Home  »  Muslims  »  Muslim Judge Dismisses Case Of Rabid Muslim Who Admitted To Assaulting Man Dressed As Zombie Mohammad For Halloween – With Video

Muslim Judge Dismisses Case Of Rabid Muslim Who Admitted To Assaulting Man Dressed As Zombie Mohammad For Halloween – With Video



Feb 24, 2012 49 Comments ›› Toro520

Opposing Views:

The Pennsylvania State Director of American Atheists, Inc., Mr. Ernest Perce V., was assaulted by a Muslim while participating in a Halloween parade. Along with a Zombie Pope, Ernest was costumed as Zombie Muhammad. The assault was caught on video, the Muslim man admitted to his crime and charges were filed in what should have been an open-and-shut case. That’s not what happened, though.

The defendant is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form. To add insult to injury, he also testified that his 9 year old son was present, and the man said he felt he needed to show his young son that he was willing to fight for his Prophet.

The case went to trial, and as circumstances would dictate, Judge Mark Martin is also a Muslim. What transpired next was surreal. The Judge not only ruled in favor of the defendant, but called Mr. Perce a name and told him that if he were in a Muslim country, he’d be put to death. Judge Martin’s comments included,

“Having had the benefit of having spent over 2 and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. In fact I have a copy of the Koran here and I challenge you sir to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted things. Before you start mocking someone else’s religion you may want to find out a little bit more about it it makes you look like a dufus and Mr. (Defendant) is correct. In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society.

Judge Martin then offered a lesson in Islam, stating,

“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 can not because you are too ill too elderly, whatever but you must make the attempt. Their greetings wa-laikum as-Salâm (is answered by voice) may god be with you. Whenever, it’s very common when speaking to each other it’s very common for them to say uh this will happen it’s it they are so immersed in it.

Judge Martin further complicates the issue by not only abrogating the First Amendment, but completely misunderstanding it when he said,

“Then what you have done is you have completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very very very offensive. I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive. But you have that right, but you’re way outside your boundaries or first amendment rights. This is what, and I said I spent about 7 and a half years 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 are 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”

But wait, it gets worse. The Judge refused to allow the video into evidence, and then said,

“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.”

And,

“The preponderance of, excuse me, the burden of proof… “

And,

“…he has not proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that this defendant is guilty of harassment, therefore I am going to dismiss the charge”

The Judge neglected to address the fact that the ignorance of the law does not justify an assault and that it was the responsibility of the defendant to familiarize himself with our laws. This is to say nothing of the judge counseling the defendant that it is also not acceptable for him to teach his children that it is acceptable to use violence in the defense of religious beliefs. Instead, the judge gives Mr. Perce a lesson in Sharia law and drones on about the Muslim faith, inform everyone in the court room how strongly he embraces Islam, that the first amendment does not allow anyone ” to piss off other people and other cultures” and he was also insulted by Mr. Perce’s portrayal of Mohammed and the sign he carried.

This is a travesty. Not only did Judge Martin completely ignore video evidence, but a Police Officer who was at the scene also testified on Mr. Perce’s behalf, to which the Judge also dismissed by saying the officer didn’t give an accurate account or doesn’t give it any weight.

Needless to say, this is totally, completely and unequivocally unacceptable. That a Muslim immigrant can assault a United States citizen in defense of his religious beliefs and walk away a free man, while the victim is chastised and insulted by a Muslim judge who then blamed the victim for the crime committed against him is a horrible abrogation.

This reeks of those cases we used to read about where a woman is blamed for her own rape because she “was asking for it” by virtue of the clothing she chose to wear, and then having the Judge set the rapist free.

I can promise you this, you have not heard the last of this issue. Not by a long shot.


  • Common Sense

    No muslims in our military.
    No muslims in our government(s).
    No muslims in our judiciary.
    No muslims in the USA…period.

  • crankyfranky

    Pray that the mooooooslims do something to wake and unite non moooooooslims around the world.  Humanity has been taking their crazy shit to long and it has got to come to an end and soon. We all grow weaker everyday. 

