The Independent Sentinel reported on this story last Halloween. If you click the link, you can get the details. To be brief, two atheists were dressed for the occasion, one as the Pope and one as Muhammad. They carried a sign that said “The Parading Atheists of Central Pennsylvania.”
A Muslim grabbed the man dressed as Muhammad, spun him around and tried to choke him.
When the harassment case against the Muslim came before District Judge Mark Martin, he threw it out after criticizing the victim, calling him a “doofus.” [APPARENTLY IF YOU ARE A DOOFUS, YOU DON'T GET TO KEEP YOUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS!] Martin then explained that the atheist could have been executed if he did that in some societies. [IN WHAT COURT IN AMERICA SHOULD THAT COMMENT MAKE ANY SENSE?]
The judge threw out the video evidence of the assault, dismissed the testimony of the eyewitness officer, and then lectured the victim about Islam. After throwing out all the evidence, he ruled there wasn’t enough evidence to find for assault. He stated in court that Elbayomy, the aggressor, was obligated to attack the victim because of his culture and religion.
This judge is missing a few rungs on his ladder, has bats in his belfry, doesn’t have all his oars in the water, he’s missing all the pins in his pin cushion, and he’s judging cases!
The Muslim fellow was happy with Judge Martin’s decision.
This was clearly a case of a judge ignoring the rule of law in favor of his personal viewpoint. Whether you agree or not, that is not what judges are supposed to do.
The Florida Family Association responded by sending out email alerts in February and March titled Judge elevates Sharia law over U.S. Constitution in Pennsylvania, rules Muslim immigrant ok to physically attack and choke American citizen who mocked Muhammed. In all, 6300 emails went out from that group alone, and I don’t doubt that other groups and individuals did the same.
It had an effect.
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s Judicial Conduct Board reprimanded Judge Mark Martin according to a report posted at World Net Daily. Joseph A. Massa Jr. the chief counsel for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s Judicial Conduct Board responded to a complaint filed by John P. McTernan, a pro-life activist and founder of Defend and Proclaim the Faith Ministry. The board’s letter said, “The board recently concluded its investigation regarding the complaint you filed against Magisterial District Judge Mark Martin, Cumberland County. The board voted to issue a letter of caution to Judge Martin as a private rebuke of his behavior and, thereafter, to close the case. Judge Martin was mailed this letter, and the case is now closed.”
A reprimand is a warning to him and it’s appropriate for a first offense except that the judge is probably too nutty to serve on the bench. I hope the judge learns from it and follows the rule of law henceforth but I doubt it.