Judge Dismisses Case, Muslim Vs. Zombie Muhammed

Submitted by: CrakrJak 5 years ago in

Judge Mark Martin, instead of serving justice scolds a crime victim for insulting Islam.
There are 91 comments:
Male 52
A man dresses up as a KKK member or a Nazi and walks through a neighborhood with at least some black people. He is assaulted and it goes to court.
We don`t know what the verdict is, what evidence was used, what legal arguments were made, OR how the judge scolded the assaulter for his actions.
All we know is that the judge also told the victim why his actions were offensive, and why common sense told him his costume might get a reaction. He does not say that the reaction was justified. He does not say that the reaction should be expected because black people are violent, or that the criminal is let off the hook because the victim had it coming. He simply says: This is why what you did is offensive, and here`s why it was more offensive than you may have realized.
0
Reply
Male 52
Dead-Kittens: No, it wouldn`t. The actual holding here had nothing to do with what we`re all arguing about, and there`s no claim he didn`t follow the law. All the recording shows it that at some point in the trial the Judge explains why the victim`s actions were offensive. Here`s an analogy:

0
Reply
Male 1,252
I couldnt be bothered to hear more than half... (foreign) but from what I understand..wouldnt this decision also allow every dumbkid on the block to beat up their teacher for believing their answeris correct?
0
Reply
Male 438
Akabane:

Beliefs should be mocked, beliefs inform ones actions and if a persons beliefs are irrational that irrationallity should be pointed out. Religious beliefs of others affect all of us, they don`t exist in a vacuum. The religious beliefs of our world leaders, and the masses have a direct effect on all of us.
0
Reply
Male 438
CrakrJak:

"You`re bemoaning that everyone cannot be treated equally in all respects and approving of the fact that the judge gave "special consideration" to the defendant ?"

Really!!!!!????? Really???? Your reading comprehension really needs to improve OR you are being intentionally dishonest. Go back to my first post where I called the judge a moron. I do not aggree with the judge BECAUSE of the special consideration he gave the defendant and especially because that consideration was based on religion, ANY religion. Try reading what I write instead of assuming you know what I think.
0
Reply
Male 171
Well said incubus. I hate you all. Dumbasses...
0
Reply
Male 977
I can`t wait until everyone dies. That is going to be GREAT.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]It seems to me that you are for "special considerations", not equality.[/quote]

Except with gay marriage people aren`t limited to marrying someone of the opposite sex, and that IS truly equal.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Marriage has been recognized as 1 man + 1 woman since before America was even a country[/quote]

Except polygamy was standard practice in Europe long before America was a country
0
Reply
Male 1,093
@RobboPatton So I have the freedom to dress like a cop and mess with people right? That`s my right? Freedom of speech is limited, and if it wasn`t, we would have utmost chaos. Besides, do you have no shame to mock one person`s belief? Kinda hypocritical to mock someone, and defend someone, then demand equality for everyone.
0
Reply
Male 2,424
Amazing how so many of you are willing to backhand one faith, but side with the belief that the Muslims are in a "higher" class and their violence should be "understood" and cow-towed to.

This is the FREE world, they can force that poo in their own nations but this is one where you can dress as gay jesus one day, and juggling muhamed the next. Why? Because a lot of people died to give you that drating freedom you goddamn ingrates.

You sell your freedom at your own peril.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Otto: You`re bemoaning that everyone cannot be treated equally in all respects and approving of the fact that the judge gave "special consideration" to the defendant ?

Marriage has been recognized as 1 man + 1 woman since before America was even a country, no one had a problem with that until recently. It seems to me that you are for "special considerations", not equality.
0
Reply
Male 438
There are religions that recognize gay marriage so the gov`t favoring one religious view over another is discriminatory and by doing so is promoting that religious viewpoint. I don`t care if the gov`t stops recognizing marriage altogether, as long as it treats people equally.
0
Reply
Male 438
"But you seem to approve this judge`s complicity of fear in his decision."

Where have I said anywhere or implied that I approve of the judges decision? Neutrality has everything to do with this case, the judge basically was saying the perp acted because he was a Muslim and offended, the judge gave special consideration to him on that fact.