  • Dr Jerry

    I hope now that a radical muslim attacks me for my Christian stand!  I now know that my government is siding with the islamist and aligned against me and my Christian faith.  Therefore, I must protect myself!  Which I intend to do vigorously…mark my words…everyone!

    I know the victim, in this case, proports to be an atheist…that is a religious system in and of itself…this muslim judge sided against the religious system of all atheists…and for the religious system of all muslims…Therefore, I must assume, and rightfully so, that the same judge, the same court system, and the same governmental administration that currently “rules” our country by fiat…will come down on the same side against me and my religious system of Christianity…

    I will not surrender to islam…I will never live under Shariah Law…I will never allow the females in my family to have their genatalia mutilated…I will never pay the jizya…I will fight…I may die, but I will fight…beginning right now if need be.

    Beware muslims what bull you fool with…some of we bulls intend to give you-all the horn!

    • Frank R.

      Atheism is not a religious system, it does not teach dogma, it does not teach anything, it only states that a person does not believe in a god.

    • Dr Jerry

      Obviously you have missed the point of my posting.  However, the American College Dictionary, Text Edition, published by Harper and Brothers Publishers 1953, on page 1024, as the 6th point of the definition of “Religion” states: “A point or matter of conscience: to make a religion out of something.” 

      Atheism is a religious system just like socialism, communism, and marxism…those who follow those beliefs, decicate themselves to such, do so “religiously.”  Teaching their doctrine and dogma to illicit followers and converts.  So call it whatever you like…it is a religion…where the worship of its followers is conducted at the altar of the non-god…whoever or whatever that may be.

      But, that was not the reason for my posting.  I responded to the above article to let anyone who read my writing know…I am not going to submit to muslim dictum…not today, not tomorrow, not any day!  I shall protect my family, my friends, and my self from its encroaching cancor…to the death!

      You can focus on the atheism proponderance if you choose…and therein lies the problem with our national demise…the absolute wrong focus on nearly every social and national issue.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

      But sir I think a lot of people would view the things that you stated in your first comment an American version of Muslim intolerance.  Here in America the Evangelical movement has pushed hard to create a nominal theocracy where the actions of others are judged against their interpretations of scripture.  This is being propagandized by the repeated use of the historical falsehood that America is a “Christian nation.”  A little research will show that many Christians are behaving the same as these Muslims do in their countries.  We not only have freedom _OF_ religion, but also freedom _FROM_ religion.  As for atheism, it is not a religion, it is a point of view.  It is not an organization, and does not have a creed or established norms.  One atheist has opinions which may differ from another atheist.  This is unlike organized Christian religions who insist upon their man-made creeds being followed despite their lack of Biblical support (such as Trinitarianism, Papal supremacy, and replacement theology, to mention but a few).  If one disagrees with their church they are condemned to hell, or defrocked.  Not so an atheist because there is no organization to which one belongs.  How you are unable to recognize this is puzzling.  It’s the same with Evolutionary views – some Evangelicals wrongly call it a religion too.

    • Dr Jerry

      I am not certain that my entertaining a conversation with a person who uses the screen name “Shipoopi” is worth my time nor effort.  However, after reading all of your reply postings to this issue, there are a few things that I think must be stated.

      1.  You question my credentials.  Most of the people who post on this site know of my credentials or know me personally, including Mr. Dollard.  However, I am setting in my office this morning looking across the room at my framed 14 x 20 earned Doctor Of Exegetical Theology Diploma from an accredited Mid-Western University…I am also looking at my 12 x 14 Doctor of Divinity Diploma…honorarily given to me for my years of work in my field.  There are numerous other diplomas and certificates covering my college and working years…with 23 years of law enforcement, 25 years as a Senior Pastor, 16 years as President of Christian School, a licensed elementary teacher, and a Disabled Veteran with 13 years of service in the United States Army and Reserve and as the Honor Graduate of a State Military Academy and Recipiant of the Erickson Trophy…my crdentials speak for themselves.

      2.  You faliaciously accuse all Christians of “The Crusades” and the “Inquisition.”  Those two events were conducted by the Roman Catholic Church…guided by the Papacy and not by “Christians.” The State Church has never represented Christianity…it has only represented itself and its greedful deisres.

