VIDEO: Pamela Geller with Ezra Levant on SUN TV
Sharia ‘Justice’ in Pennsylvania

23
Ezra Levant had me on his television show this evening to discuss the all-American Judge Martin adjudicating sharia justice in a Pennsylvania court. Much thanks to for grabbing the video.
We discuss Judge Martin enforcing the sharia even though he is non-Muslim while lecturing the victim, Ernest Perce, on Islamic sensibilities. That Judge Martin would think it is relevant or decisive that Perce offended Muslims is stunning. Further, the defdendant, Talaag Elbayomy, assumed it was illegal to insult Muhammad, and the Judge advanced that view.

Hundreds of threats for assault victim in case dismissed by Quran-minded judge — Pamela Geller, TheDC

According to Pence, "The judge is furious. Police called me warning of a Muslim brotherhood death threat. I told the chief, 'I've receives hundreds of death threats.'"

Here's what we know about the sharia judgement in Pennsylvania. Back in October, a non-Muslim, Ernest Perce, was accosted at a Halloween Parade by a Muslim, Talaag Elbayomy, because he was wearing a Zombie Muhammad costume with a sign. Police were called to the scene. The Muslim admitted to the police officer on the scene that he had gotten physical with Ernest Perce. Elbayomy attempted to rip Perce’s beard off, pull off his “Muhammed of Islam” sign and choke him.

Story continues below advertisement

“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,” Perce told ABC 27.

At the trial, Talaag Elbayomy said that he never got physical with Perce. So either he perjured himself or he lied to the policeman the night of the attack.The Judge called it a he said/she said. Not so. The policeman Curtis testified, and the Judge completely ignored that testimony. Further, the Judge refused to allow the video taken that night of the attack.

Eugene Volokh over at the legal blog, The Volokh Conspiracy, has posted a long explanation from the Judge here, wherein the Judge explains himself and says he is not a Muslim. It doesn't matter. What matters is American law in American courts.

JUDGE:         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 Koran here, and I would challenge you, sir, to show me where it says in the Koran that, that Mohammed is, Mohammed arose and walked among the dead.  Uh, 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 bit more about it.  Kind of makes you look like a doofus. 

 And Mr. Thomas is correct.  In many other Muslim speaking country – excuse me, many Arabic-speaking countries, predominantly Muslim, um, something like this is definitely against the law there, in their society.  In fact, it could be punished by death; frequently is, in their society.  Here in our society, we have a 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 our forefathers really intended.  I think our forefathers intended that we use the First Amendment so that we can speak what’s on our mind; not to piss off other people and cultures, which is what you did.  I don’t think you’re aware, sir…  There’s a big difference between how Americans practice Christianity – and I understand you’re 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’re otherwise told you cannot because you’re too ill, too elderly, whatever.  But you must make the attempt.  (Their greetings) – salaam aleichem (sp), (alekema) salaam – uh, may God be with you…  Whenever – it is very common in their language, when they’re speaking to each other, it’s very common for them to say, uh, Allah willing, this will happen.  It is – they are so immersed in it.  And what you’ve done is, you completely trashed their essence, their being.  They find it very, very, very offensive.  I’m a Muslim; I find it offensive.  I find what’s on the other side of this very offensive.  But you have that right.  But you’re way outside your bounds, First Amendment rights.  This is what – and I’ve spent about seven and a half of my years all together living in other countries – um, 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’re 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 what the other people 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.  I’ve been at the Halloween Parade and I understand how noise can be, how difficult it is to get a pulpit.  And 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, that the police officer on the bicycle didn’t stop and say, hey, let’s break this up.  You put your hand down, sir.  You’re not a witness.

JUDGE:         The preponderance – excuse me – the burden of proof is that the defendant, it must be proven that the defendant did with the intent to harass, annoy or alarm the other person.  The Commonwealth – 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 his story that he did not.  But another part of the element as Mr. Thomas said was, was the defendant’s attempt to harass, annoy or alarm, or was it 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, 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’m going to dismiss the charge.  (Inaudible phrase), (please).

