Muslim attacks Athiest dressed as Mohammad, Pennsyl. Muslim Judge Sides w/ Attacker

[WhipperSnapper]

I'm sure this judge will get tossed out, either by the state's judicial system or in the next election or possibly even a recall election.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Other articles state that the judge threw the case out because of a lack of evidence. The video was grainy and not clear on what happened. The Yahoo article states that he threw it out because the Muslim defendant had some sort of obligation.

Also, other articles are stating that the judge is not a Muslim.

If this is fake I'd like to know.

 

[Sacrilege]

Other articles state that the judge threw the case out because of a lack of evidence. The video was grainy and not clear on what happened. The Yahoo article states that he threw it out because the Muslim defendant had some sort of obligation.

Also, other articles are stating that the judge is not a Muslim.

Please post links to these articles you speak of.

 

[CanOWorms]

http://volokh.com/2012/02/24/charges-dismissed-in-pennsylvania-prosecution-for-attack-on-zombie-mohammed-atheist-parader/

The judge concluded there wasn’t enough evidence to convict Elbayomy of the crime, and it’s possible that there was indeed inadequate evidence. A police officer reports that Elbayomy had admitted that he grabbed the parader and tried to grab his sign; but it’s possible that the judge found this evidence to not be credible enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, it appears that Elbayomy was prosecuted for criminal harassment, which requires an “intent to harass, annoy, or alarm,” and a mere physical attack with an attempt to grab a sign might or might not qualify, see the pen-grabbing discussion in this case. The acquittal itself might thus be justified, depending on exactly what evidence was introduced.

This blog (from a well-known conservative-leaning law professor) also has an update with a letter from the judge where he states:

(Fact: if anyone cares, I’m actually Lutheran, and have been for at least 41 years).

 

[masteryoda34]

I felt a disturbance in the forums. As if a thousand conservative posters heads exploded when they realized if they took a position on this thread they would be supporting an Atheist or Muslim.

QFT

 

[CanOWorms]

If this is fake I'd like to know.

It's more of a misunderstanding than fake. The Yahoo article is also a contributor article, not a normal news article. It states: "This story comes from the Yahoo! Contributor Network, where individuals publish their unique perspectives on some of the world’s most popular websites."

The perspective is certainly unique!

 

[janas19]

Hey everyone. You do realize that Sacrilege is trolling you. This douche bag loves to cherry pick the most extreme and fanatical examples of Islam in the media, post them in P&N, then sit back and get his jollies as people flame each other over why crazy people are crazy.

Sad.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Hey everyone. You do realize that Sacrilege is trolling you. This douche bag loves to cherry pick the most extreme and fanatical examples of Islam in the media, post them in P&N, then sit back and get his jollies as people flame each other over why crazy people are crazy.

Sad.

I know that if the judge acted on a bias then he needs to go. If he's been falsely accused then he deserves vindication. Somebody is wrong.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Fact: if anyone cares, I’m actually Lutheran, and have been for at least 41 years

Slowly puts away his Muslim beating stick

Pulls out his Lutheran stick

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Slowly puts away his Muslim beating stick

Pulls out his Lutheran stick

Beware of Minnesota!

 

[janas19]

I know that if the judge acted on a bias then he needs to go. If he's been falsely accused then he deserves vindication. Somebody is wrong.

My point is that the troll wants people to get upset and argue over these things to feed his twisted agenda. It doesn't matter if we reach a concensus on this issue or not, because he intends to keep trolling us. So it would be betters to ignore him altogether.

 

[Perknose]

I know that if the judge acted on a bias then he needs to go. If he's been falsely accused then he deserves vindication. Somebody is wrong.

Why didn't you read the article that was posted here a full 25 minute before this post of yours? Continuing to believe this BS story is beneath any reality-based observer. Here, I'll quote the relevant parts for you, Haya:

A STILL FURTHER UPDATE: A reader passed along this message that appears to be from the judge in the Zombie Mohammed case, and that I’ve also posted as a separate post:

This story certainly has legs. As you might imagine, the public is only getting the version of the story put out by the “victim” (the atheist). Many, many gross misrepresentations. Among them: I’m a Muslim, and that’s why I dismissed the harassment charge (Fact: if anyone cares, I’m actually Lutheran, and have been for at least 41 years).