      3.  You also falsely state that the Constitution grants “Freedom from Religion” not “Freedom of Religion.”  The First Amendment clearly states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”  There is not now, nor has there ever been a document, at the Federal level, that states your case.  There are now and have always been, documents at the Federal level, stating that the United States of America is a nation where we can exersice the “Freedom of Religion” without interference from the government.  Not one time is there a statement in any of the Federalist Papers (also setting on a shelf here in my vast office library) that states any “Freedom from religion” but, often states our ”Freedom of religion.”

      4.  Also, note that this website is filled with warriors, of which I have been and continue to be one.  Now, while liberal progressives, and worthless cowards may try to dictate that any person who claims to be a Christian must shun any element of fighting…they “error, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power thereof.”  Even the great Sgt. Alvin York, could not deny, as a devout and practicing Christian, that fighting for the security of your nation and fellow countrymen is outside the boundries of the Word of God.  He did fight for his country, he did kill the enemy, and he remains one of the most decorated soldiers in the history of this nation. 

      The word War is mentioned some 225 times in the King James Version of the Bible. 210 times in the Old Testament and 15 times in the New Testament, 8 of those times in the Book of the Revelation.  Not one of those Scriptures references God as anti-war. Nor are they just historical references without Spiritual implications. Note the following:

      Exodus 15: 3 “The LORD is a man of war: The LORD is His name.”

      King David, in Psalm 18: 34, states that God teaches him how to fight and war: “He teacheth my hands to war, so that a bow of steel is broken by mine arms.”

      A lesson on the Godliness of war is easlily taught from the Word of God, in complete context with the whole of Scripture.

      While that may not set well with liberals, modernists, and or atheists…what solid teaching of the Word of God does?

      Finally, in ending permanently my conversing with you “Shipoopi” The wisest human to ever live was King Solomon who gave the following tremendous advice in Proverbs 26: 4 “Answer not a fool in his folly, lest thou also be like him.” Thus my conversation with you herefore ends.

    • YERMOM

      well said Dr Jerry

    • Lyra

      “3.  You also falsely state that the Constitution grants “Freedom from
      Religion” not “Freedom of Religion.”  The First Amendment clearly
      states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
      religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”  There is not now,
      nor has there ever been a document, at the Federal level, that states
      your case.  There are now and have always been, documents at the Federal
      level, stating that the United States of America is a nation where we
      can exersice the “Freedom of Religion” without interference from the
      government.  Not one time is there a statement in any of the Federalist
      Papers (also setting on a shelf here in my vast office library) that
      states any “Freedom from religion” but, often states our ”Freedom of
      religion.”"

      This is actually terribly amusing to me, considering the context. If it was true that we have Freedom OF Religion but not Freedom FROM Religion, (neither of which term actually appears in the amendment), then the judge would have made the right decision. It is part of the Muslim’s religion that he beat on the victim. Freedom OF Religion says he must be free to follow the dictates of religion. If the victim had Freedom FROM Religion, one could argue that the victim had a right not to have the Muslim’s religious views imposed on him via assault. But you’re saying that the victim didn’t have Freedom FROM Religion; as such, he had no right to be free from the religious actions of others.

      You can’t have Freedom OF Religion without having Freedom FROM Religion.

  • Billyoldster

    They should appeal this case asap. It wouldn’t stand up in the appeals process.

  • Biff

    If I can no longer rely upon the law to protect me from criminal attack (and obviously, I no longer can), then I choose to stop delegating my right of self-defense to the government, and reclaim it for myself.
    Congrats, Judge Martin – you’ve just reinvented anarchy.

  • http://twitter.com/rdbrewer4 RD Brewer

    Needs a bar camplaint.

  • OregonMuse

    Unfortunately, there’s no appeal possible. Nobody in this case has any standing to appeal. You only can appeal if you’re declared guilty. What needs to happen is that this judge needs to be removed from office immediately.

    • CommonSense

      But they can recharge him.  Also, the Feds can step in and charge him with a hate crime, which this certainly qualifies as.

  • RufusChoate

    The bravery of the Left when two conflicting favored minorities: Muslims and Atheists clash is to discard the Constitution and cave to the primitive psychopaths.  It is a function of who will murder you first.  Atheists need the entire apparatus of the Totalitarian state to exact vengeance while Muslim will murder you no matter how much control they have in a society.  