As for the red herrings you threw out in your second point, the law is to treat everyone equally under the law as far as race, sex, religious beliefs...either you aree with that or you don`t. You obviously think the gov`t is right to legislate the morality of homosexuality, and whither you admit it or not the question of morality regarding homosexuality is based on religion. If religious belief is taken out of the debate there is no rational reason not to allow gay marriage. cont.
0
Reply
Male 2,384
fuc/king religion
0
Reply
Male 17,512
markust: [quote]There is no way I would dress up as Muhammed. I value my life too much.[/quote]

Then the muslims have scared you into complicity and that means they`ve won. I doubt you would let a Christian(s) scare you like that.

Otto: But you seem to approve this judge`s complicity of fear in his decision. Neutrality has nothing to do with this case, equal treatment under the law does. In this case the judge did not apply the law, he applied his opinion.

If marriage is redefined, then "Equal treatment" would have to necessarily have to spread to polygamy, communal marriage, and worse.

There are many necessary inequalities, in the law, for the good of our society. Most notably, you can`t vote until your 18, can`t drink until you`re 21, can`t retire with full SS benefits until 62, men can`t stop their wives from having an abortion, Parents aren`t notified that their daughters had an abortion, etc.
0
Reply
Male 438
CrakrJak: "I haven`t promoted "moral legislation", I have promoted the status quo, the two are different."

You have promoted the gov`t legislating bedroom activity between 2 consenting adults. Status quo was promoted by slave states. Status quo was argued by those against woman`s sufferage. I don`t find `status quo` to be a valid arguement.
0
Reply
Male 438
CrakrJak:

Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear. - Thomas Jefferson

I could post a bunch more, the point is gov`t should be completely neutral, if you think your religion should be supported by the gov`t, you are no better than the judge in this case.

0
Reply
Male 52
So what exactly did this Judge do that was wrong? The video starts off by saying that it is in not claiming the judge made the incorrect decision about whether the harasser was guilty. So, all we know is that he spent part of his verdict(the part we heard) explaining how the alleged victim`s actions were offensive. If anyone goes around being obnoxious (in the judge`s opinion) but legal, the judge is free to say so as long as the verdict follows the law. I would say there is a decent chance that to elicit a speech like this, the alleged victim probably spent at least some of the trial being offensive or showing ignorance about what he did. Constitutional freedom to say something is by no means the freedom to not be told you`re a dick for saying it. Since someone has the records of this case, post the part where the judge ignores evidence, if he does. If that happened it`s an easy appeal. But it probably didn`t.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]The constitution wasn`t designed for immoral people, it was designed to limit the governments powers, not it`s people.[/quote]

1)Again you`re conflating morality with conformity
2)Actually yes it was designed to limit people`s as well. Originally Senators were appointed by state governments NOT by the people. The reasons for this arrangement was given in Federalist #10 to avoid "tyranny of the majority".
0
Reply
Male 4,854
A few years back when my hair was long I dressed up as an easily recognizable Kurt Cobain. Although it would have been funny to many people I didn`t go full-gunshot-wound-Kurt because being in Seattle I didn`t want to hurt any real fans. Unless this guy lives in an isolation booth he knew his costume would offend people and could cause the reaction he got or worse. He asked for it. There is no way I would dress up as Muhammed. I value my life too much. Not defending the attacker here.
0
Reply
Male 1,093
You know, we really dont have freedom of speech in reality, because if we did, i want you to go to a crowded movie theater and scream "fire!" Though I would not kill someone for such an insult, there is someone that would. Be smart, and dont do stupid things. very simple.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Otto: I haven`t promoted "moral legislation", I have promoted the status quo, the two are different.

Change for changes sake is not a good thing, one person`s progress is another`s degrees.

We should be an ethical and moral people, but that doesn`t include taking the law into our own hands, be that individually or in a mob. It is apparent from the recent `arab spring`, throughout the middle east, that most muslims live by vigilantism and mob justice. Personally I find that astounding, and don`t want America to turn into that.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Otto: [quote]I have also seen you argue that moral teachings of your religion should be incorporated in law..[/quote]

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." - Benjamin Franklin

"What constitutes the bulwark of our own liberty and independence? It is not... the guns of our war steamers, or the strength of our gallant and disciplined army... our reliance is in the love of liberty which God has planted in our bosoms." - Abraham Lincoln

The constitution wasn`t designed for immoral people, it was designed to limit the governments powers, not it`s people.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
akabane: Getting offended is one thing, and I agree that both the zombie Pope and zombie mohammed were tasteless costumes, attacking someone in a Halloween parade is quite another.