Here is how the Judge explains himself:

This story certainly has legs. As you might imagine, the public is only getting the version of the story put out by the “victim” (the atheist). Many, many gross misrepresentations. Among them: I’m a Muslim, and that’s why I dismissed the harassment charge (Fact: if anyone cares, I’m actually Lutheran, and have been for at least 41 years).

I also supposedly called him and threatened to throw him in jail if he released the tapes he had made in the courtroom without my knowledge/permission (Fact: HE called ME and told me that he was ready to “go public” with the tapes and was wondering what the consequences would be; I advised him again to not disseminate the recording, and that I would consider contempt charges; he then replied that he was “willing to go to jail for (his) 1st amendment rights”- I never even uttered the word “jail” in that conversation).

He said that I kept a copy of the Quran on the bench (fact: I keep a Bible on the bench, but out of respect to people with faiths other than Christianity, I DO have a Quran on the bookcase BESIDE my bench, and am trying to acquire a Torah, Book of Mormon, Book of Confucius and any other artifacts which those with a faith might respect).

He claims that I’m biased towards Islam, apparently because he thinks I’m Muslim. In fact, those of you who know me, know that I’m an Army reservist with 27 years of service towards our country (and still serving). I’ve done one tour in Afghanistan, and two tours in Iraq, and am scheduled to return to Afghanistan for a year this summer. During my first tour in Iraq, I was ambushed once, attacked by a mob once, sniped at once, and rocketed, bombed, and mortared so many times that I honestly don’t know how many time I’ve been attacked. Presumably by Muslim insurgents. My point: if anyone SHOULD be biased towards Muslims, one would think it would be me. I’m not, however, because I personally know or have met many good, decent people who follow Islam, and I shouldn’t characterize the actions of those who tried to kill me as characterizations of all Muslims.

When I asked him why he dressed up as “Muhammad zombie,” he told me that it was because he was reflecting the Muslim belief that Muhammad rose from the dead, walked as a zombie, and then went to heaven. That was one of the reasons I tried to spend 6 whole minutes trying to explain and de-mystify Islam through my own knowledge, and in an attempt to prevent an incident like this recurring in my community. Unfortunately, the message was obviously not received in the vein that I had intended. And, in the interest of full disclosure, I did use the word “doofus,” but didn’t call him that directly; I said something akin to “ if you’re going to mock another religion or culture, you should check your facts, first- otherwise, you’ll look like a doofus.”;

In short, I based my decision on the fact that the Commonwealth failed to prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that the charge was just; I didn’t doubt that an incident occurred, but I was basically presented only with the victim’s version, the defendant’s version, and a very intact Styrofoam sign that the victim was wearing and claimed that the defendant had used to choke him. There so many inconsistencies, that there was no way that I was going to find the defendant guilty.

A lesson learned here: there’s a very good reason for Rule 112 of Rules of Criminal Procedure- if someone makes an unauthorized recording in a Court not of Record, there’s no way to control how it might be manipulated later, and then passed off as the truth. We’ve received dozens upon dozens of phone calls, faxes, and e-mails. There are literally hundreds of not-so-nice posts all over the internet on at least 4 sites that have carried this story, mainly because I’ve been painted as a Muslim judge who didn’t recuse himself, and who’s trying to introduce Sharia law into Mechanicsburg.

Ernest Perce responds:

LMAO, he can't find a Torah? he ordered me to destroy the recording. He's in fact right about section 112 rules of court. He verbally said he would hold me in contempt for this. I forwarded you the emails from his assistant Bonnie Snyder saying, the judge ordered you to destroy the audio. He grossly misinterpreting section 112 section D. Doing this with the section 42 contempt he told me about, I asked him what is the penalty? That's jail or fines.
Fact is, I called originally to ask him about releasing audio, he was gone in training. That is why I commutated with Bonnie. Then on Friday when we talked he was aggressive with section 42 contempt. That's when I said, Judge your threatening me and misinterpreting 112. I'm releasing this and you can't do a damned thing about. you gave us permission to record. conversation Furthered and I hung up.

He wrote to Bonnie Snyder, administrative secretary of the Cumberland County District Court: “I was in a recent proceeding and Judge Martin gave both parties the right/permission to record the proceeding on our cellular devices. I would like to know if it is allowed to put the recording online for listening purposes. If the answer is no, I'd like to know the case law which is being cited and the punishment for violating the case law.”

