Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Dismissal of Harassment Charge Characterized By Critics As Acceptance of Sharia Defense

The Huffington Post reported yesterday on the storm of controversy around the Internet over a ruling by Pennsylvania state trial court judge Mark Martin dismissing a harassment charge that had been brought against a Muslim man who, during a Halloween parade, apparently attacked an atheist who was marching in the parade dressed as "Zombie Muhammad." According to the National Review, Ernest Perce, wore a “Zombie Mohammed” costume and pretended to walk among the dead, in the company of an associate who was the “Zombie Pope”.  Muslim immigrant Talag Elbayomy, attempted to pull the sign off of Perce. His attorney argued that Elbayomy thought it was a crime to insult the prophet Mohammed and acted to set an example for his children who were with him.

According to the National Review's transcript, the judge ruled from the bench:
I’ve got two sides of the story that are in conflict with each other.... I can’t believe that, if there was this kind of conflict going on in the middle of the street, that somebody didn’t step forward sooner to try and intervene....
But another part of the element [of the offense charged] is... “Was the defendant’s intent to harass, annoy or alarm — or was it his intent to try to 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. Something more substantial as far as testimony going on that there was a conflict. Because there is not, it is not proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that this defendant is guilty of harassment. Therefore I am going to dismiss the charge.
The furor over the decision however stems from other remarks by the judge chastising Perce for wearing the costume.  The court said in part:
I have a copy of the Koran here, and I would challenge you, sir, to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammed arose and walked among the dead.... Before you start mocking someone else’s religion you may want to find out a little bit more about it. That makes you look like a doofus....
.... It’s unfortunate that some people use the First Amendment to deliberately provoke others. I don’t think that’s what our forefathers really intended. I think our forefathers intended that we use the First Amendment so that we can speak our mind, not to piss off other people and other cultures, which is what you did....
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..... Then what you have done is you’ve completely trashed their essence, their being. 
The ruling is being described by some as the judge's accepting a shariah defense to violation of Pennsylvania law. Apparently Perce [corrected] has received hundreds of death threats since the ruling was handed down.