Cajun: Apparently my stalker is trying to offend and provoke people as well, just ignore them.
0
Reply
Male 137
I didn`t know Mark Martin was a judge too! GO #55!!!
0
Reply
Male 21
@Cajun247 not doing anything wrong /rude mean to anyone else... Impersonation is the sincerest form of flattery.

And do you also see the fallacy in telling someone not to express themselves by mimicking, while in the very next post defending someone for expressing themselves, by mimicking in a very offensive way...
0
Reply
Male 438
"By the way, I`m noting that no atheists, looking at Davymid here, are giving any credit my way for defending one of their own."

I don`t see it as you are defending `one of my own`, an atheist is just one that answers the question `do you believe in god(s)` with `no`, as such there are plenty of atheists I disagree with and do not identify with them except in regard to that one question. I see it as you defending the 1st Amendment, for that I applaud you, but I have also seen you argue that moral teachings of your religion should be incorporated in law and support politicians who think the same, so that begs the question of whither you are really defending our Constitutional rights or attacking the violence in the name of Islam.
0
Reply
Male 438
"It`s called empathy CrakrJak. Let me remind you of what that is, because it`s not an American Law, but a moral one."

You are right it is not an American Law so the judge had no real reason to mention it, there was no legal point to his 10 minute tirade. So what if the Muslims feelings got hurt, too bad, he has no right to physically attack someone because he thinks his invisible friend was offended.

What I find humerous is all these religious people that that believe in an all powereful god(s) but for some reason said god(s) are not able to take care of the offenders themselves, they need their followers to step in for them.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]We all have the right to be provoking, disgusting, and tasteless.[/quote]

So long as it`s in the proper forum, yes. But I do consider this parade to be the proper forum and the muslim in question was absolutely out of line. Rather than attacking him, he could`ve jeered instead.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@CrakrJak impersonator
0
Reply
Male 1,093
@CrakrJakk, idk why you still log in as that name?

@CrakrJak I get just as offended with zombie jesus and zombie moses, and even zombie ghandi. Honestly, it isn`t right to make fun of the dead, no matter who they are. If they were a terrible person, we should be grateful that we werent that person, or be depressed that such a person did such things, and that s/he won`t see good nor have good said about them.
0
Reply
Male 228
Gotta Agree with CrakrJakk here, rare as that is. You don`t hit people over things they say, period. At least, you don`t if you want to call yourself a man.
0
Reply
Male 21
0
Reply
Male 1,754
Listed under things I don`t give a poo about. NEXT!
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"If the zombie guy was empathetic, then he wouldn`t have dressed as a zombie Muhammed."

Correct. That wasn`t your original statement though. The judge was not trying to point out a lack of empathy, he was suggesting US laws imply the victim MUST be empathetic. They simply do not. Perhaps you don`t know many american`s, but we are not a largely empathetic nation. This judge seems to feel he alone can change this, but the reality is, most of us don`t feel it`s a requirement to consider strangers emotions. Pity that however much you please, but it`s very much a reality and few people I have ever met here will state "I acknowledge the EMOTIONAL ramifications this word or action may have on any living person who will hear or view it."

Like most americans, I don`t put stock into empathy. Neither do our laws.
0
Reply
Male 83
[quote]please do not put your own statements in bracketed quotes[/quote]

I`m not trying to confuse people, I just wanted to point out that there are levels of offense, some things are more offensive than others. How much it offends, depends on how aware you are of the probable consequences.
0
Reply
Male 83
CrakrJak, please don`t say "their" empathy as though all Muslims are the same. I know many many Muslims who are very empathetic (I`m currently living in Indonesia), even to the point where if they are about to eat and you don`t have food, they will ask permission to eat first, because you could be hungry. Or in many cases would invite you to eat with them. I remember one time, travelling to a place in Indonesia and finding the hostel we wanted to stay in closed. It was late and we were tired, and didn`t know where to go. Suddenly this Muslim guy shows up, hears of our situation and offers us a place to sleep in his family home.

