Muslim judge rules against costumed atheist attacked by Muslim

DonnyMost · Feb 22, 2012

This sounds almost too ridiculous to be true, both the attack and the subsequent ruling. Judge should be suspended/disbarred (or whatever the hell they do to judges when they remove them).

<script type='text/javascript' src='http://www.abc27.com/global/video/videoplayer.js?rnd=783340;hostDomain=www.abc27.com;playerWidth=630;playerHeight=355;isShowIcon=true;clipId=6767233;flvUri=;partnerclipid=;adTag=News;advertisingZone=;enableAds=true;landingPage=;islandingPageoverride=false;playerType=STANDARD_EMBEDDEDscript;controlsType=overlay'></script>

MECHANICSBURG, Pa. (WHTM) -
It almost sounds like the makings of a joke: an atheist, a Muslim and the Mechanicsburg Halloween parade. But non-believers aren't laughing about an attack and insist what's really frightening is the way a district judge ruled on it.

The Atheists of Central Pennsylvania decided to walk in the Mechanicsburg Halloween parade. There was a zombie Pope and a zombie Muhammed. On YouTube, you can catch a scary moment. It's dark and distorted, but a Muslim man comes off the curb extremely offended at Muhammed being depicted in this way.

"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," said Ernie Perce, who donned the costume.

The Muslim man and Perce both called police to report a crime. Both kept walking, and a few blocks down found Sgt. Brian Curtis. He talked to both and came to this conclusion.

"Mr. Perce has the right to do what he did that evening, and the defendant in this case was wrong in confronting him," he said.

Talaag Elbayomy was charged with harassment, but District Judge Mark Martin threw it out after criticizing Perce, the victim, and even calling him a "doofus." The audio is also on YouTube.

Martin, who has done several tours of duty in the Middle East, said Perce would be put to death in those societies for his crime, but Perce wonders why that's relevant in this country.

"He let a man who is Muslim, because of his preference of his culture and his way of life, walk free from an attack," Perce said.

R. Mark Thomas represented Elbayomy and applauds the judge.

"I think this was a good dressing down by the judge," he said. "The so-called victim was the antagonist and we introduced evidence that clearly showed his attitude toward Muslims. The judge didn't do anything I wouldn't have done if I was in that position."

Although Elbayomy denied touching Perce at trial, Curtis said he admitted grabbing Perce's sign and beard the night of the incident.

Talaag Elbayomy said he was at the parade with his wife and two kids and felt he just had to do something. In fact, he too called police because he thought it was a crime for someone to depict Muhammed in such a way. He has since learned otherwise.
Click to expand...

http://www.abc27.com/story/16986440/midstate-judge-rules-against-attack-on-atheist-in-costume

rhadamanthus · Feb 22, 2012

*speechless*

FranchiseBlade · Feb 22, 2012

It does sound a ridiculous ruling and the judge sounds biased on what is presented here.

But there is a lot missing from the article. The judge's legal reasoning isn't presented. The judge may have ruled based on evidence not mentioned in the article, because the article doesn't mention much of the evidence.

If that's because not much evidence exists then the judge's ruling is as bad as it seems. But if it was that a lot of the facts were left out because the article wanted to lead readers to a certain conclusion then it is the fault of the article.

Wilford_Knows · Feb 22, 2012

So the f*** what.

Do what you want, believe what you want, say what you want...

But, when you know what you're doing may be offensive to others, don't be surprised when they kick your a**

Eric Riley · Feb 22, 2012

FranchiseBlade said: ↑

It does sound a ridiculous ruling and the judge sounds biased on what is presented here.

But there is a lot missing from the article. The judge's legal reasoning isn't presented. The judge may have ruled based on evidence not mentioned in the article, because the article doesn't mention much of the evidence.

If that's because not much evidence exists then the judge's ruling is as bad as it seems. But if it was that a lot of the facts were left out because the article wanted to lead readers to a certain conclusion then it is the fault of the article.
Click to expand...

I tried searching for an actual news article as well, but couldn't find one. I did find the audio of the entire trial. Didn't feel like spending 36 minutes listening to it, however. Here it is.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Sv9IyrpOnbs?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Ottomaton · Feb 22, 2012

Wilford_Knows said: ↑

So the f*** what.

Do what you want, believe what you want, say what you want...

But, when you know what you're doing may be offensive to others, don't be surprised when they kick your a**
Click to expand...

You've just offended me with your backwardness. I'm coming to kick your a**.

DonnyMost · Feb 22, 2012

Eric Riley said: ↑

I tried searching for an actual news article as well, but couldn't find one. I did find the audio of the entire trial. Didn't feel like spending 36 minutes listening to it, however. Here it is.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Sv9IyrpOnbs?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Click to expand...

The ruling starts around the 29th minute.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Direct text here.

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 ---- 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.
Here in our society we have the constitution that gives us many rights specifically first amendment rights. It's unfortunate that some people use the first amendment to deliberately provoke others. I don't think that's what the forefathers really intended I think our forefathers intended that we use the first amendment so that we speak with our mind not to piss off other people and other cultures which is what you did. I don't think you are aware sir there's a big difference between how Americans practice Christianity. I understand you are an Atheist, but see, 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.
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....
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. I understand and I've been in the Halloween parade I understand how noise can be how difficult it can be to get a pulpit I can't believe that if there was this kind of conflict goin on in the middle of the street that somebody didn't step forward sooner to try and intervene or that the police officer on the bicycle didn't stop and say "Hey let's break this up" Put your hand down sir you are not a witness (it was in fact a witness) (long pause) The preponderance of, excuse me, the burden of proof. It must be proven that the defendant did with the intent to harass annoy or alarm another person whether there's conflict or not and yes he shouldn't be putting his hands on you. I don't know, I have your story that he did and I have his story that he did not but another part of the element is as Mr __ said was was the defendants intent to harass annoy or alarm or was his intent to try and have the offensive situation negated? If his intent was to harass annoy or alarm I think there would have been a little bit more of an altercation and something more substantial as far as testimony goin on if there was a conflict. Because there is not 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
Click to expand...

