Penn. Judge: Muslims Allowed To Attack People For Insulting Mohammed.....

[MMC]

Jonathon Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, reports on a disturbing case (http://jonathanturley.org/2012/02/24/pennsylvania-judge-throws-out-charge-for-harassing-atheist-while-calling-the-victim-a-doofus/) in which a state judge in Pennsylvania threw out an assault case involving a Muslim attacking an atheist for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.
Judge Mark Martin, an Iraq war veteran and a convert to Islam, threw the case out in what appears to be an invocation of Sharia law.
The incident occurred at the Mechanicsburg, Pa., Halloween parade where Ernie Perce, an atheist activist, marched as a zombie Muhammad. Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim, attacked Perce, and he was arrested by police.

Judge Martin threw the case out on the grounds that Elbayomy was obligated to attack Perce because of his culture and religion. Judge Martin stated that the First Amendment of the Constitution does not permit people to provoke other people. He also called Perce, the plaintiff in the case, a "doofus." In effect, Perce was the perpetrator of the assault, in Judge Martin's view, and Elbayomy the innocent. The Sharia law that the Muslim attacker followed trumped the First Amendment.

Words almost fail.

That Judge Martin should be removed from the bench and severely sanctioned goes almost without saying. He clearly had no business hearing the case in the first place, since he seems to carry an emotional bias. He also needs to retake a constitutional law course. Otherwise, a real can of worms has been opened up, permitting violence against people exercising free speech.....snip~

http://news.yahoo.com/penn-judge-muslims-allowed-attack-people-insulting-mohammad-210000330.html
<<<<< More Here!

I say.....:cussing:this Judge is a :douchebag: This Judge needs to be brought to Justice. :riot:
Pennsylvania Judge.....sounds like Cap's Turf. What the hell if wrong with this Judge. I notice that those on the left in Politics are kinda having to whisper about Sharia Law coming to a neighborhood near you. Obama and crew went after Oklahoma's New law Concerning Sharia Law. Yet they have nothing to say about this? Due to his Culture and Religion the Judge Cited. Think Team Obama will get to protect this Judge? Where is Holder's azz on this issue? Since he is all about Constitutional Law. I'm sorry there can be no other interpretation as to what was committed here.

Let the Rant begin! :rant:

[Peter1469]

Here is a copy of at least part of the transcript. From the National Review:

Well, having had the benefit of having spent over two-and-a-half years in a predominantly Muslim country, I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. In fact, I have a copy of the Koran here, and I would challenge you, sir, to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammed arose and walked among the dead.
[Unintelligible.] You misinterpreted things. Before you start mocking someone else’s religion you may want to find out a little bit more about it. That makes you look like a doofus.
And Mr. Thomas [Elbayomi's defense lawyer] is correct. In many other Muslim speaking countries – excuse me, in many Arabic speaking countries – call it “Muslim” – something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society, in fact, it could be punishable by death, and it frequently is, in their society.
Here in our society, we have a constitution that gives us many rights, specifically, First Amendment rights. It’s unfortunate that some people use the First Amendment to deliberately provoke others. I don’t think that’s what our forefathers really intended. I think our forefathers intended that we use the First Amendment so that we can speak our mind, not to piss off other people and other cultures, which is what you did.
I don’t think you’re aware, sir, there’s a big difference between how Americans practice Christianity – uh, I understand you’re an atheist. But, see, Islam is not just a religion, it’s their culture, their culture. It’s their very essence, their very being. They pray five times a day towards Mecca. To be a good Muslim, before you die, you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca unless you are otherwise told you cannot because you are too ill, too elderly, whatever. But you must make the attempt.
Their greetings, “Salaam alaikum,” “Alaikum wa-salaam,” “May God be with you.” Whenever — it is very common — their language, when they’re speaking to each other, it’s very common for them to say, uh, “Allah willing, this will happen.” It is — they are so immersed in it.
Then what you have done is you’ve completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very, very, very offensive. I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive. [Unintelligble] aside was very offensive.
But you have that right, but you’re way outside your bounds on First Amendment rights.
This is what — as I said, I spent half my years altogether living in other countries. When we go to other countries, it’s not uncommon for people to refer to us as “ugly Americans.” This is why we are referred to as “ugly Americans,” because we’re so concerned about our own rights we don’t care about other people’s rights. As long as we get our say, but we don’t care about the other people’s say.
All that aside I’ve got here basically — I don’t want to say, “He said, she said.” But I’ve got two sides of the story that are in conflict with each other. I understand — I’ve been at a Halloween parade, I understand how noisy it can be, how difficult it can be to get a [unintelligible]. I can’t believe that, if there was this kind of conflict going on in the middle of the street, that somebody didn’t step forward sooner to try and intervene — that the police officer on a bicycle didn’t stop and say, “Hey, let’s break this up.”
[Unintelligible]. You got a witness.
[Unintelligible response. Judge Martin then continues:]
The preponderance of, excuse me, the burden of proof is that the defendant — it must be proven that the defendant did with the intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person — The Commonwealth, whether there was conflict or not — and, yes, he should be took [sic] putting his hands on you. I don’t know — I have your story he did and his story that he did not.
But another part of the element [of the offense charged] is, as Mr. Thomas [the defense lawyer] said, was — “Was the defendant’s intent to harass, annoy or alarm — or was it his intent to try to have the offensive situation negated?”
If his intent was to harass, annoy or alarm, I think there would have been a little bit more of an altercation. Something more substantial as far as testimony going on that there was a conflict. Because there is not, it is not proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that this defendant is guilty of harassment. Therefore I am going to dismiss the charge.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291921/sharia-court-pennsylvania-transcript-andrew-c-mccarthy

Basically the judge is saying that because the defendant's culture compels him to defend Mohammad, it is not a crime to do so. The judge should be impeached.

[Mister D]

What the heck is an "atheist activist"?

Anyway, this is quite a disturbing story. It's all over the news sites too.

[MMC]

Yeah and like at the end of the piece. They said the Atheists also had a guy dressed as a Zombie-Pope. Didnt see any Catholics come out and start whooping some azz on people. Bet Holder is aware now. Everyone at work was talking about this.

I am surprised that some atheists didnt jump this Muslim. Leave him splattered all over the ground. this Judge can attempt to defend himself all he wants. The people of Pennsylvania need to stand up and put this guy out to pasture. This Judge took an oath to Uphold the Constitution and he just threw it right into everyones face!

[Conley]

Pennsylvania judges are on quite a roll, first we had Sandusky's buddy, then the woman who threw out her traffic tickets, and now this fine piece of work.

[Mister D]

Pennsylvania judges are on quite a roll, first we had Sandusky's buddy, then the woman who threw out her traffic tickets, and now this fine piece of work.

Yeah, that's true. PA seems to be in the spotlight recently.

[Peter1469]

What the heck is an "atheist activist"?

Anyway, this is quite a disturbing story. It's all over the news sites too.

An atheist activist is someone who is not content with their own beliefs, but they have to publicly mock religious belief. They are social autistics.

[Mister D]

An atheist activist is someone who is not content with their own beliefs, but they have to publicly mock religious belief. They are social autistics.

Seems like they feel compelled to proselytize however clumsily they go might go about it.

[MMC]

Lets hope they burn this Judge ASAP. They need to get on top of this. I don't think any SC Judge would go for this.