Suaad Hagi Mohamud

noahbody · September 30, 2009

10) Her signature on the driver's licence and immigration forms differed significantly from what she provided

Her lawyer should be smart enough to figure out that her signature on her immigration forms likely isn't hers, making them invalid.

eyeball · September 30, 2009

Is this woman just incredibly stupid or is there even MORE to this story...

Its a bit of a mystery alright. We shouldn't rule out the possibility that stupidity is a big part of both sides of this story.

...and what do you think of the consulate/government's actions now?

These will always be suspect, that's the only given we can be certain of.

All I know for sure is I'll be registering a DNA sample with someone here at home before I ever travel abroad again. We obviously can't rely on our ID cards.

Keepitsimple · September 30, 2009

All I know for sure is I'll be registering a DNA sample with someone here at home before I ever travel abroad again. We obviously can't rely on our ID cards.

I don't think you'll have anything to worry about unless your appearance dramatically changes from your passport and you're brain-dead like this woman. What these stories lack is the "foundation" story - that thousands of imposters try to con their way into Canada every year and our Consulates are our first line of defence.....and from the evidence being presented in this case, they seem to be doing a thankless job pretty well. As can be seen, it only takes one poorly researched story for the critics to pounce.

Edited September 30, 2009 by Keepitsimple

kimmy · October 3, 2009

"The Current" on CBC this morning was going to have interviews with experts who were going to explain why it's actually really unfair to expect Canadian citizens to know the answers to the questions that were posed to Suaad Mohamud.

I was beginning work just as the interview started, so I didn't get to hear why. I'm sure it was scintillating, however.

-k

DogOnPorch · October 3, 2009

"The Current" on CBC this morning was going to have interviews with experts who were going to explain why it's actually really unfair to expect Canadian citizens to know the answers to the questions that were posed to Suaad Mohamud.
I was beginning work just as the interview started, so I didn't get to hear why. I'm sure it was scintillating, however.

-k

It was, actually.

kimmy · October 3, 2009

It was, actually.

Oh? What did they have to say?

-k

DogOnPorch · October 3, 2009

They did a 'Jay-Walking' like thing where Canadians were asked similar questions...lots of fun answers.

kimmy · October 3, 2009

They did a 'Jay-Walking' like thing where Canadians were asked similar questions...lots of fun answers.

Did they find a lot of Canadians who didn't know what year they were married or where their children were born?

-k

myata · October 3, 2009

Because of privacy issues, the Federal government was unable to disclose the information gathered that led to the Mohamud ordeal. Her $2.5 million dollar lawsuit opened the door for the government to introduce sworn testimony of the three interviews that were conducted that led authorities to believe she was an imposter. Keep in mind that Mohamud is a Canadian citizen who has lived in Toronto for 10 years. Aside from the fact that she looked different than in previous pictures, key points include:

In a story I heard on CBC radio awhile back a suggestion was made that perhaps it was attempted to smuggle in a relative under Ms A's guise. It would certainly explain many of otherwise mysterious events attributed to this story. A possible scenario:

- somebody shows up in the embassy and claims to be Ms A who lost her passport; she's seeking to obtain a new one (but with a slightly different spelling of her name). She gets her passport and enters Canada;

- awhile later, (real) Ms A finds her original passport, buys ticket and flies to Canada;

- result: there are now two instances of Ms A in Canada now, each with her own passport, and no costly time consuming and most importantly, restrictive immigration procedures involved.

I don't think we should write off those 2.5 millions just yet. And, I'm all for this actually going to the court, so that at least not every legitimate attempt to prevent illegal entry to Canada is instantly interpreted as an abuse of power of state.

A question though: what should be a legitimate reaction of a state toward such possible abuse (short of physically arresting alleged impostor, how could a case of abuse being proven, to charge and convict the offender)?

Edited October 3, 2009 by myata

Argus · October 3, 2009

They did a 'Jay-Walking' like thing where Canadians were asked similar questions...lots of fun answers.