Your examples of Muslims (who obviously aren`t following Islam) who show no empathy, can be drawn from all types of people from various backgrounds, so It`s not right just to focus on one group.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Sam1002: It was just a Halloween costume and a really bad looking one at that. Empathy ? Please tell me where their empathy is when they are about to execute a Christian pastor in Iran ? Or empathy for the Coptic Christians who are being murdered and their churches burned down in Egypt ? I could on and on with tons of examples of muslim "empathy".

Empathy is earned, not demanded at sword point.

[quote]or a black guy attacked someone in a Ku Klux Klan outfit, or a Jew attacked a guy in a nazi outfit[/quote]

Btw, please do not put your own statements in bracketed [quotes] and leave mine in normal text, it can really confuse people here.

That`s not the same thing as a zombie costume on Halloween and you know it. A zombie Michael Jackson or a zombie Moses would be proper comparisons.
0
Reply
Male 2,345
more anti-muslim bullcrap.

0
Reply
Male 83
Owh and by the way CrakrJak, you forgot to include this in your post to evan:

"I seriously doubt that if a Catholic attacked a zombie Pope, or if an atheist attacked a zombie Darwin, [quote]or a black guy attacked someone in a Ku Klux Klan outfit, or a Jew attacked a guy in a nazi outfit[/quote] that any judge would give them a dismissal, the way this one did, and on top of that heap scorn on the victim"

After all, surely being in a Ku Klux Klan outfit is just as offensive as a zombie darwin. Isn`t it?
0
Reply
Male 83
[quote]Perhaps you should actually read what was said.[/quote]

If the zombie guy was empathetic, then he wouldn`t have dressed as a zombie Muhammed.
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"The judge was just pointing out that this guy has no empathy in this case."

There is a 36 minute video with captions.

Perhaps you should actually read what was said.
0
Reply
Male 83
It`s called empathy CrakrJak. Let me remind you of what that is, because it`s not an American Law, but a moral one. So empathy is the capacity to be able to recognise the possible feelings of others. Bearing this in mind, with empathy involved, you have the possiblity of being aware of the consequences formed by your actions, before you follow through with them.

My point, therefore CrakrJak, is that as a person who is aware that Muhammed shouldn`t be depicted in any form in Islam, and it`s highly likely to cause offence and possibly hurt someone`s feelings, I would not wear a zombie Muhammed costume. Not because I`m afraid, but because I`m aware of the probable consequences of my actions (no, not violence CrakrJak but the effect on their feelings)

The judge was just pointing out that this guy has no empathy in this case.

However, as a practicing Christian, I`m sure you are well aware of how to be empathetic towards people CrakrJak.
0
Reply
Male 1,268
BTW, not saying you SHOULD be dumb or anything. Just that, between you, I, and the guy who went to law school, I`d really hope the guy who went to law school would be smarter than either of us. Yet somehow he`s a fraking dumb punk who was saddened by the way we treated muslims in iraq so he has a stick up his butt about it.

I do think that`s the bigger story here. I`d love to know what this guy did in Iraq where he comes back to convert to Islam. REALLY?
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"By the way, I`m noting that no atheists, looking at Davymid here, are giving any credit my way for defending one of their own."

Only because atheists rarely identify with other atheists to conclude "that guy is one of my people." We don`t have people. That`s the whole reason most atheists dislike the idea of religion far more than the idea of God. "how many wars did your religion start because your people didn`t like their people." so on and so forth.

Your religious identification has no bearing on whether or not you should or shouldn`t be sticking up for the first amendment. So nah, props really aren`t in order. You`re just smarter than the judge for some ridiculous reason.
0
Reply
Male 1,089
9 mins? wtf iab???
0
Reply
Male 17,512
By the way, I`m noting that no atheists, looking at Davymid here, are giving any credit my way for defending one of their own.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
evan: I seriously doubt that if a Catholic attacked a zombie Pope, or if an atheist attacked a zombie Darwin, that any judge would give them a dismissal, the way this one did, and on top of that heap scorn on the victim.