    What idiots put a Muslim on the bench in the first place?  Impeach and remove because he clearly doesn’t share Western  values of justice.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

       What does this have to do with “left” or “right”?  Historically, most conservative judges such as this one identify with the “right,” not the “left.”  But this left vs right stuff is nonsensical and unbalanced because it insists that “if you don’t agree with everything I say then you are wrong.”

    • YERMOM

      If this shit head judge identified with the right, he would have convicted the assailant regardless of his muzzie faith. Your argument is retarded.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_P7K7NCEIB2EWYLSLUOX6D3XN6E frank

    Zombie judge finds zombie idiot not guilty of attacking zombie Mo…nothing to see here.  Move along…

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady
  • http://www.tempeteaparty.org Lee Reynolds

    What happens in some Islamic nations when someone is found guilty of theft?  They cut that person’s hand off.

    This judge has stolen the plaintiff’s constitutional right to free speech. 

    He should be glad that reversal on appeal and possible dismissal from the bench are the only things he has to fear from this.

  • doug

    I just called the actual District Court in question.  Um, some of the stuff going around is not true.

    FACTS:- The judge, Mark Martin, is not a Muslim.  Repeat, he is NOT.  He is a Christian.- The case wasn’t dealing with a criminal charge.  What was dismissed was the equivalent of a non-traffic citation (“harassment”).- The judge is elected.- The judge can not be recalled or removed by popular vote.

    Anyways, fyi…

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

       If you can prove this then you should post the information in order to set the record straight.  How did this story get reported upon in the Pennsylvania newspapers if it is THAT inaccurate?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

       Okay,
      I just listened to the audio recording that was made of the Judge and
      he states quite clearly at the 31:30 mark “I am a Muslim.”  You can hear
      the audio at youtube.  Look for the video entitled “A muslim Judge, Zombie Muhammed goes to court against the muslim attacker!” 
      Either the Judge is lying or you’ve gotten your facts confused.  The
      Judge is sitting on the bench so I would assume he isn’t lying when he
      said “I am a Muslim.”

    • Andy Kreiss

       That seems to be the case, Doug. I was under the impression that he was a Muslim as well, but have since seen updates that refute it. He may have said “IF I’m a Muslim, I’m offended”, or even dropped the “IF” as some people do ( “I’m in your shoes, I take that job”). Especially as he refers to Muslims repeatedly as “they”, and explains his knowledge as a result of spending time in other countries.

      And the “violent attack” seemed to be a mild confrontation. This whole thing is a typical media meltdown, emotional stuff to drum up scary Sharia Law rants.

  • Fight Islam Now

    Mr. Martin is a sad excuse for a judge. He is just so darn enlightened, you know, after living in those unmentioned foreign countries over the years. Too bad he doesn’t understand the US constitution, and US law in general. He needs to be FIRED!

  • shutterbug

    I hate Muslims–they don’t like something–they try to kill it.  Simplistics idiots.

    • Dexter

      Says the person that is lumping all Muslims into a single category when. Christians have their own extremists as well.

    • Common Sense

      What an imbecilic reply. Your equivocation of a handful of supposed Christian “extremists” to the hundreds and thousands of attacks by muslims against non-muslims is, in a word, pathetic.
      Ponder this passage from Qur’an 47:4: “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks…”, and go peddle your islamist apologist innanities elsewhere, tool.

    • Dr Jerry

      Dexter, your reply is moronic, thus I must assume that you are a moron or that you are a muslim…in either case…point out to me the world-wide movement of Christians killing persons for being a part of or practicing another religion…or cutting of heads of ten year old girls in a Philippine Orchard…or cutting of the heads of men with their hands bound behind their backs while video taping it for the world to see (Nick Berg srcreamed for 32 seconds as they sawed of his head sceaming Alluah Akbar!).  Show me the Christians mobs buring down a country because someone burned a Bible!  On and on my list can go..no..you sir are a muslim or a moron..take your foolishness to some other website that caters to your moronic needs and leave we patriots and anti-muslim fighters alone. 

