilling her for seven months before the Indictment issued, 

but she did attempt to flee. 

Noor’s strong family ties are also evident in the fact that her mother and uncle are willing to 

act as her custodian should the court require a third party custodian to release her.64 They are also 

willing to secure their homes as a guarantee of Noor’s presence at future hearings.65 Noor’s 

mother is also willing to temporarily relocate to Florida if the court conditions Noor’s release on 

Noor staying in Florida.66 

(4) Nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be 

posed by the person’s release 

In this case, it is clear Noor poses no danger to any person or the community. Any threat she 

might have posed is solely a function of Mateen, and that threat has been removed. Unlike others 

charged with material support of terrorism, Noor does not adhere to a violent religious 

philosophy. In contrast to reported material support cases, the government proffers no evidence 

that Noor expressed a desire to support ISIL or approved of her husband’s actions. Noor’s 

religious views have no political bent. Indeed, she is not particularly religious at all.67 Ironically, 

ISIL’s reported views towards women condemn Noor’s lifestyle as apostate. Her lack of extreme 

religious views is confirmed by her lifestyle—she does not adhere to the conservative dress, she 

does not attend congregational prayers or services, she does not express an interest in political 

activities abroad or the need to defend Islam. 

Noor’s connection to the crime does not stem from her desire to provide material support to 

ISIL, but rather her tragic marriage to an individual who allegedly desired to support ISIL among 

other terrorist organizations, by attacking the patrons of the Pulse Night Club. In this case, the 

 

64 See Declaration of Ekbal Salman; Declaration of Abdallah Salman. 

65 Id.

66 See Declaration of Ekbal Salman. 

67 See Declaration of Lauri Jaber. 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 13 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 14

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Court should bear in mind the condition of her marriage when determining whether the 

circumstances of the offense charged weigh in favor of detention. 68

Noor was physically and financially abused at the hands of Mateen. He isolated her from her 

family by threatening her that he would take custody of their son if she were to leave him. 

Noor, unlike other terrorism defendants, was only present as a wife, and an abused wife at that. 

The removal of the perpetrator husband mitigates the danger posed by the serious nature of the 

crime. 

Moreover, the fact that Noor has been under investigation from the onset and she, along with 

her family, has cooperated with the FBI to an extraordinary extent, demonstrates that release to 

her family does not pose a danger to any person or the public and that she is not a flight risk.69

 

The recent case of United States v. Meek delineates the difference between a person who 

was aware of the threat posed by a perpetrator of a mass shooting and the actual perpetrator of a 

mass shooting.70 In Meek, the defendant was similarly alleged to have known of Dylan Roof’s 

plan to enter a predominantly African American Church and shoot the occupants due to his white 

supremacist beliefs. Shortly after the attack, the FBI questioned Meek where he allegedly 

provided false statements regarding his role. Subsequently, Meek was charged by way of 

indictment with misprision of a felony and false statements.71 In that case, despite Meek’s 

admitted foreknowledge of a horrific crime of mass shooting, the court found that there were 

sufficient grounds to establish conditions of release.72

 

 

68 See Declaration of Jacquelyn Campbell “Ms. Salman scored in the Extreme Danger range, the 

highest level of danger from and abusive intimate partner.” 

69 See Declaration of Emtiyaz Adieh. 

70 United States v. Meek, 2:15-cr-00633-RMG, Doc. No. 36 (D. SC. Oct. 22, 2015). 

71 Id. 

72 The conditions of the release were a bond of $25,000 secured with standard conditions, surety 

required; home detention with electronic monitoring; requirement to live with his grandparents 

with no contact with his brothers or girlfriend; inability to obtain his passport; performance of a 

mental health evaluation and participation in in-patient treatment. Id.

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 14 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 15

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IV. Conclusion 

Wherefore Noor prays that this honorable Court find that her proposed conditions of release, 

namely to be released into her mother’s custody with her appearance further secured by real 

property and GPS monitoring, along with such other terms as the Court determines, are sufficient 

to permit release under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(c), and order the same. 

 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 

 /s/ Charles D. Swift 

 Charles D. Swift, Attorney 

 Constitutional Law Center for Muslims in America 

 833 E. Arapaho Rd., Suite 102 

 Richardson, TX 75074 

 cswift@clcma.org

 (972) 914-2507 

Dated: January 31, 2017 

 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 15 of 16
UNITED STATES V. SALMAN, CR 4-17-70058-MAG 

MOTION TO FOR CONDITIONAL RELEASE 16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of Notice of Motion, Motion, and 

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Conditional Release was electronically filed and 

served on the Court’s electronic filing system: 

DATED this 31st Day of January, 2017. 

 /s/ Charles D. Swift 

Charles D. Swift, Attorney 

833 – E. Arapaho Rd., Ste. 102 

Richardson, TX 75081 

Tel: (972) 914-2507 

Fax: (972) 692-7454 

cswift@clcma.org 

Case 4:17-mj-70058-MAG Document 16 Filed 01/31/17 Page 16 of 16