Snyder responded: “Judge Martin only gave permission for the attorney or officer to record the proceedings.  He did not give anyone else permission to record anything in the courtroom at the hearing held on December 6, 2011 at 2:45 pm.”

Perce then asked her: “Are you instructing me via Judge Martin to destroy or delete and not use my audio recording?”

Answered Snyder: “Yes, since you were not authorized to make any recordings.”

The Truth Must be Told

Your contribution supports independent journalism

Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.

Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.

Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.

Please contribute here.

or

Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding. Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America's survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on
Trump's social media platform, Truth Social. It's open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spammy or unhelpful, click the - symbol under the comment to let us know. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

If you would like to join the conversation, but don't have an account, you can sign up for one right here.

If you are having problems leaving a comment, it's likely because you are using an ad blocker, something that break ads, of course, but also breaks the comments section of our site. If you are using an ad blocker, and would like to share your thoughts, please disable your ad blocker. We look forward to seeing your comments below.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
23 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Lithlad
Lithlad
12 years ago

91% of ‘honour killings’ occur within Muslim families and they have the nerve to say this is has nothing to do with Islam. They say it’s ‘cultural’. Where the hell do cultural values stem from? RELIGION.

Lithlad
Lithlad
12 years ago

Please ignore my first comment, I misread the location of this story as being in the USA. My mistake. However, I stand by what I said. All people of the free world – whatever your colour or creed or religion (Muslims need to leave Islam for their sakes and ours)- need to stand up against Islam.

Rob
Rob
12 years ago

Just watched it. Pamela, you totally ROCK!
The US is glad to have you! It’s people like you who defend freedom from oppression. Please keep it up!

DesertPaladin
DesertPaladin
12 years ago

Why is this outrageous story not on Fox News? Surely Hannity, O’Reilly, et al have an interest in this? PS @ Lithlad: It would be ill-advised to advocate violence of any kind on a Public Forum. “Big Brother IS watching you”… There are other means still available to us to “take back our Country”, and until those are exhausted/prohibited, violence remains a last, most distasteful resort.
What I’d like to know is HOW a NAZI, having ideological aims hostile to the United States can the majority of it’s people, can be prohibited from Public Office, and a Muslim, whose ideological goals are far more malevolent and ancient is not? Forgive me for saying so, but the numbers massacred by Hitler seem paltry when compared to those massacred by the “Religion of Peace”.

Brandy
Brandy
12 years ago

Judge Martin said, “…that was one of the reasons I tried to spend 6 whole minutes trying to explain and de-mystify Islam through my own knowledge, and in an attempt to prevent an incident like this recurring in my community.”
Judge Martin, that isn’t your job! Your job is to weigh all the evidence (and actually look at ALL of it!) and make a judgement on that evidence. What Mr. Pence did wasn’t a crime. What the defendent did WAS! My gosh, I don’t even have a law degree and I can figure it out.
You also said: “In short, I based my decision on the fact that the Commonwealth failed to prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that the charge was just; I didn’t doubt that an incident occurred, but I was basically presented only with the victim’s version, the defendant’s version…” “There so many inconsistencies, that there was no way that I was going to find the defendant guilty.”
I guess you could apply the same with respect to Mr. Pence posting the audio recording on the internet. You said one thing and Mr. Pence said another. Case closed.
Pamela, THANK YOU for keeping this story in the spotlight. It needs to be! I think Judge Martin is trying his hardest to backtrack but most of us have heard the audio for ourselves and watched the video. The evidence speaks for itself.

Cate
Cate
12 years ago

Great job, Pamela at keeping this story going. It’s got legs, for sure. And I believe that judge needs to be taken to task for what he did. He has put a man’s life in danger, and his family’s lives in danger. He needs to be held accountable for that, which means keeping this story going. I want it to go viral. And I want him to be FORCED to step down. This is CRAP what he is doing.

alyn21
alyn21
12 years ago

The judge at the very least is overly sympathetic to Islam. He did not weigh the evidence properly since he totally ignored the policeman’s statement.
Also the defendent admitted that he believed he was within his rights to assault Mr. Pence for insulting Mohammed.
And why is this so-called judge giving a lecture about Islam to the plaintiff in an American court of law???
Clearly there is something rotten in the state of Pennsylvania.