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

      Never heard of the Inquisitions, or the Crusades, or WWI and WWII with had significant Christian vs the world overtones?  Evangelicals in the United States have taken over the Republican Party, have been trying hard to win the White House, and insist on having their say in American politics.  It’s just as intolerant as any extremist Muslim.  There are many peaceful Muslims, and many peaceful Christians, but the most prominent before the eyes of the world are the growing number of extremists.  Perhaps you are not one of them, but if your use of “Dr” is legitimately earned then you should know better than most that what I’ve said is true, and I speak as a Th.D.

    • YERMOM

       WWI and WWII were not religious wars retard.

  • Yodan

    This Judge should be removed from the bench immediately.  We do not live in a religious dictatorship.  We do not live in a country with an official state religion.  We live in a country where the Judiciary does not pick sides.  This Judge did just that.  He picked sides.  He has to go.  Now.

  • RickH

    I don’t know what sort of judge – what level – Judge Mark Martin is, but if it’s possible, it’s time for recall.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Quilly-Mammoth/100001536079705 Quilly Mammoth

    Too easy to demonize the Muslim here.  He clearly didn’t get it about America since he reported the crime to the police. The bigger issue is of the aggressive, hypocritical nature of the atheists involved.

    One thing, the Judge wasn’t
    actually Muslim. He’s a JAG officer that’s been to the Sandbox several
    times. Two things pissed me off:

    1. the assailant didn’t get punished.
    2. The atheists admitted they want to offend people of faith…yet they
    still retain the right to be offended…and sue…for demonstrations of
    faith. Basically the leader of the Atheist Paraders said that the
    ability to piss off others is a 1st amendment right. But when we piss
    off an atheist by displays of our faith he’s grievously wounded and
    needs redress through the legal system! Weighing it out….I wish the Muslim man had knocked the hypocritical atheist the fuck out.

    • Get a clue

      What the hell are you babbling about?
      “Too easy to demonize the Muslim here. He clearly didn’t get it about America since he reported the crime to the police. The bigger issue is of the aggressive, hypocritical nature of the atheists involved.”
      How is filing assault charges against someone who assaulted a guy in a parade, and admitted said assault, ”demonizing”?
      And, since when is an “aggressive, hypocritical nature” a “bigger issue”  than a muslim assaulting another person for “insulting” their so-called prophet?
      You’ll make a great sharia-enforcer.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

       He was beaten.  It’s on tape.  That is quite a bit different from “being offended.”  The Muslim man committed a crime of violence for which he should have either suffered some weeks in jail, or a very stiff fine. 

  • Aphomegrown

    I for one will not be beaten by the hand of another, regardless of religion. If this is the new stand of the court, I suppose all fights should just end when one or the other stops breathing, as long as you were defending yourself or your religious beliefs. Next time a muslim in this area offends my religion, ill be putting this stand to the test, trust me on that one. Difference is, I won’t claim ignorance, I’ll claim Judicial Right by Precedent.

    D

  • Eaglescout414

    Dr. Jerry, you don’t need to worry about society turning to islam because Judge Martin is not a muslim.  He is a Christian.  You’re so called “friend” altered the tape that he “illegally” used in the first place and spread lies about the judge.  If you know you’re “friend” so well, then you would know that he used to be a Christian and believed that God would heal his son.  Instead of believing that God would send doctors to his son to heal him, he stayed at home waiting for a miracle.  Since he did not take his son to the hospital his son became deaf, therefore leading the man to become an atheist.  I would be careful in who you choose to be friends because this guy is a lunatic.

    • Dr Jerry

      Read my posting again Jack!  Not one time is the word friend mentioned in it…I have no idea who the victim in this case is nor do I know the accused…I do state that “I know the victim is and atheist”  and only so because the article says so…I only posted a response to the article…by the way moron…Fox News reported the same story on Friday, February 25, 2012…that was the basis of my post…Get your story right before you challenge someone’s response.

      My statements still stand with unequivocal ferver!