I'm sure that you can find people living in Toronto for 10 years who don't know the name of the lake the city is on. It wouldn't be easy, but you can find them, particularly in the immigrant community, for these people are often quite distanced from the local culture and media.

But now ask the same people who the mayor is, who the PM is, to name their any of their teachers at college, what TTC stands for - and what are your odds of getting wrong answers on all of them?

Now, if you've actually found a group which can't answer ANY of those questions add in questions about their own son's birthday and their marriage - and try to find ones who don't know the month or year of their son's birthday or when they themselves were married.

Sorry. I don't buy that anyone is that stupid. She has a drivers licence but was unable to give any details about the process for obtaining a drivers licence. Uhmmm, you don't have to be a cynic to suggest that we're dealing with two individuals here.

DNA says she is who she says she is, but what was the DNA compared to? Her son? Maybe she was the boy's birth mother, but I don't think she's the person who has been living in Toronto for the last 10 years.

Keepitsimple · October 3, 2009

I'm sure that you can find people living in Toronto for 10 years who don't know the name of the lake the city is on. It wouldn't be easy, but you can find them, particularly in the immigrant community, for these people are often quite distanced from the local culture and media.
But now ask the same people who the mayor is, who the PM is, to name their any of their teachers at college, what TTC stands for - and what are your odds of getting wrong answers on all of them?

Now, if you've actually found a group which can't answer ANY of those questions add in questions about their own son's birthday and their marriage - and try to find ones who don't know the month or year of their son's birthday or when they themselves were married.

Sorry. I don't buy that anyone is that stupid. She has a drivers licence but was unable to give any details about the process for obtaining a drivers licence. Uhmmm, you don't have to be a cynic to suggest that we're dealing with two individuals here.

DNA says she is who she says she is, but what was the DNA compared to? Her son? Maybe she was the boy's birth mother, but I don't think she's the person who has been living in Toronto for the last 10 years.

Exactly.....and why would the CBC want to try and make it seem different? Hmmm.

Smallc · October 3, 2009

I don't think it's that. The job of the current is to investigate the other side and to investigate in general. There's a story, now lets look at how things could be different.

Keepitsimple · October 6, 2009

Here's the latest from the LIberals - when you're in a hole, the first rule is to stop digging. If the Liberals think that Canadians will feel $2 million dollars of sympathy for this woman when the facts are known, they have truly lost touch with the populace:

OTTAWA - The Liberals want the Harper government to settle a $2-million lawsuit and apologize to a Toronto woman who was left stranded in Kenya.

Link: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091006/..._kenya_stranded

I find it amazing that the media summaries continue to leave out the sworn testimony of consular officials with regards to this woman's interviews:

Because of privacy issues, the Federal government was unable to disclose the information gathered that led to the Mohamud ordeal. Her $2.5 million dollar lawsuit opened the door for the government to introduce sworn testimony of the three interviews that were conducted that led authorities to believe she was an imposter. Keep in mind that Mohamud is a Canadian citizen who has lived in Toronto for 10 years. Aside from the fact that she looked different than in previous pictures, key points include:

1) She didn't know the name of the lake (Lake Ontario)

2) She didn't know who the current or former Prime Minister was

3) She didn't know the name of the mayor of Toronto

4) She didn't know what TTC stood for, although she took it every day

5) She didn't know where her son was born

6) She got his birth date wrong

7) She got the month AND the year of her marriage wrong

8) She was 6 or 7 cm shorter than her driver's license indicated

9) She could not describe any of the process for how she obtained a driver's license

10) Her signature on the driver's licence and immigration forms differed significantly from what she provided

11) She could not name any of her son's school teachers

12) She said she was attending Humber college but could not correctly name any professors.

Is this woman just incredibly stupid or is there even MORE to this story......and what do you think of the consulate/government's actions now?

