#1 Interview: Infidel Victim of Pennsylvania Sharia Judge02-28-2012, 05:00 PM
February 28, 2012 Exclusive Interview: Infidel Victim of Pennsylvania Sharia Judge Reveals Inside Details of CaseThis is why anti-sharia legislation is so essential. What happened to equal protection under the law?
Back in October, I reported on Ernest Perce, a parade-goer wearing a "Zombie Muhammad" costume while marching in a local Pennsylvania Halloween parade. He was viciously attacked and choked by Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim (who was enforcing the sharia -- he assumed that it was illegal in this country to insult Muhammad). "He grabbed me, choked me from the back, and spun me around to try to get my sign off that was wrapped around my neck," reported Perce.
Last week, an American judge in Pennsylvania, Judge Mark Martin, ruled on the case and sided with the Muslim,and said that the victim would have been put to death in Muslim societies for his "crime."
Martin told Perce: "Having had the benefit of having spent over two and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. ... 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."
So what? This is America, where we don't have to obey the Islamic blasphemy laws -- at least not yet. But Martin went on to reveal why he was ruling against the victim: "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." He now denies that he is a Muslim, but that's what he said.
Ultimately, it is irrelevant if the judge is or isn't a Muslim. What is germane is his sharia ruling, which is worse if he's not a Muslim. In Islam, sharia supersedes all man-made laws. It is the law of Allah, so one might understand (though not condone) a Muslim judge defaulting to sharia. But an American judge admonishing an infidel victim while holding up the Koran is shocking. You hear the Koran slam down in the audio of the court proceeding. Martin also told Perce: "You're way outside your boundaries or First Amendment rights."
Perce had video of the attack, but Judge Martin refused to allow the video into evidence. The judge refused even to look at the video, saying that he had heard enough and that there were two conflicting stories. In sharia, in any conflict between a Muslim and a non-Muslim, the Muslim is always right. Martin ruled for Elbayomy.
It gets worse. Since his ordeal began, the infidel victim, Ernest Perce, has received 471 verifiable threats. Perce never released any personal information on Judge Martin or Elbayomy, but they released his, and now he has gotten threats at his home. He may alsosoon be spending time in jail because he released audio of the court proceeding. Martin is threatening to hold Perce in contempt of court for releasing the audio, even though Perce says he was given permission to release it.
Perce released the video because he believes that he was treated unfairly -- that Martin showed Elbayomy preferential treatment. He wrote to Bonnie Snyder, administrative secretary of the Cumberland County District Court: "I was in a recent proceeding and Judge Martin gave both parties the right/permission to record the proceeding on our cellular devices. I would like to know if it is allowed to put the recording online for listening purposes. If the answer is no, I'd like to know the case law which is being cited and the punishment for violating the case law."
Snyder responded: "Judge Martin only gave permission for the attorney or officer to record the proceedings. He did not give anyone else permission to record anything in the courtroom at the hearing held on December 6, 2011 at 2:45 pm."
Perce then asked her: "Are you instructing me via Judge Martin to destroy or delete and not use my audio recording?"
Answered Snyder: "Yes, since you were not authorized to make any recordings."
Are we living in a sharia state? Aren't court cases open to the public?
Pamela Geller is the publisher of AtlasShrugs.com and the author of the WND Books title Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance.
Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...s_of_case.html at February 28, 2012 - 01:47:21 PM CST
Last edited by Odysseus; 02-28-2012 at 10:06 PM.
02-28-2012, 05:03 PM
Recently I interviewed Ernest Perce and asked him why Judge Martin did not allow the video of the attack to be shown.
Perce: Judge would be offended! Yet they used comments made on the video at YouTube two months later to establish that I had a biased view toward Talaag Elbayomy. If the judge were honest, he would have said, "Attorney, the video is not entered as evidence, and therefore I cannot use the comment from two months after the supposed attack."
I called demanding to speak to the judge. He was always in a training session or in court. Finally, on February 16, I talked with the judge at 3:42PM, and he said, "I will hold you in contempt of court under section 42 of the Judicial System" if I didn't take down the audio. He also threatened to hold me in violation of 112 of the Rules of Court Section D.
He also said that I would be held in contempt of court. He denies this now, but this is what he told me. He was furious.
PG: Why did you decide to dress as Zombie Muhammad for Halloween in the first place?
Perce: Mainly to stand for the freedom of speech, and to show my disdain for such a hateful religion and culture. I have always made fun of Muhammad.
PG: When did you start receiving threats?
Perce: I started receiving death threats immediately after putting the video online of the parade. People have said that they would kill me, rip my eyes out, run me over, shoot me and laugh at me, since I have blasphemed Muhammad. They say I will be found out and [hanged] in front of my family.
PG: Did you report these threats? If so, what response did you receive?
Perce: I have reported several of the threats.
PG: What is your reaction to the judge's telling you that what you did was offensive to Muslims?
Perce: When I first heard Attorney Thomas, the defendant's attorney, telling me to read the Koran and the judge stayed silent, I was stunned. Then when the judge said, " I have a Koran; I challenge you to show me where it says Mohammed [rose] from the dead," I was stunned. I remember thinking "In America, what does it matter what interpretation a person has about a ruthless book?" I thought, "I'm not going to challenge you to a debate, and who in the hell are you to require me to read a Koran?"