Revnant Dream
Revnant Dream
12 years ago

Pamela is right. Its all about a Judge , no matter what back ground. Using Sharia law in America over American Law. Than trying to cover up his respect for foreign law in barbaric Nations. As eqaul to US law under The Constitution or common law. He decided this not with the Constitutional first amendment in mind, but tried to make Sharia Law equal to The American constitution. This Judge is about cultural equivalence, not Justice as we know it. End of story.

Bob H
Bob H
12 years ago

This “Judge” states very clearly “I’m a Muslim”. What’s this crap that he’s not a Muslim ? Let’s stay with the facts and not a fairy tale. “Truth” much stronger than fiction.

Chrissy Lee
Chrissy Lee
12 years ago

A real God isn’t threatened by a cartoon, an insult, or depiction of any kind. What does that say about Allah and his pedophile prophet? What does that say about the ‘religion of peace’ when Muslims react, time and time again, with brutal and lethal violence?
More importantly, what does this tragic ruling say about the fate of the courts and the Constitution when Sharia Law is applied on American soil?
Pamela Geller, thank you for your bravery and determination to see this dhimmi judge removed. More power to you, go raise hell! 🙂

Margie
Margie
12 years ago

Andrew McCarthy stated in his article regarding this case (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291921/sharia-court-pennsylvania-transcript-andrew-c-mccarthy) that the Judge was not a Muslim. But, one can clearly hear, in the audio, the Judge stating that he is a Muslim.

vinny
vinny
12 years ago

What a surprise; the judge is lying about his faith. That makes him a muslim in my eyes. It appears every muslim is a lying turd. Same as the shit in the White House.

InfidelForLife
InfidelForLife
12 years ago

“judges” like this, Muslim or not, need to be removed. Period. They are not only a danger to freedom, justice, and the victim, but a clear and present danger to the very existence of the United States and Western civilization and everything it stands for.

Paula
Paula
12 years ago

Here’s another judge who doesn’t know what’s in his job description. He should be impeached.
He first says he’s a Muslim, then claims he’s a Lutheran. I am a Lutheran and I know there are misguided well-intentioned “let’s all just get along” Lutherans who will say they’re both if it means keeping the peace. Makes me wonder if they know what a Christian believes or the totality of what Muslims believe. Lord save our country from judges like Martin.

BUTSeriously
BUTSeriously
12 years ago

Pamela is “WRONG” in this instant. The antics of the atheists were anything but freedom of speech, representing only its antithesis. One cannot abuse someone’s mother using the same premises – and abusing someone’s faith is the same thing – sometimes even worse.
The U.S. Constitution is the greatest man made treatise humanity possesses, and it specially marks the antithesis of Islamic Shariah – but one cannot abuse the Constitution by reading such a grotesque spin of it. Free speech, like everything else, is conditional and law based, with responsibility and onus.
My advice: Pamela – bite the bullet and cease undoing all your good work. Thou art positively wrong in this instant. Pursuing this track will cause you a lack of credibility and coherence. You have my permission to bang the head of anyone using free speech to curse you or your religion.

dsinc
dsinc
12 years ago

BUTSeriously That’s not seriously?? You’re joking surely? Abusing someone’s faith is not a crime. Pamela is RIGHT. The OIC, Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu and the 56 members plus ‘Palestine’ and any Muslim’s out there can not decide what legal and conditional restrictions are to be placed on FREE speech. Seriously!!!

