Score:   1
Docket Number:   D-MD  1:18-cr-00601
Case Name:   USA v. Ahmad
  Press Releases:
Baltimore, Maryland – U.S. District Judge Richard D. Bennett sentenced Khalil Ahmad, age 51, of Hanover, Maryland, today to two years in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release, for stalking his estranged wife.  Ahmad solicited another individual to have his wife killed after he violated protective orders she had obtained against him, but instead, ultimately paid that individual to set her up to appear to be a terrorist and have her arrested.  Ahmad paid the same individual to burn down the restaurant Ahmad owned in order for him to collect the insurance. 

The sentence was announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Robert K. Hur; Acting Special Agent in Charge Jennifer L. Moore of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Baltimore Field Office; and Anne Arundel County Police Chief Tim Altomare.

According to his plea agreement, Ahmad and the victim were married in July 2015.  Before and after their marriage, the victim lived in Howard County, Maryland, and Ahmad lived separately in Anne Arundel County, Maryland.  During their marriage, Ahmad threatened to kill the victim by shooting her.  In April 2018, the victim informed Ahmad that she wanted a divorce.

On April 24, 2018, Ahmad drove to the victim’s residence, and in the presence of the victim and her children, poured gasoline over his body, produced a lighter, and threatened to light himself on fire if the victim did not take him back. 

The next day, the victim obtained a temporary protective order in Howard County against Ahmad, which was served on April 25, 2018, and was effective through May 8, 2018.  Ahmad violated the order by contacting the victim by mobile phone on April 29, and May 27, 2018, in Howard County.  Ahmad also violated the order on April 30, 2018, by contacting the victim by mobile phone and by following the victim’s vehicle as she drove in Prince George’s County.  Criminal summonses were issued in Howard County and in Prince George’s County for violating a protective order. 

To further harass the victim and put her in fear of her life, Ahmad contacted the victim’s relatives, members of her religious community, and her ex-husband, and advised them that the victim was not a good person and that she was having a romantic relationship with another man; threatened to have the victim’s brother killed in Pakistan; and threatened to have the victim killed if she returned to Pakistan, causing the victim to be afraid to visit her family in Pakistan.

On May 8, 2018, the victim obtained a Final Protective Order from the Circuit Court for Howard County that remains in effect through May 7, 2019.  The order directed Ahmad not to: abuse or threaten to abuse the victim; contact, attempt to contact, or harass the victim in person, in writing, or by any other means; or enter the residence of the victim.  In addition, the order required Ahmad to stay away from the victim’s place of employment.

Ahmad admitted that beginning in May 2018, he solicited an individual (CW) to harass the victim. CW and Ahmad met several times, during which Ahmad expressed a desire to have his wife murdered.  Ahmad subsequently decided to have the victim framed so that she would be arrested as a terrorist because she is from a Middle Eastern country.  The plan was to place a ballistic vest, firearm, bottles of alcohol, and extremist jihad writings in her possession, without her knowledge, and then notify law enforcement to have her arrested.  

On May 10, 2018, following several discussions with Ahmad, CW reported Ahmad’s plan to law enforcement.  Thereafter, at the direction of and/or in the presence of law enforcement, CW’s calls and meetings with Ahmad were recorded.  Ahmad gave CW a total of $5,000 in cash over two separate meetings, as a down payment to have the victim set up to appear to be a terrorist.  Ahmad also provided CW with a photo of the victim, her address, phone numbers, and the last two digits of her Maryland license plate number.  Ahmad made numerous statements to CW that he wanted the victim arrested prior to his June 21 court date in Prince George’s County for violating the protective order.  If the victim were arrested, she could not testify, which would result in the court cases being dismissed. 

The recorded calls and meetings reflect that Ahmad also wanted CW to commit an arson at Ahmad’s business (Allah Rakha Restaurant) so that Ahmad could collect the insurance payout from the fire.  Ahmad advised CW that he recently had raised the amount of insurance on the restaurant by approximately $200,000.  During one of their meetings, CW and Ahmad walked into the kitchen area of the restaurant to view the hot water heater and gas line, and discussed how CW would set the business on fire to make it look like an accident. 

On June 5, 2018, investigators staged a scene involving what appeared to be Anne Arundel County Police Department (AAPD) uniformed police officers and detectives searching the victim’s vehicle on the side of a road.  Photographs were taken of the victim’s vehicle and provided to CW who then went to meet with Ahmad.  CW showed Ahmad the staged photographs and told Ahmad that it was done.  Ahmad told CW that he would pay $2,000 that day, but would pay the remaining $7,000 once Ahmad could verify that the victim had actually been arrested.  Ahmad then drove to a bank, withdrew $2,000 in cash, and handed the money to CW. 

