Bob Marley speaks!

He’s not the Messiah…….

Burka

Judge refuses to allow defendant to plead while wearing burka

Chloe Hamilton Friday 23 August 2013

 A judge has refused to allow a Muslim woman to enter a plea in court until she removed her burka, claiming he could not confirm the woman’s identity without seeing her face.

The 21-year-old woman from Hackney in east London, who is accused of witness intimidation, had refused to take off the full-length veil and reveal her face at Blackfriars Crown Court, the Judicial Office confirmed.

Judge Peter Murphy said there was a risk that a different person could pretend to be the defendant in the dock, and argued that the principle of open justice was more important than the woman’s religious beliefs.

He also refused a request from the woman’s barrister for a female police officer or prison guard to confirm that she was the same person as in police arrest pictures.

The judge reportedly told the woman: “I can’t, as a circuit judge, accept a plea from a person whose identity I am unable to ascertain.”

A Judicial Office spokeswoman said: “There was an issue with the judge asking to confirm the identity of the woman and he has adjourned the case until September 12, when he may hear legal argument about the issue.”

The defendant is alleged to have intimidated a witness in Finsbury Park, north London, in June.

Official guidelines were issued to judges in 2009 suggesting a “range of different possible approaches” to the matter of women wearing a burka or niqab in court, but stating that “the interests of justice remain paramount”.

The guidelines state: “For a witness or defendant a sensitive request to remove a veil, with no sense of obligation or pressure, may be appropriate, but careful thought must be given to such a request.

“The very fact of appearing in a court or tribunal will be quite traumatic for many, and additional pressure may well have an adverse impact on the quality of evidence given.”

While there is no ban on Islamic dress in public places in the UK, schools have been allowed to forge their own dress codes after a 2007 directive which followed several high-profile court cases.

The controversial garment has been the subject of an attempted ban within Parliament, however, with Tory MPs listing “ban the burka” as a proposed Private Members Bill earlier this year, alongside bringing back the death penalty and abolishing the position of Deputy Prime Minister.

The UK Independence Party, which argues that the burka is a sign of an “increasingly divided Britain”, has long supported a public ban, claiming the religious veils pose a potential security risk.

Ukip became the first British party to call for a total ban in January 2010. Both France and Belgium have banned the full-face veil from public places.

He’s not the Messiah…….

from the Daily Mail

By Alex Greig

PUBLISHED: 03:17, 12 August 2013 | UPDATED: 08:48, 12 August 2013

A judge has ordered a seven-month-old baby’s parents to change his name from Messiah to Martin after they appeared before her in a dispute about the child’s surname.

Instead, the pair were ordered to change the baby’s first name, because, according to the judge, only one person earned the name Messiah, ‘and that one person is Jesus Christ’.

According to WBIR Newport, the mother of the child, Jaleesa Martin, and his father couldn’t agree on whose last name the boy should have, so they went before child support magistrate Lu Ann Ballew at Cocke County Chancery Court on Thursday to decide the matter.

However, Ballew took issue not with the baby’s surname but his first: Messiah.

The baby’s full name was officially Messiah DeShawn Martin, but Ballew told the baby’s parents that they must change it to Martin DeShawn McCullough, which incorporates both mother and father’s surnames but leaves out Messiah.

“The word Messiah is a title and it’s a title that has only been earned by one person and that one person is Jesus Christ,” Judge Ballew told WBIR.

A WBIR reporter asked the judge what she thought about all the children named Jesus.

‘Well, I thought about that,’ she responded. ‘That’s not relevant to this case.’

Martin is amazed a judge could force her to change her son’s name because of their own religion.

‘I was shocked. I never intended on naming my son Messiah because it means God and I didn’t think a judge could make me change my baby’s name because of her religious beliefs.’

 Judge Ballew said she was thinking of the child’s future wellbeing when she made the decision.

The area of Newport where Martin and her son live has a large proportion of Christians, said the judge.

‘It could put him at odds with a lot of people and at this point he has had no choice in what his name is,’ Judge Ballew said.

Things Jesus Didn’t Say 2