Catherine Segurane

De plus, d’après Andrew McCarthy, il n’y aurait pas de compte-rendu écrit des débats. Voici ce qu’il dit à la fin de son article paru  dans le National Review Online du 25 février 2012 intituté To be or not to be a muslim :

In any event, I will put appropriate edits in the prior posts. »

@ Annie

Les circonstances du « démenti » (si c’en est un ; il vient de la réceptionniste et non du juge) figurent dans cet autre article de Chelsea Hoffmann pour le blog Gather News du 24 février 2012. L’article est intitulé :

Judge Mark Martin was not available for comment on Wednesday of this week, or today (Friday). However, his receptionist who goes by the name Rita, was able to answer this simple yet important question.

Is Mark Martin a Muslim ?

No.

Rita answered the question exclusively for Gather News after just a small amount of coaxing. Magistrate judge Martin doesn’t want Rita to be too communicative regarding this increasingly high-profile issue and that is to be expected. She stuck her neck out to give this answer, but it was more than necessary when so many news outlets and blogs are reporting him as a Muslim judge.

If you can rely on the answer given by his receptionist, then it’s safe to say that this man is not a Muslim. However, it still feels that he took a biased stance regarding this case. He dismissed it and wouldn’t allow evidence to be submitted. Even the officer who charged the attacker, Talaag Elbayomy, says that the victim was well within his rights and that he was very disappointed with the judge’s decision.

His speech before dismissing the case and referring to the victim as a »doofus« was drenched with anti-American sentiments and religious pandering. He is quoted as saying :

Well, 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 fact, I have a copy of the Quran here, and I would challenge you, Sir, to show me where it says in the Quran that Muhammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted a couple of things. So before you start mocking somebody else’s religion, you might want to find out a little more about it. It kind of makes you look like a doofus. ...

In many other Muslim-speaking countries, err, excuse me, many Arabic-speaking countries, predominantly Muslim, something like this is definitely against the law there, in their society. In fact, it could be punished by death, and frequently is, in their society... (read here for the entire excerpt)

Judge Mark Martin may not be a Muslim, but it’s apparent that he values the feelings of Muslims more than the physical safety and Constitutional rights of Americans. »

La question de savoir si le juge Martin est musulman est maintenant débattue sur internet.

I reported that Judge Martin is a convert to Islam, based on a published reportcorroborated by the audio of the court proceeding (quoted in the published report), in which the judge seemed to assert (while lecturing the victim about his purported provocation of the assault), “I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive.” 

A member of the judge’s staff yesterday stated without equivocation that Martin is not a Muslim. So why did he say otherwise in the court proceeding ? I now believe, though I’m not a hundred percent certain, that he probably did not say otherwise.

The audio sounds clear enough on YouTube streamed through your computer. But I’ve now listened to the sentence in question many times, wearing a good set of earphones with the volume amplified a bit. Based on that, it’s entirely possible that what Martin said was, “F’Im a Muslim, I’d find it offensive” — as in If I were a Muslim, I would find it offensive. The “F” sound before the word “I’m” is almost inaudible, even with good equipment ; the “d” sound that changes “I” to “I’d” is more perceptible, but you have to work a bit to hear it. »

On notera que, même s’il laisse au juge le bénéfice du doute quant au fait d’être musulman, il persiste à dire que l’affaire a été jugée « on sharia grounds »

Ici, le premier article que Mc Carty avait fait paraitre :

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291881/sharia-court-pennsylvania-andrew-c-mccarthy 

Il est intitulé « The sharia Court of Pennsylvania », et il reste intitulé ainsi après que l’auteur l’ait corrigé en barrant l’expression « and a convert to Islam » (à noter qu’il ne barre rien d’autre), ce qui donne :

« A state judge in Pennsylvania has dismissed an assault and harrassment case against a Muslim defendant who admitted attacking the victim. Magistrate Judge Mark Martin, a veteran of the war in Iraq and a convert to Islam, ruled that Talag Elbayomy’s sharia defense — what he claimed was his obligation to strike out against any insult against the prophet Mohammed — trumped the First Amendment free speech rights of the victim.

Yes, you read that correctly.

There will be much more to say about this. For now, you can find details, here, including the YouTube recording of Judge Martin hectoring the assault victim, Ernie Perce, an activist atheist who paraded last October in a “Zombi Mohammed” costume. Before dismissing the case, Martin lectured Perce about the principles of Islam and the tender sensibilities of Muslims, calling him a “doofus” for failing to appreciate same.

In 27 years of trying and analyzing legal cases, this performance is as shocking and disgraceful as anything I’ve ever seen from an American trial judge. 

UPDATE : This post has been corrected because, after further review, it appears Judge Martin’s reported statement on the audio of the court proceeding, “I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive”, is actually, “F’Im a Muslim, I’d find it offensive.” For further details, see this post. »

@ Docdory