      In other words stupid; I meant what I said!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

       What a nice example of a Christian you are: “Read my posting again Jack!” … “by the way moron” … “In other words stupid.”  WWJD?  He wouldn’t call someone names for having a different opinion.  Hopefully you aren’t one of those “Christians” who believe that Jesus burns people in an oven of burning fire for all eternity and therefore it justifies any and all insults, injury, violence, etc…against an unbeliever?  Please say it ain’t so.

    • YERMOM

      WWJD?

      Probably slap you like the bitch you are.

    • Atlas Shrugged

      Jesus called the Pharisees whited sepulchres, aka hypocrites, and used harsh words in dealing with other people when Truth was challenged. That is also what Doc Jerry did. Next time remove head from sphincter, THEN comment.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

      Okay, I just listened to the audio recording that was made of the Judge and
      he states quite clearly at the 31:30 mark “I am a Muslim.”  You can hear
      the audio at youtube.  Look for the video entitled “A muslim Judge, Zombie Muhammed goes to court against the muslim attacker!”

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V6CJKTPZHRD2FKU2LXXY4IQN4Q Shipoopi

    Everyone
    in the US has freedom of religion (or freedom from no religion).  Even
    Muslims are allowed to practice their religion in our country.  But
    nobody – nobody – has the right to use their religious beliefs as an
    excuse for violence.  What if the man had a gun?  In Muslim countries a
    person who defamed “the prophet” would be shot dead, and if he had a gun
    he’d be guilty of murder.  We have the right to protest and the right
    to express our opinions.  Muhammad represents murder, violence, and
    intolerance just as much as Medieval Popes represent the very same
    things.  I hope this judge is not only removed from the bench, but also
    disbarred, and the defendant convicted for his crime.  Who cares if it
    would mean deportation?  If he wants to beat up people who call Muhammad
    names then go do it in a country where it is legal to do so.  History
    proves Muhammad to have been a cold blooded murderer (just like the
    Popes) and certainly not a prophet of God.  Now see, just for expressing
    that fact, which is indeed an historical fact, that defendant would hit
    me, kick me, or perhaps even kill me.  Get rid of the judge, and get
    rid of the defendant.  Now!

    • YERMOM

      peddle your freedom FROM religion bullshit somewhere else Heathen 

  • Jrinmims

    Where is the ACLU? They’re always jumping to the defense of atheists. You’d think they’d be going ballistic. The judge needs to be removed or have his butt kicked or both. If a Christian had been the one attacking, he’d be in jail as we speak.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/02/judge-martin-responds-on-zombie.html

    I have been reporting (to be fair) that Judge Martin responds on the Zombie Mohammed case (pointing out the Volokh Conspiracy link in the link above).  Judge Martin, a Iraq and Afghanistan combat reservist, claims he is not a Muslim convert, that he was only trying to explain to the victim why he was offensive, and that the evidence did not support assault under the circumstances.  This still does not make sense.  Even if the comments on the victim’s tapes of the hearing were taken out of context, do they square with what Judge Martin is saying now?  It is unusual and not at all proper for a judge to act the way Judge Martin did.  And free speech (in this context) does absolutely trump any offense the Muslim immigrant had to the depiction of Mohammed. It does not look like the protester was hurt, but if this was reversed and some offended citizen assaulted a flag burner…do you think that offended citizen would be given the same deference by Judge Martin’s as this Muslim defendant was?   

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/02/judge-martin-responds-on-zombie.html

    I have been reporting (to be fair) that Judge Martin responds on the Zombie Mohammed case (pointing out the Volokh Conspiracy link in the link above).  Judge Martin, a Iraq and Afghanistan combat reservist, claims he is not a Muslim convert, that he was only trying to explain to the victim why he was offensive, and that the evidence did not support assault under the circumstances.  This still does not make sense.  Even if the comments on the victim’s tapes of the hearing were taken out of context, do they square with what Judge Martin is saying now?  It is unusual and not at all proper for a judge to act the way Judge Martin did.  And free speech (in this context) does absolutely trump any offense the Muslim immigrant had to the depiction of Mohammed. It does not look like the protester was hurt, but if this was reversed and some offended citizen assaulted a flag burner…do you think that offended citizen would be given the same deference by Judge Martin’s as this Muslim defendant was?   

  • American

    to hell with islam and mohammad