La question de savoir si le juge Martin est musulman est maintenant débattue sur internet.
Son bureau a démenti qu’il le soit.
Pourtant, à écouter la bande, beaucoup ont entendu « I’m a muslim ».
L’enregistrement serait-il difficile à entendre ?
Les avis sont partagés.
Ici, Chelsea Hoffmann, dans un article intitulé
I’m a Muslim,’ Said Judge Mark Martin Before Dismissing Charges Against Muslim , comprend bien qu’il a dit « I’m a muslim » :
Par contre Andrew Mc Carthy, dans cet autre article intitulé To be or not to be a muslim, exprime un doute :
En seconde analyse, après maintes ré-auditions de la bande en amplifiant le son et sans être affirmatif, il pense qu’il est peut-être possible qu’il faille deviner un ’f, pour « if », devant « I’m a muslim » :
Il écrit :
«
Mark Martin is the Pennsylvania state court judge I referred to in two posts (here andhere) yesterday — the jurist who, on sharia grounds, dismissed a harassment case against a Muslim man who assaulted an activist atheist whose “Zombie Mohammed” costume the assailant found insulting to Islam.
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. »