This is America! Freedom of speech is our birthright. This judge trampled on the Constitution. At that point I forgot I was recording. Do you think he thinks that being offended justifies harassment? There is no doubt that he believes that offensive speech warrants harassment.
PG: What do you think of Judge Martin's office denying that he is a Muslim?
Perce: Remember, a Muslim can lie to a nonbeliever, a kaffir. He spoke Arabic to the defendant and his friend. They answered back. If he claims he isn't a Muslim, then why does he have a Koran? Why did he challenge me to a debate on the interpretation of the Koran? Why get mad at me and insult me? Why then go on a six-minute rant against me? Why value Islam above Christianity? He said, "They pray five times a day, towards Mecca. To be a good Muslim before you die, you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca." Christians pray all the time, Jews pray all the time, Buddhists follow the basics of karma. Humanists will do no harm to anyone.
There is so much wrong with his preference for Islam. I've never met a Christian who got offended at a person dressing as Muhammad or wanted to debate them, or who told another person, "As-Salamu Alaykum."
His staff can say what they want, but there are only three possibilities: he just got saved, or if he has nothing to hide, why threaten me with contempt and order me to destroy the audio? Or third, he's a Muslim who is backpedaling because he got offended and had a slip of anger, and he knew he couldn't physically attack me!
PG: What do you plan to do now?
Perce: I am going to organize a protest against Judge Martin. I'm going to buy a billboard featuring Martin's photo, saying, "You're outside your bounds of the First Amendment! I'm Mark Martin, I am a Muslim and I'm offended." Victims are not the antagonists. Women do not deserve to be raped because of how they dress. A woman who has been abused doesn't warrant further abuse. I'm angry that an official of a court would say this.
PG: Is there any possibility you could try to press any further criminal or civil charges against the attacker?
Perce: I am not able to file criminal charges against the attacker because of double jeopardy. I am considering a $50 civil suit or asking for a public apology. Martin's decision effectively says that Muslims do not have to learn to accept blasphemy against their religion without violence. Yet when you are a citizen of the USA, you accept our Constitution. Free speech is our foundation.
PG: What do you want people to know?
Perce: I will say to Muslims: "I will not allow you put fear in my mind or [the minds] of those whom I know! I will not be silent. I am an American atheist, and I am not afraid to deal with you openly. While so many others draw Muhammad in private, I am Muhammad in open public!
PG: Are you worried about being attacked or getting death threats?
Perce: I'm more worried that if I stay silent, the energy and emotion within me will be worse to me than being attacked, or even death threats or death itself! So do your worst, and I will do mine! Only my worst is standing up against Islam!
PG: Has the media expressed interest in this story?
Perce: The media has expressed little or no interest. I hope they do, because this judge needs to be out of office.
This is why we must have anti-sharia legislation in America. Equal protection under the law. There is no equal protection or justice for non-Muslims under the sharia. Nor was there for Ernest Perce in Mark Martin's sharia court.
Last edited by Odysseus; 02-28-2012 at 10:06 PM.
02-28-2012, 09:00 PM
In the United States of America:
Guy dresses up as Zombie Mo for Halloween. Muslim whackjob assaults Zombie Mo guy for insulting Mo.
Muslim admits in open court that he attacked Zombie Mo guy because he was dressed as Zombie Mo and that shit's insulting.
Whackjob judge dismisses charges against whackjob Muslim and openly berates guy dressed as Zombie Mo and basically blames the assault on the guy, on the guy.
Is this what went down and is it true? ie, Has it been verified?
PS - A friend of the guy dressed as Zombie Mo went to the same party dressed as Zombie Pope. As of this writing, no one cared.Be Not Afraid.
02-28-2012, 10:04 PM
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
this judge should be thrown out on his ass and disbarred for that shit"Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings..." Patrick Henry
02-28-2012, 10:29 PM
What is intriguing about this story is that the judge blamed the victim for being assaulted because of the way he was dressed. I thought we were passed that line of thinking when we blamed female rape victims for being raped because they dressed too provocatively.
So where is the outrage against the Mo assaulter? Because we should be outraged.Be Not Afraid.
02-28-2012, 11:23 PM
So after reading some sources that aren't dedicated to anti-Muslim hysteria, I get a slightly less upsetting picture.
The video wasn't allowed in the court because it was ruled as inconclusive. You can't see any indication of violence whatsoever in it. The supposed scene is almost entirely dark and consists of the guy screaming "he's attacking me!"
Does the man screaming that count as conclusive evidence that he was being attacked? Let's think about this: if you have a video of a person being pinned down by police, and you can hear them screaming "POLICE BRUTALITY!", is that conclusive evidence of police brutality taking place?
Without the video, the only evidence left in court was one guy's word vs the other guy's word. That's hardly enough to decide a case on. When you have a case that is nothing more than he said, he said heresay, what else can you do besides dismiss it?
That is hardly a case of "sharia judge" imposing islamic law onto Americans.
As for the judge scolding the guy about offending other cultures. It is not unusual that judges take the chance in court to lecture the people who enter their court on doing the right thing, It's not officially part of the legal process, it's an informal gesture that is pretty common. Young men in inner-cities often get stern-talking to's about right and wrong, respect, and making good decisions when they find themselves in front of a judge.
I agree his opinions about multiculturalism are irrelevant in the application of US law, but there's no evidence that those opinions influenced the application of the law.Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|