There should be no "lower bar" for any group, it`s not constitutional.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Sam1002: [quote]It`s about being sensitive to the subject. The guy is well aware that Muhammad shouldn`t be depicted in any form...[/quote]

Says who ? Where does it say in American law that mohammed can`t be depicted in any form ? Why should we have to walk on eggshells around muslims ? Is it fear of their potential for violence that motivates your timidity ?

It`s that sort of cowardice, that fear, that makes judges, like this one, complicit to injustice. Any judge that allows injustice like this should be disbarred and removed from office.
0
Reply
Male 559
Fascinating... I asked my husband, a professor of Constitutional Law, about this after seeing it. He said that intentional infliction of distress has a lower bar for the First Amendment pass. Thus, the guy dressed as Zombie Muhammad offers extenuating circumstances to the attacker. It is possible that the Magistrate was attempting to explain to ZM that his overtly offensive attire is not only frowned on, (ie: should not continue) but that he will do what he can to make ZM understand what it would be like to be in the attacker`s shoes. I didn`t hear the entire verdict, and what we saw here was clearly cut from a larger speech that may very well include a social consciousness raising component for the attacker.

In short, " What it really comes down to is the first amendment. We all have the right to be provoking, disgusting, and tasteless." -- Two out of three ain`t bad.
0
Reply
Male 83
@CrakrJak It`s about being sensitive to the subject. The guy is well aware that Muhammad shouldn`t be depicted in any form, so he is trying to incite a response on a sensitive subject. Zombie Darwin cannot be used as a comparison.

"Muslims would call that prejudice, because now you are presupposing violence from a minority group."

If you re-read my comment I said "..cause some kind of reaction.." this is not necessarily a violent one or even physical one.

"I`m pretty sure some non-nice individual will make a zombie Whitney Houston outfit for next Halloween and I`m pretty sure people will call that tasteless and disgusting, but I doubt that person will be physically attacked for it."

That depends. I`m sure the reaction will be very different if a close family member saw it, as it becomes more sensitive to them.

But as you say, everyone has a right to do what they please, even if they don’t care about the c
0
Reply
Male 15,187
In a bit to appease protesters in Afghanistan, perhaps NATO will begin distributing copies of the Koran to schools. Apparently they have a container full of slightly fire damaged books.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
*something about Muslims and Islam being inherently evil. Makes small bet with self on submitter*

Crakrjak. Yep. Nailed it before checking the submitter.

Tomorrow we should post something on how Israel is always great and the Palestinians are all terrorists (5Cats). Then run a story about how THIS time it`s a real UFO (Madest).

F*ck this, I`m off to bed. Early flight.
0
Reply
Male 1,745
what will happen if someone dresses up as KKK for fun? a nazi? or your mother??? if you make it your duty to offend people as the method to teach them they shouldn`t be offended, some *one* may not agree.
0
Reply
Male 234
I`m christian and I refer to easter as zombie jesus day. Get over it.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Sam1002: I`m pretty sure if I went to the next Halloween parade as zombie Darwin, that I wouldn`t be attacked by an atheist.

[quote]common sense says that it`s highly likely you will cause some kind of reaction from a Muslim for doing what he did.[/quote]

Muslims would call that prejudice, because now you are presupposing violence from a minority group.

I`m pretty sure some non-nice individual will make a zombie Whitney Houston outfit for next Halloween and I`m pretty sure people will call that tasteless and disgusting, but I doubt that person will be physically attacked for it.

What it really comes down to is the first amendment. We all have the right to be provoking, disgusting, and tasteless.

Here at IAB I`ve had some pretty disgusting comments hurled my direction, but I`d never get violent over it, or threaten someone`s life.

If you let someone get under your skin to that point, you`ve let them win.
0
Reply
Male 8
Baalthazaq, I disagree with you. I learned a saying as a young child when I told my parents I was provoked. "sticks and stones can break your bones but words.........."

