When Ernest Perce was attacked by Muslim man Talaag Elbayomy, he was dressed as "zombie Muhammed" in a costumed march in Mechanicsburg, PA. He was not the only costumed character, as a zombie pope was also in attendance. The officer who charged Talaag with harassment says that the man admitted to attacking and choking Ernest Perce, and there is even shaky and dark video footage that doesn't show the attack, but you can hear that there are witnesses yelling in protest at the man attacking the atheist marcher.
Judge Mark Martin not only refused to look at the evidence, he disregarded the police officer's evidence as well and dismissed the case after lecturing Ernest about Islam. He even challenged the victim to a debate on Islam. He is even heard in an audio clip during the trial as saying, "I'm a Muslim; I'm offended."
He has fired back in defense, and his statements aren't really adding up to someone who is innocent of abusing his position on the bench.
"The victim claims that I said that I was a Muslim, and he portrayed incorrectly that I was a Muslim, and that I showed biased toward Muslims in my ruling, and really that's ridiculous," said Mark Martin.
However, he did not apparently address the recording in which he can be clearly heard stating: "I'm a Muslim; I'm offended." It would be nice if he could explain this! Some people say that he says "I'm not a Muslim," but that is in no way audible on the below clip as far as many are concerned:
So what do you think? Do you think that Judge Mark Martin should prove that he did not say this? Do you think that him claiming to be a Lutheran matters at all? It doesn't matter whether or not he's a Muslim, but what matters is that he clearly used bias in his decision to dismiss the case against Talaag ElbayomyÂ—who admitted to the police officer that he did in fact attack Ernest Perce. The judge decided that him saying otherwise in court was all the evidence he needed even though the charging police officer was present and there was audio/video evidence that depicted an attack being committed while onlookers shouted in protest. What does that say about his ability to judge in a United States courtroom?
He may not be enforcing Sharia Law in his courtroom, but like on Republican representative says, he is certainly being Sharia compliant. If one judge is allowed to do this in America, then it will eventually become more than one judge and that will become many judges. This does not need to become a trend in the United States whether or not you agree with atheism. This could have very easily had been a Christian or Jew or Hindu person who had been attacked for whatever reason. Everyone in this country has the same First Amendment rights as the other, and if you can be assaulted for displaying those rights and a judge ignores you as a victim, then that right clearly doesn't exist.
Chelsea Hoffman is a prolific crime writer and fiction author with several works published. Her writing has been recognized by such entities as NBC Dateline and several others. Contact her directly by visiting ChelseaHoffman.Com.Or follower her on Twitter @TheRealChelseaH