Link to CBC story: http://www.canadaka.net/link.php?id=49780

Link to The Star story: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/703085

Edited October 6, 2009 by Keepitsimple

noahbody · October 6, 2009

Even more bizarre, they had Joe "I signed up dead people" Volpe at the press conference. :lol:

noahbody · October 6, 2009

duplicate

Edited October 6, 2009 by noahbody

ToadBrother · October 6, 2009

Here's the latest from the LIberals - when you're in a hole, the first rule is to stop digging. If the Liberals think that Canadians will feel $2 million dollars of sympathy for this woman when the facts are known, they have truly lost touch with the populace:
Link: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091006/..._kenya_stranded

I find it amazing that the media summaries continue to leave out the sworn testimony of consular officials with regards to this woman's interviews:

Because of privacy issues, the Federal government was unable to disclose the information gathered that led to the Mohamud ordeal. Her $2.5 million dollar lawsuit opened the door for the government to introduce sworn testimony of the three interviews that were conducted that led authorities to believe she was an imposter. Keep in mind that Mohamud is a Canadian citizen who has lived in Toronto for 10 years. Aside from the fact that she looked different than in previous pictures, key points include:

1) She didn't know the name of the lake (Lake Ontario)

2) She didn't know who the current or former Prime Minister was

3) She didn't know the name of the mayor of Toronto

4) She didn't know what TTC stood for, although she took it every day

5) She didn't know where her son was born

6) She got his birth date wrong

7) She got the month AND the year of her marriage wrong

8) She was 6 or 7 cm shorter than her driver's license indicated

9) She could not describe any of the process for how she obtained a driver's license

10) Her signature on the driver's licence and immigration forms differed significantly from what she provided

11) She could not name any of her son's school teachers

12) She said she was attending Humber college but could not correctly name any professors.

Is this woman just incredibly stupid or is there even MORE to this story......and what do you think of the consulate/government's actions now?

Link to CBC story: http://www.canadaka.net/link.php?id=49780

Link to The Star story: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/703085

It certainly isn't nearly as clear as it at first seemed. She does appear to have been the author of some of her misfortune. That being said, Canada has an obligation to its citizens, even the dumb and confused ones.

M.Dancer · October 6, 2009

It certainly isn't nearly as clear as it at first seemed. She does appear to have been the author of some of her misfortune. That being said, Canada has an obligation to its citizens, even the dumb and confused ones.

Even those who apparently try to defraud the consular office. Of course that responsibility is to fine and imprison them.

ToadBrother · October 6, 2009

Even those who apparently try to defraud the consular office. Of course that responsibility is to fine and imprison them.

Could you be clear here. Where in all of this is there an accusation of fraud?

M.Dancer · October 6, 2009

Could you be clear here. Where in all of this is there an accusation of fraud?

The same accusation which landed her in jail in AFrica. At first glance it appears she allowed another person (probably her sister) to use her passport to enter Canada illegally.

I am reminded of being in Amsterdam in the 70s. I was offered $200 for my passport.

October 6, 2009

It certainly isn't nearly as clear as it at first seemed. She does appear to have been the author of some of her misfortune. That being said, Canada has an obligation to its citizens, even the dumb and confused ones.

I have to agree with you. It certainly does paint a different picture than 'she didn't look like her passport picture,' which is what we originally heard, but it doesn't sound as if Canada did anything to help her/look into it, either.

However, if there was some kind of fraud involved, Canada doesn't owe her a thing. I think, under the circumstances, she has a lot of guts suing the government.

Riverwind · October 6, 2009

However, if there was some kind of fraud involved, Canada doesn't owe her a thing. I think, under the circumstances, she has a lot of guts suing the government.

Guts? I don't think so. She was probably approached by a lawyer looking for a contigency fee. The 2M has nothing to do with how much hurt she suffered - it is simply the number the lawyer picked to ensure he/she gets a fat profit if he can get the case settled out of court.

jdobbin · October 6, 2009

Here's the latest from the LIberals - when you're in a hole, the first rule is to stop digging. If the Liberals think that Canadians will feel $2 million dollars of sympathy for this woman when the facts are known, they have truly lost touch with the populace:

They haven't asked for a $2 million payout. They have asked for a settlement and an apology since it seemed evident that Harper's office had been informed quite some time earlier about the situation.