I also supposedly called him and threatened to throw him in jail if he released the tapes he had made in the courtroom without my knowledge/permission (Fact: HE called ME and told me that he was ready to “go public” with the tapes and was wondering what the consequences would be; I advised him again to not disseminate the recording, and that I would consider contempt charges; he then replied that he was “willing to go to jail for (his) 1st amendment rights”- I never even uttered the word “jail” in that conversation).

He said that I kept a copy of the Quran on the bench (fact: I keep a Bible on the bench, but out of respect to people with faiths other than Christianity, I DO have a Quran on the bookcase BESIDE my bench, and am trying to acquire a Torah, Book of Mormon, Book of Confucius and any other artifacts which those with a faith might respect).

He claims that I’m biased towards Islam, apparently because he thinks I’m Muslim. In fact, those of you who know me, know that I’m an Army reservist with 27 years of service towards our country (and still serving). I’ve done one tour in Afghanistan, and two tours in Iraq, and am scheduled to return to Afghanistan for a year this summer. During my first tour in Iraq, I was ambushed once, attacked by a mob once, sniped at once, and rocketed, bombed, and mortared so many times that I honestly don’t know how many time I’ve been attacked. Presumably by Muslim insurgents. My point: if anyone SHOULD be biased towards Muslims, one would think it would be me. I’m not, however, because I personally know or have met many good, decent people who follow Islam, and I shouldn’t characterize the actions of those who tried to kill me as characterizations of all Muslims.

When I asked him why he dressed up as “Muhammad zombie,” he told me that it was because he was reflecting the Muslim belief that Muhammad rose from the dead, walked as a zombie, and then went to heaven. That was one of the reasons I tried to spend 6 whole minutes trying to explain and de-mystify Islam through my own knowledge, and in an attempt to prevent an incident like this recurring in my community. Unfortunately, the message was obviously not received in the vein that I had intended. And, in the interest of full disclosure, I did use the word “doofus,” but didn’t call him that directly; I said something akin to “ if you’re going to mock another religion or culture, you should check your facts, first- otherwise, you’ll look like a doofus.”

In short, I based my decision on the fact that the Commonwealth failed to prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that the charge was just; I didn’t doubt that an incident occurred, but I was basically presented only with the victim’s version, the defendant’s version, and a very intact Styrofoam sign that the victim was wearing and claimed that the defendant had used to choke him. There so many inconsistencies, that there was no way that I was going to find the defendant guilty.

A lesson learned here: there’s a very good reason for Rule 112 of Rules of Criminal Procedure- if someone makes an unauthorized recording in a Court not of Record, there’s no way to control how it might be manipulated later, and then passed off as the truth. We’ve received dozens upon dozens of phone calls, faxes, and e-mails. There are literally hundreds of not-so-nice posts all over the internet on at least 4 sites that have carried this story, mainly because I’ve been painted as a Muslim judge who didn’t recuse himself, and who’s trying to introduce Sharia law into Mechanicsburg.
​

http://volokh.com/2012/02/24/charge...or-attack-on-zombie-mohammed-atheist-parader/

 

[ch33zw1z]

Thanks for the update Perknose.

I still believe the guy dressed up as zombie Mohammed was well within his 1st Amendment rights. The defendant in this case, and people of the Muslim faith, need to understand how that works here in America. You cannot attack someone because you don't agree with what they're doing unless it's causing you physical harm.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Why didn't you read the article that was posted here a full 25 minute before this post of yours? Continuing to believe this BS story is beneath any reality-based observer. Here, I'll quote the relevant parts for you, Haya:

http://volokh.com/2012/02/24/charge...or-attack-on-zombie-mohammed-atheist-parader/

We went from one "truth" to the next. Obviously I read what COW posted since I responded to him. What I wanted was more information before choosing between the two versions. Now what is unreasonable about waiting for clarity before making a final judgement?

Edit-
There is some things that reality based observers should note.

1) The religion of the judge is immaterial unless he uses it to base a judgement in law.
2) We do NOT know if the attack occurred. We know that the judge said there was insufficient evidence and that may be true.
3) Here's the important thing- This is our country where people have every right to the expression of religion or lack thereof. The judge had absolutely no business lecturing the alleged victim whatsoever. If the judge was going to lecture it should have been to the supposed attacker. That should have been true if this were a zombie Jesus.

