PA Man Acquited of Assaulting Atheist Impersonating Mohammad

[TJ in Oregon]

A man had harassment charges dropped for attacking an atheist group protester marching as "zombie prophet Mohammad". The judge delivered a lecture to the protester saying that his was not within his First Amendment rights to insult Muslim culture in that way. The judge has been falsely reported to be a convert to Islam (he's actually a Lutheran).

This whole thing sounds rather bizarre to me. How can the guy be let off for attacking someone on the grounds that the "victim" was mocking his religion? Could I have attacked the "zombie pope"? All that being said, the marchers sound like a bunch of morons since neither Mohammad nor the pope rose from the dead in Islam or Catholicism and what kind of @$$hole does a march like that anyway? But they should be allowed to without getting physically assaulted as long as they aren't breaking some other law.

[Torie]

The judge did not follow the law. If appealed, his ruling will be overturned. He just doesn't understand SCOTUS precedents on free speech, or if he does, doesn't care. So I would not make too much of this. We have had rogue judges before, and we will have them again. That is why we have the appellate process.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The evidence for assault is flimsy at best, which is probably why only a charge of harassment was brought.  Provocation can be used as a defense for a criminal charge, so the question becomes is it applicable here.   It's borderline.  Clearly the defendant had no reason to expect his faith to be attacked during a Halloween parade.   On the other hand, he also had no reason to expect that he might not encounter something offending his sensibilities.   If the idiot playing Zombie Mohammad has shown up at some sort of Islamic-related event, then I'd say there was provocation, but not here.

I do find it interesting that they did not have a Zombie Jesus Christ.  The idiots were at least smart enough to pick religions they thought would not have many defenders at the Halloween parade.

[J. J.]

From what I understand, the judge is now under police protection. 

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

That's 3 WTFs in one story!

1. Zombie Mohammed--Why?
2. Attacking Zombie Mohammed--Two wrongs don't make a right.
3. Acquitting Crazy Attack Guy--Hitting people is bad.

[dead0man]

I do find it interesting that they did not have a Zombie Jesus Christ.  The idiots were at least smart enough to pick religions they thought would not have many defenders at the Halloween parade.

There wasn't a Zombie Jesus, but there was a Zombie Pope with him.  Mechanicsburg has it's share of Catholics.  Zombie Pope wasn't attacked (and I'm sure Zombie Jesus wouldn't have been either).

[Joe Republic]

There's just too much crazy going on here for me to figure out what the f[inks] even happened here.

[CaDan]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

His decision can't be appealed. This was a bench trial and he found the defendant Not Guilty.

Keep in mind, that District Justices in Pennsylvania are not required to be lawyers. Regardless, his tirade really didn't have anything to do with the fact that he simply didn't believe that the Commonwealth carried its burden of proof.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Since it sounds like more than just a simple assault, I'd have to read the court transcripts before I pass judgment on the judge's ruling.