suad was one of them.ly, _ only me and my brother survived. at the age of 1a, she was taken captive and suffered years of sexual abuse. suad's sister and her uncle hamid's daughter are still missing. now they are determined to fight for justice for what happened to her and the family. the girls were kept at the home of is leader abu bakr al—baghdadi. it's believed they were then sold as sex slaves. al—baghdadi's widow umm hudaifa is now being held in a prison in baghdad. suad is taking her to court for her alleged past and their ordeal. i spent two hours with umm hudaifa. she admits the two missing girls did stay at her home. translation: at the time, i felt ashamed. _ how is it that women could be degraded to such an extent? i was entirely against it, but i was a helpless woman. suad insists that umm hudaifa is not innocent and she must be confronted with her crimes. suad and hamid are accusing umm hudaifaof sex trafficking and abuse. he assaulted a worker. translation: it's| al-baghdadi's wife. she's a c

suad was one of them.nfronted with her crimes. suad and hamid are accusing umm hudaifa of sex trafficking and abuse. translation: it's| al-baghdadi's wife. she�*s a criminal like him. where is my family? i can�*t find them. isn�*t it because of both of al—baghdadi and his wife? i won�*t forgive her. i will take my and other yazidis girls�* revenge. i asked umm hudaifa why she didn�*t help the girls escape. i myself couldn't leave. how was i supposed to help her? i don't deny that my husband was a criminal. i'm very sorry about what they went through, but i wish they would know that i had absolutely nothing to do with this. abu bakr al—baghdadi led is, an extremist jihadist group. this brutal organisation carried out crimes including murder, torture, kidnapping and enslavement. he was killed in a us raid in 2009. "2019. umm hudaifa says her husband was changed forever during detention at a us—run prison in 2004. translation: i've always l asked him about that change in his mental state. and he used to tell

conduct at falls squarely within 1512d, the pernicious intentionally harasses a person and therefore,suades that persom testifying in proceeding. you got cleaviation of 1512d, punishae by no more than three years in prison. when congress added 1512c2, which seems to cover that conduct. well the punishment -- you can punish that person for up to 20 years. >> there's a key difference between 1512d and c. d doesn't require the intent to obstruct. the effect of the defendant harassment action is to prevent the testimony or the production of the document. the government has not read that statute to require an actual intent to obstruct. there are certain scenarios where the government might be able to prove 1512d offense without satisfying c2. i want to be responsive to broader concern that there's smog a-- something anomalous. no matter which statute government charges under, they will be funneled through the same sentencing guidelines. the charging decision wouldn't make a difference with the extents -- sentencing range. i don't think the existence of statutory max should drive intuitions how t