Dave_78 · Feb 22, 2012

Wilford_Knows said: ↑

So the f*** what.

Do what you want, believe what you want, say what you want...

But, when you know what you're doing may be offensive to others, don't be surprised when they kick your a**
Click to expand...

and don't be surprised when the person who is simply exercising free speech kicks your teeth in for attacking them without provocation.

FranchiseBlade · Feb 22, 2012

Wilford_Knows said: ↑

So the f*** what.

Do what you want, believe what you want, say what you want...

But, when you know what you're doing may be offensive to others, don't be surprised when they kick your a**
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you understand the rights we have in America. Being offensive is not against any of the rights we have in the United States. There is no right to not be offended.

Simply being offensive is not just cause for violence.

FranchiseBlade · Feb 22, 2012

Eric Riley said: ↑

I tried searching for an actual news article as well, but couldn't find one. I did find the audio of the entire trial. Didn't feel like spending 36 minutes listening to it, however. Here it is.
Click to expand...

Thanks for finding that. Unfortunately at work, I can't watch/listen to that because of the firewall.

FranchiseBlade · Feb 22, 2012

DonnyMost said: ↑

The ruling starts around the 29th minute.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Direct text here.
Click to expand...

That ruling seems crazy. Hearing the judge talk about the 1st amendment in such a messed up way seems ground for his disbarment or whatever would be needed to remove him.

justtxyank · Feb 22, 2012

Wilford_Knows said: ↑

So the f*** what.

Do what you want, believe what you want, say what you want...

But, when you know what you're doing may be offensive to others, don't be surprised when they kick your a**
Click to expand...

So the heck what.

Beat up who want, jump who you want, choke who you want...

But when you know what you're doing is against the law, don't be surprised when they turn you into a burrito in the old pokey.

rhadamanthus · Feb 22, 2012

Moron judge who needs to be taken off the bench 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.
Click to expand...

Nonsensical and wrong. SMH.

wtf. Seriously.

justtxyank · Feb 22, 2012

rhadamanthus said: ↑

Nonsensical and wrong. SMH.

wtf. Seriously.
Click to expand...

This will be a big boon for ORLY? Tate.

Wilford_Knows · Feb 22, 2012

Just because you have the 'right' to do something, doesn't mean that you're exempt from the results of your actions.

This is the REAL WORLD, you know. There are consequences for your actions, and the Constitution can't protect you from that.

Was the attacker right? No. But, why is it so outrageous that the guy in the costume received backlash for wearing it?

Now the judge... That's just a different subject all together, it depends on the facts in the case.

FranchiseBlade · Feb 22, 2012

Wilford_Knows said: ↑

Just because you have the 'right' to do something, doesn't mean that you're exempt from the results of your actions.

This is the REAL WORLD, you know. There are consequences for your actions, and the Constitution can't protect you from that.

Was the attacker right? No. But, why is it so outrageous that the guy in the costume received backlash for wearing it?

Now the judge... That's just a different subject all together, it depends on the facts in the case.
Click to expand...

It is not unreasonable to think that your rights will be protected.

Daedalus · Feb 22, 2012

Talaag Elbayomy said he was at the parade with his wife and two kids and felt he just had to do something. In fact, he too called police because he thought it was a crime for someone to depict Muhammed in such a way. He has since learned otherwise.
Click to expand...

this troubled me the most. What America has this dude been living in?

Wilford_Knows · Feb 22, 2012

FranchiseBlade said: ↑

It is not unreasonable to think that your rights will be protected.
Click to expand...

Look man, I'm not saying that it is.

Just that there are consequences for what we all do and say. And sometimes, it's not in anyone's best interest to express your 'rights' just because you can.

Dairy Ashford · Feb 22, 2012

Hopefully the ADA will file some kind of complaint as the judge should have recused himself, I don't know how double jeopardy or burden of proof comes into play, but this is probably good for a civil suit.

MadMax · Feb 22, 2012

wow, that sincerely pisses me off. what an awful judge.

Forums

Muslim judge rules against costumed atheist attacked by Muslim

DonnyMost be kind. be brave.
Supporting Member

rhadamanthus Contributing Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Wilford_Knows Member

Eric Riley Contributing Member

Ottomaton Contributing Member
Supporting Member

DonnyMost be kind. be brave.
Supporting Member

Dave_78 Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

justtxyank Contributing Member

rhadamanthus Contributing Member

justtxyank Contributing Member

Wilford_Knows Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Daedalus Member

Wilford_Knows Member

Dairy Ashford Member

MadMax Contributing Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

Muslim judge rules against costumed atheist attacked by Muslim

DonnyMost be kind. be brave. Supporting Member

rhadamanthus Contributing Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member Supporting Member

Wilford_Knows Member

Eric Riley Contributing Member

Ottomaton Contributing Member Supporting Member

DonnyMost be kind. be brave. Supporting Member

Dave_78 Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member Supporting Member

justtxyank Contributing Member

rhadamanthus Contributing Member

justtxyank Contributing Member

Wilford_Knows Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member Supporting Member

Daedalus Member

Wilford_Knows Member

Dairy Ashford Member

MadMax Contributing Member

Share This Page

DonnyMost be kind. be brave.
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Ottomaton Contributing Member
Supporting Member

DonnyMost be kind. be brave.
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
Supporting Member