Later that same day, AAPD and FBI investigators went to Ahmad’s residence to conduct a ruse, informing Ahmad that his wife had been arrested and asking Ahmad if investigators could talk to him about his wife.  Ahmad told investigators that his wife had filed a protective order against him and retrieved the file he had in his home.  Ahmad said that he had overheard his wife on the phone at night taking classes about terrorism over the phone and that his wife had attended a terrorist training camp.  Ahmad agreed to meet with investigators at AAPD to talk more about his wife, her activities, and her possible associates.  At the meeting at AAPD, an FBI Urdu-speaking linguist was present for the interview.  Ahmad was provided his Miranda warnings and the FBI linguist translated for Ahmad.  Ahmad spoke to investigators at length about his wife.  Investigators then confronted Ahmad with recorded video of one of his meetings with CW, during which the two discussed the plot to kill his wife, the plan to set her up to look like a terrorist, and the scheme to burn down his restaurant.  Ahmad stated that he wanted CW to make things hard for his wife and to engage in a romantic relationship with her.  Ahmad falsely told investigators that the plot to kill his wife, to set her up to look like a terrorist, and the plan to burn down his restaurant were all CW’s ideas.  

As a result of Ahmad’s conviction on the federal stalking charge, the Anne Arundel County, Howard County, and Prince George’s County State’s Attorney’s Offices have dismissed their cases against Ahmad.

United States Attorney Robert K. Hur commended the FBI and Anne Arundel County Police Department for their work in the investigation and thanked the Howard County Police Department, Anne Arundel County State’s Attorney Anne Colt Leitess, Howard County State’s Attorney Rich Gibson, and Prince George’s County State’s Attorney Aisha Braveboy for their assistance in this prosecution.  Mr. Hur thanked Assistant U.S. Attorneys Paul E. Budlow and Sandra Wilkinson, who prosecuted the case.

# # #

Baltimore, Maryland – Khalil Ahmad, age 51, of Hanover, Maryland, pleaded guilty on December 12, 2018, to stalking his estranged wife.  Ahmad admitted that he solicited another individual to have his wife killed after he violated protective orders she had obtained against him, but that he ultimately paid that individual to set her up to appear to be a terrorist and have her arrested instead.  Ahmad further admitted that he paid the same individual to burn down the restaurant Ahmad owned in order for him to collect the insurance. 

The guilty plea was announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Robert K. Hur; Special Agent in Charge Gordon B. Johnson of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Baltimore Field Office; and Anne Arundel County Police Chief Tim Altomare.

According to his plea agreement, Ahmad and the victim were married in July 2015.  Before and after their marriage, the victim lived in Howard County, Maryland, and Ahmad lived separately in Anne Arundel County, Maryland.  During their marriage, Ahmad threatened to kill the victim using a firearm.  In April 2018, the victim informed Ahmad that she wanted a divorce.

On April 24, 2018, Ahmad threatened to kill himself.  He drove to the victim’s residence, and in the presence of the victim and her children, poured gasoline over his body.  Ahmad then produced a lighter and threatened to light himself on fire if the victim did not take him back. 

The next day, the victim obtained a temporary protective order in Howard County against Ahmad, which was served on April 25, 2018, and was effective through May 8, 2018.  Ahmad violated the order by contacting the victim by mobile phone on April 29, and May 27, 2018, in Howard County.  Ahmad also violated the order on April 30, 2018, by contacting the victim by mobile phone and by following the victim’s vehicle as she drove in Prince George’s County.  Criminal summonses were issued in Howard County (two counts) and in Prince George’s County (three counts) for violating a protective order. 

To further harass the victim and put her in fear of her life, Ahmad also contacted the victim’s relatives, members of her religious community, and her ex-husband, and advised them that the victim was not a good person and that she was having a romantic relationship with another man; threatened to have the victim’s brother killed in Pakistan; and threatened to have the victim killed if she returned to Pakistan, causing the victim to be afraid to visit her family in Pakistan.

On May 8, 2018, the victim obtained a Final Protective Order from the Circuit Court for Howard County that remains in effect through May 7, 2019.  The order directed Ahmad not to: abuse or threaten to abuse the victim; contact, attempt to contact, or harass the victim in person, in writing, or by any other means; or enter the residence of the victim.  In addition, the order required Ahmad to stay away from the victim’s place of employment.