If the government has evidence of fraud, make an arrest. It really is as simple as that. They are making accusations and excuses at the moment which might not stand up in court.

I know some on the right blame the person for the dilemma they got themselves and I have no doubt that fraud takes place but the government had better have some more evidence than they have presented. So far it looks as if they are the ones that are digging.

jdobbin · October 6, 2009

However, if there was some kind of fraud involved, Canada doesn't owe her a thing. I think, under the circumstances, she has a lot of guts suing the government.

It will be up to the government to give evidence of that.

The accusation appears to be that a family member might have impersonated her.

I am not sure what protocols that the government goes through to ensure this does not happen but the interview that they released thus far seems not enough to make a charge of fraud. I'd be curious to hear what the process is and how they ensure that they haven't made a mistake one way or the other.

Riverwind · October 6, 2009

They haven't asked for a $2 million payout. They have asked for a settlement and an apology since it seemed evident that Harper's office had been informed quite some time earlier about the situation.

We will need to see the facts, however, an innocent person kept in jail prior to trial is not entitled to compensation provided the crown had a reasonable basis for pressing charges. She will need to demonstrate that the inaction rises to the level of 'malicious procecution'.

wyly · October 6, 2009

Here's the latest from the LIberals - when you're in a hole, the first rule is to stop digging. If the Liberals think that Canadians will feel $2 million dollars of sympathy for this woman when the facts are known, they have truly lost touch with the populace:
Link: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091006/..._kenya_stranded

I find it amazing that the media summaries continue to leave out the sworn testimony of consular officials with regards to this woman's interviews:

Because of privacy issues, the Federal government was unable to disclose the information gathered that led to the Mohamud ordeal. Her $2.5 million dollar lawsuit opened the door for the government to introduce sworn testimony of the three interviews that were conducted that led authorities to believe she was an imposter. Keep in mind that Mohamud is a Canadian citizen who has lived in Toronto for 10 years. Aside from the fact that she looked different than in previous pictures, key points include:

1) She didn't know the name of the lake (Lake Ontario)

2) She didn't know who the current or former Prime Minister was

3) She didn't know the name of the mayor of Toronto

4) She didn't know what TTC stood for, although she took it every day

5) She didn't know where her son was born

6) She got his birth date wrong

7) She got the month AND the year of her marriage wrong

8) She was 6 or 7 cm shorter than her driver's license indicated

9) She could not describe any of the process for how she obtained a driver's license

10) Her signature on the driver's licence and immigration forms differed significantly from what she provided

11) She could not name any of her son's school teachers

12) She said she was attending Humber college but could not correctly name any professors.

Is this woman just incredibly stupid or is there even MORE to this story......and what do you think of the consulate/government's actions now?

I'll take the same test

1-we have two rivers in my city, I don't know which is which, I also don't know the name of the main road that I use every day when I leave home, and I've lived here 9 yrs...

2-I've met Canadians born here who can't name our PM at any time...yes I can, I think can name most of them and in reasonable order.

3-I don't know the name of my MLA or MP..I don't care they're both idiots...

4-I didn't know what TTC was either or the name of Calgary's bus system...

5-I know that and even the time...

6-I know 1 of my 4 kids birthday and I can't remember my wife's either, I can't even recall one day to the next with certainty how old I am...

7-I know the month and day of my marriage but not always the year..

8-I'm 2.5 cm shorter than what's on my DL

9-took a driving test, is all I recall with certainty...

10-my signature on my passport and DL are different...it's changed over the years...

11-I can't name any of my kids teachers...

12-I can recall only one profs name from my Uni days, it just wasn't important then and it isn't now..

my memory is excellent, for things I find relevant...this stuff is trivial and mundane(don't tell mrs wyly I said that)

and my passport photo doesn't look like me either, they never seem to but that isn't my call it's for the people who issue the passport to make that decision...

Edited October 6, 2009 by wyly