Rick Patel
Rick Patel
12 years ago

Pamela Geller is absolutely gorgeous. She is torrid, tempestuous, tantalizing. Her hair is long, lustrous, lovely. Thanks for the video.

steiner
steiner
12 years ago

Trial by a zombie judge….as well…

Wallabee
Wallabee
12 years ago

> trying to acquire a Torah
Er, if he really WAS a Christian who had even the bare minimum knowledge of basic Judaism, he would be aware that he ALREADY HAS a copy of the Torah if he owns a complete Bible. What is called the “Old Testament” (i.e. the first and largest section of the Christian Bible) is what constitutes the Jewish “Torah”. The books are arranged differently, but otherwise it is the same collection of books.
And, if he actually wanted a Jewish translation of the Torah, he can find this in nearly any book store, including many Christian book stores. I own copies of the JPS and Artscroll translations of the Torah, along with copies of Midrash, Mishnah, and 6 volumes of the Talmud… most of which were purchased at a Christian book distributer.
It seems odd to me that a “Christian” who wants to pretend to be sensitive to all religions, would have a copy of the Quran but can’t seem to find a copy of the Torah… or that he doesn’t realize he already has a copy.
But then again, the Judge isn’t quite sure WHAT he is: “I’m a Muslim; I find it offensive…” vs his current claim that he is Lutheran.
In spite of this guy’s desire to fill his book shelf with various religious holy books he obviously has not read ANY of them (other than maybe the Quran) and has NO clue about any of the religions. For example, there is no “Book of Confucius” and no “faith” associated with Confucius. Kung Fu Tzu (Confucius) did not write any books nor establish a religion. He was a philosopher and teacher who emphasized Government and Societal ethics, morality and justice. Collections of his sayings and teachings appear in numerous books including “The Analects” but they are not considered “Holy” books, such as the Bible, Torah, or Quran. On the other hand, he does not mention commonly known holy books of other religions such as the Bhagavad Gita, etc.
But the Judge would not know any of this because he is just presenting a random list of what he thinks are books of “faith” to deflect the charge that he applied his own prejudicial views of Islam and Quran to circumvent the U.S. Constitution and Law.
He needs to be disbarred.

Shmooviyet
Shmooviyet
12 years ago

“Trying to acquire” a Book of Mormon, etc.? He hasn’t seen the ads on TV offering them free to anyone who makes the call? How difficult is it to acquire any of these books/teachings? What a lying little worm. I cannot imagine his bragging about his tour is impressing anyone, either. I’ve never heard any friends nor family members who are veterans crow about their combat experiences.
Also, as AtlasShrugs has pointed out, O’Reilly is “part of the problem”. IF the story is covered by his show, he will put a big PC spin on it, and end up interrupting or attacking the atheist in one way or another. If anyone is allowed to report on the story on FOX, it will be Hannity.

supra shoes for sale
supra shoes for sale
12 years ago

A friend without faults will never be found. *>*

Uncle Vladdi
Uncle Vladdi
12 years ago

Whether or not the judge is an actual muzi, he is a preposterous doofus – his backwards ruling seem to go like this:
“A valid defense against physical assault charges is ‘hurt feelings!’ The Constitution says so! Whee!”
Thus he actively enables violent crime by conflating it with the right to free speech – “you have the right to speak freely, and then those you offend with it have the right to pummel you into Submission!”
He’s pretending there’s a right to not have your feelings hurt (by the Truth, for instance). Often learning new facts is apainful experience, but that’s the right we have – not the right to remain wilfully ignorant (i.e: criminally negligent) after the truth has been pointed out to us.
Obviously, this (Submission to nonsense) IS the basis of sharia crime (“Law”)! islam itself is nothing more than an ancient ongoing extortion-racket CRIME-syndicate.
;-(

Uncle Vladdi
Uncle Vladdi
12 years ago

This “judge” is implicitly saying:
“A valid defense to accusations of violent physical assault, is to say your victim infringed on your right to not be offended! The Constitution says so! Whee!”
Well, NO. Sorry, Judge Doofus, BUT:
Actually, your only right is to learn from the (often painful) Truth.
There is no right to remain in (therefore criminally negligent) ignorance.
THE ‘JUDGE’ RULED:
“In his opinion, the moslem had the right to be offended and attack you, infidel. So therefore that’s the law now, too. Case dismissed!
SO: NO – JUDGE DISMISSED!
😉
Seems someone started a petition about this:
http://www.change.org/petitions/petition-to-pennsylvania-governor-tom-corbett-immediate-removal-and-disbarment-of-judge-mark-w-martin

Sponsored
Geller Report
Thanks for sharing!