Speaking of which, suppose that this were a Southern Baptist judge (or alleged to be) and the atheists mocked Jesus? There would be weeping and gnashing of teeth about the judge pushing his religious viewpoints on someone and separation of church and state, and you know what? They would be right on the money. This thread would be a few hundred posts long by now and I believe you know it. Well this is an internet forum and double standards exist because they can and they have that right however a judge in his official capacity should not lecture another on their peaceful expression regardless of it's taste.

Christian or atheist, Muslim or Mormon have the right to peacefully express their views without a representative of the state telling them otherwise in their official capacity. There seems little question that the judge exceeded his mandate.

 

[kage69]

Nope nm, seems Perk has better info?

 

[waggy]

so we have 2 sides being cliamed. one by the judge himself and one by the so called victim.

 

[Jaskalas]

I felt a disturbance in the forums. As if a thousand conservative posters heads exploded when they realized if they took a position on this thread they would be supporting an Atheist or Muslim.

No contest, the Atheist was upholding American values. His detractors are upholding anti American values.

 

[zinfamous]

Bad as this case is, I don't see it as a significant threat to the USA. I'm sure the victim will sue and the judge will lose his seat as a result.

The atheist probably is a doofus, but the judge is wrong about the main point of law - the 1st Amendment does protect people's rights to say things that may be offensive, insulting, or sacriligeous to other cultures. Elbayomy should have gotten a proper trial for assault/battery or other appropriate charges, and the judge ought to be reprimanded for his decision and conduct in the courtroom. I don't give a damn if someone takes a shit on a Koran in Times Square, if you're a Muslim and you attack the person doing it then you deserve to go to jail if found guilty.

both of these.

But I don't think some idiot should get off scott free for intentionally insulting an extremely large class of people.

Hell, taking a shit on a Koran in Times Square, at the very least, is public lewdness/defecation, littering, whathaveyou.

(not to ignore the act of pooping on a holy book, but inciting anger and retaliation, or something)

Not to mention, idiot behavior like this does put our soldiers in danger.

 

[zinfamous]

I felt a disturbance in the forums. As if a thousand conservative posters heads exploded when they realized if they took a position on this thread they would be supporting an Atheist or Muslim.

lol.

 

[zinfamous]

http://volokh.com/2012/02/24/charges-dismissed-in-pennsylvania-prosecution-for-attack-on-zombie-mohammed-atheist-parader/



This blog (from a well-known conservative-leaning law professor) also has an update with a letter from the judge where he states:

OP: owned.

lol

 

[the DRIZZLE]

http://volokh.com/2012/02/24/charges-dismissed-in-pennsylvania-prosecution-for-attack-on-zombie-mohammed-atheist-parader/



This blog (from a well-known conservative-leaning law professor) also has an update with a letter from the judge where he states:

The judge may have had legitimate reasons for dismissing the charges. I also don't particularly care if he wanted to educate victim about Islam. However, he did state that the first Amendment does not protect making fun of other people's religions which it most certainly does. That is really the disturbing part of this case.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

both of these.

But I don't think some idiot should get off scott free for intentionally insulting an extremely large class of people.

Hell, taking a shit on a Koran in Times Square, at the very least, is public lewdness/defecation, littering, whathaveyou.

(not to ignore the act of pooping on a holy book, but inciting anger and retaliation, or something)

Not to mention, idiot behavior like this does put our soldiers in danger.

You are wrong. He has completely has the right to make fun of a religion. It's only illegal to incite violence against a third party. For example, he can't stand in Times Square and tell everyone to kill the first Muslim they see. He can insult Muslims as much as he wants and if they attack him they have committed a crime not him. You and the judge both fail to understand this.

 

[Nebor]

Judge Mark Martin, an Iraq war veteran and a convert to Islam

This whole story is BS. Namely because this has literally never happened. No one goes to a shit hole shaped by Islam, has Muslims try to kill them day in and day out and then, goes, "you know, that's quite a religion they have there, I think I'll convert!"

 

[JEDIYoda]

No one goes to a shit hole shaped by Islam, has Muslims try to kill them day in and day out and then, goes, "you know, that's quite a religion they have there, I think I'll convert!"

Exactly!!!:thumbsup:

 

[tommo123]

wonder how long until someone plans for this and carries a gun then ends up shooting the muslim that attacks him pissing on the book.