Ahmad admitted that beginning in May 2018, he solicited an individual (CW) to harass the victim. CW and Ahmad met several times, during which Ahmad expressed a desire to have his wife murdered.  Ahmad subsequently decided to have the victim framed so that she would be arrested as a terrorist because she is from a Middle Eastern country.  The plan was to place a ballistic vest, firearm, bottles of alcohol, and extremist jihad writings in her possession, without her knowledge, and then notify law enforcement to have her arrested.  

On May 10, 2018, following several discussions with Ahmad, CW reported Ahmad’s plan to law enforcement.  Thereafter, at the direction of and/or in the presence of law enforcement, CW’s calls and meetings with Ahmad were recorded.  Ahmad gave CW a total of $5,000 in cash over two separate meetings, as a down payment to have the victim set up to appear to be a terrorist.  Ahmad also provided CW with a photo of the victim, her address, phone numbers, and the last two digits of her Maryland license plate number.  Ahmad made numerous statements to CW that he wanted the victim arrested prior to his June 21 court date in Prince George’s County for violating the protective order.  If the victim were arrested, she could not testify, which would result in the court cases being dismissed. 

The recorded calls and meetings reflect that Ahmad also wanted CW to commit an arson at Ahmad’s business (Allah Rakha Restaurant) so that Ahmad could collect the insurance payout from the fire.  Ahmad advised CW that he recently had raised the amount of insurance on the restaurant by approximately $200,000.  During one of their meetings, CW and Ahmad walked into the kitchen area of the restaurant to view the hot water heater and gas line, and discussed how CW would set the business on fire to make it look like an accident. 

On June 5, 2018, investigators staged a scene involving what appeared to be Anne Arundel County Police Department (AAPD) uniformed police officers and detectives searching the victim’s vehicle on the side of a road.  Photographs were taken of the victim’s vehicle and provided to CW who then went to meet with Ahmad.  CW showed Ahmad the staged photographs and told Ahmad that it was done.  Ahmad told CW that he would pay $2,000 that day, but would pay the remaining $7,000 once Ahmad could verify that the victim had actually been arrested.  Ahmad then drove to a bank, withdrew $2,000 in cash, and handed the money to CW. 

Later that same day, AAPD and FBI investigators went to Ahmad’s residence to conduct a ruse, informing Ahmad that his wife had been arrested and asking Ahmad if investigators could talk to him about his wife.  Ahmad told investigators that his wife had filed a protective order against him and retrieved the file he had in his home.  Ahmad said that he had overheard his wife on the phone at night taking classes about terrorism over the phone and that his wife had attended a terrorist training camp.  Ahmad agreed to meet with investigators at AAPD to talk more about his wife, her activities, and her possible associates.  At the meeting at AAPD, an FBI Urdu-speaking linguist was present for the interview.  Ahmad was provided his Miranda warnings and the FBI linguist translated for Ahmad.  Ahmad spoke to investigators at length about his wife.  Investigators then confronted Ahmad with recorded video of one of his meetings with CW, during which the two discussed the plot to kill his wife, the plan to set her up to look like a terrorist, and the scheme to burn down his restaurant.  Ahmad stated that he wanted CW to make things hard for his wife and to engage in a romantic relationship with her.  Ahmad falsely told investigators that the plot to kill his wife, to set her up to look like a terrorist, and the plan to burn down his restaurant were all CW’s ideas.  

As a result of his guilty plea to the federal stalking charge, the Anne Arundel County, Howard County, and Prince George’s County State’s Attorney’s Offices have agreed to dismiss their pending cases against Ahmad.

Ahmad faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison for stalking and is subject to removal from the United States upon completion of his sentence.  U.S. District Judge Richard D. Bennett has scheduled sentencing for March 12, 2019.

United States Attorney Robert K. Hur commended the FBI and Anne Arundel County Police Department for their work in the investigation and thanked the Howard County Police Department, the Anne Arundel County State’s Attorney Wes Adams; Howard County State’s Attorney Dario Broccolino and Prince George’s County State’s Attorney Aisha Braveboy for their assistance in this prosecution.  Mr. Hur thanked Assistant U.S. Attorneys Paul E. Budlow and Sandra Wilkinson, who are prosecuting the case.

# # #

 

Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3

Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4

Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3

Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8

Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Magistrate Docket Number:   D-MD  1:18-mj-01751
Case Name:   United States v. Ahmad
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3

Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4

Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3

Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8

Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E