In this country we have a right to dress as a zombie mohammed. If a muslim finds this offensive then leave the festivities and start your own parade. The muslim mans actions were absolutely wrong. The mohammed zombie may be tasteless, but so are many things in life. Personally I found it humorous. I will even go so far to say that I think mohammed was a cornhole. I love how easily those of muslim faith are offended, get a grip and loosen up. Mohammed was just another man with delusions of grandeur like so many before and after.
0
Reply
Male 3,310
The US Constitution gives people the right to be arseholes. If you explore that right, you may be an arsehole. But that is not and should never be something punishable by law. I don`t think that`s what played a part here. I think the judge had a he said, shiate said case and ruled the best he could.

That being said, what the magistrate said was what I just said. We have the right to be arseholes. I don`t know what kind of a mind wants to make fun of belief systems they don`t subscribe to, but it`s legal. Unless this guy was confronting a specific individual and challenging them with what could be considered "fighting words" (*cringes*), it should be ok.

It`s just creepy to want to dress in a zombie Muhammad costume.

I think the judge was making a ruling about the "attack" and that there wasn`t enough evidence to take side. Which might have been the best choice from a legal standpoint. This is obviously a biased post and gives al
0
Reply
Male 1,836
I would be filing the charges again in a real court along with charges against the magistrate.
0
Reply
Male 2,214
I`m a Jew. If you want to wear a nazi uniform,go ahead. I will pity you.I won`t attack you,because you mean nothing to me. I might even laugh.
0
Reply
Male 83
I`m sure the guy obviously knows that the costume will provoke Muslims, just as much as wearing a Hitler costume would provoke Jews, or wearing a KKK costume would provoke black people. It`s this "I have a right (but lack empathy) to wear any costume I like" mentality, that causes things like this to happen. The guy is an activist atheist, and likely purposefully wanted to antagonise Muslims, hence the dressing down from the judge.

I know it`s not right that the Muslim should attack him for it, but like Scuzoid said, common sense says that it`s highly likely you will cause some kind of reaction from a Muslim for doing what he did. Personally I don’t know if antagonising with intent can be taken into consideration when passing a sentence. So I’m in the middle here.
0
Reply
Male 718
Figures. what a HORRIBLE judge. i hope he gets fired from being a judge, or whatever they gotta do to get his ass out of there.
0
Reply
Male 1,737
Pretty sure Jews would say it`s also their culture, since they have been living it for, oh, a few thousand years longer than any other religion. So by his standards all Jew jokes would have to go, I think a few Jews might have a few things to say about that. Of course that`s not fair, their culture has a sense of humor.

He sounds like he himself is a Muslim, oh, he says he is. So as long as the Judge has the same beliefs he can let fellow members off, da faq is that.

As for the founding fathers, they them selfs came from Christian backgrounds, they were raised/forced into it. Hense the leaving to seek religious freedom. The freedom to think and believe what you want. They knew better than to let the two mix, and they shouldn`t. . There`s too many variations to squabble over, it`s fighting two different fights at once. One for religion and the other the actual issue at hand, whatever it may be.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
patchouly: The victim here was an atheist in a Halloween costume, there was also a zombie pope in the same groups parade.

Of course, no Catholics attacked the zombie pope.

The local ABC TV Station did a report
Here
0
Reply
Male 2,214
Free speech? Where? Bush outlawed the constitution.
In America, there is no justice,just law.
Popular speech rarely needs protection.
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"Judge Mark Martin requires evidence in case"

Please, minor assaults rarely require anything more than testimony from both parties and the police. Common sense says a drunk guy starts the assault 9 times out of 10 when the other guy is sober. Common sense says a muslim starts the assault 9 times out of 10 when the other guy is wearing a zombie muhammed costume. If mister zombie muhammed ended up with a broken rib, muslim should pay for the medical/time off work. If mister zombie muhammed ended up with a fat lip, meh, restraining order.

You don`t need "evidence" when the crime and consequences can be ignored after a month.
0
Reply
Male 519
Wow, talk about a bias judge. I`ve seen judges that were getting kickbacks from the jails that were less obvious than that guy.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
[quote] There was a videotape that corroborates the assault (it does not depict the assault but it shows there was a sudden disturbance), and a police officer would have testified that Elbayomy admitted attacking Perce [/quote]
Oh good! Now we have some facts.

Baal:
[quote]Judge Mark Martin requires evidence in case, and doesn`t simply side against Muslims in absence of evidence.
[/quote]
Well in this case there was evidence. So... no.

If we can accept that the defendant did, in fact, harass/assault this guy, then he should be prosecuted. Simple as that.

You, and this muslim judge, might be put off by the fact that he wanted to appear offensive, but he was well within his rights to wear that costume.

So I`m gonna side against the judge on this one.

Also, I wouldn`t be surprised if this caused a sh*tstorm during the next few days.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
If this was guy who...
1)...knowingly and willingly walked into a neighborhood with this costume,...
2)...he also knew that neighborhood in question was predominantly Muslim, and...
3)...it was not part of any demonstration,
I would wholeheartedly agree with this judge. But NONE of this criteria was SATISFIED! It was Halloween and the streets are filled with people of MANY faiths most likely Christian.
0
Reply
Male 438
I didn`t realize the judge was a Muslim as well, I think getting a bunch of friends together and dressing everyone up as Zombie Muhammed to spend a day in the gallery of his court would be amusing.
0
Reply
Male 248
The judge should be fired and the Muslim immigrant deported.
0
Reply
Male 997
For those who don`t want to watch a long video but read for half a minute and read directly what the judge says. Transcript of what the judge said
0
Reply
Male 626
I don`t understand why it`s a BFD when a Muslim thinks that their religion should be incorporated in our government, but when a Christian says the same thing (like half of the Republican presidential candidates), it`s no problem and a lot of people agree with them.
0
Reply
Female 157
People get pissed off so easily. I`m Christian and people make fun of Jesus on I-am-Bored all the time. I`m not going to attack anybody.
0
Reply
Female 157
OH man the what ifs are endless. It`s kind of fun. What if it was a Zombie Lady Gaga...do you think a fan would have attacked him?
0
Reply
Female 157
If it was a guy dressed as a zombie Buddha do you think a Buddhist spectator would have attacked the guy? What if it was a guy dressed as a Zombie Obam a? Do you think the secret serv ice would have attacked the guy?
0
Reply
Male 365
That was really badly edited... the sound was cut in the middle of virtually every sentence.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
"CrakrJak posted it? It will be brainwashed, right wing, hillbilly drivel. I`ll pass."

Thanks for that patchouly. Now we know that you are an ignorant bigot, which is useful.
0
Reply
Male 3,894
"I think the founding fathers intended..."

*sigh* I hate when people do this.
0
Reply
Male 438
The judge was a moron, the victims intention with regard to his dress is irrelevant.


All great truths begin as blasphemies.
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

0
Reply
Male 4,546
Judge Mark Martin requires evidence in case, and doesn`t simply side against Muslims in absence of evidence.

You mean persecution, not justice, if you think this case should have been handled differently based on religion, and lets face it. That`s why you think it should be handled differently.

Hatred rarely gives good grounds for justice.
0
Reply
Male 468
If people really want to be heard, they should not have a computer speak for them.
0
Reply
Male 4,162
i`ll go with the Judge on this one
0
Reply
Male 522
Turn on the CC Buiadh, it will absolutely not clear things up for you.

My condensed version:
Mr. Zombie, you were wearing an offensive costume. (He was really over long saying this). We have no evidence that the Muslim assaulted you, case dismissed.

I have to admit I disagree with the judges sentiment. Anyone should be able to say /anything/ they want. That makes it much easier to identify ignorant douchebag non-nice individuals, and then ignore them.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
Also the audio was really grainy.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
[quote]It will be brainwashed, right wing, hillbilly drivel. I`ll pass.[/quote]

Not this time. It was an atheist making fun of islime who was harassed and then scolded by the judge.

It`s a shame he didn`t defend himself in the courtroom. One would think that if your intent was to make fun of, you could anticipate how the judge might react and have a rebuttal prepared. On the other hand, it may not have been enough of a thing to make a fuss over.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
I can`t understand half of what`s said...
0
Reply
Male 4,745
CrakrJak posted it? It will be brainwashed, right wing, hillbilly drivel. I`ll pass.
0
Reply
Male 25,417
well that was interesting
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Link: Judge Dismisses Case, Muslim Vs. Zombie Muhammed [Rate Link] - Judge Mark Martin, instead of serving justice scolds a crime victim for insulting Islam.
0
Reply