Reply To: Justice in Balto.?

Raphael Kaufman -“Hi Health, I haven’t been around for a while but I see that you have remained consistant in your position. My statement was correct. the instigator of the confrontation is the one at fault. Whether or not the shomrim guy instigated a confrontation was a matter for the court to decide. The court apparently decided that he was, in fact the instigator.”

I understand the Court decided this, but my statement of “miscarriage of justice” was based on how she decided this. After reading the quotes in the media -I can’t find any reason besides her prejudice & desire to be PC. The only testimony she legally has – is the Shomrim guys’ and he said he had no intention for a fight or “confrontation”. The 911 call which was also included in evidence occured after the boys had left. This can’t possibly tell what occured at the time. What evidence does she have that the Shomrim guy is lying? I think NONE.

Also, remember he testified that he only hit the kid after he charged him with the stick and he didn’t think he could out run him.

“In any event, getting out of the car to “talk” to the “victim” was a bad idea. The Shomrim kid should have reported to the police and followed the “victim”. He would only be justified in taking further action if he witnessed an assault taking place.”

Granted. But this isn’t illegal. And “Hindsight is always 20-20” or “Hindsight is always better than foresight.”

“P.S. I do, in fact, believe that the kid was tried fairly and the anit-semitism that you and others on this blog perceive to exist in the U.S. is in your mind. That is not to say that there are no anti-semites in America. It’s just that institutional and social anti-semitism simply does not exist in the U.S. I know you believe otherwise, but you believe a lot of other things that I see differently. Biz 120, we’ll find out who was right. Mestammeh we’ll find that we were both wrong.”

The reason you think that way is because you haven’t seen it. I was also asleep until I experienced it. I can’t even count how many jobs I was turned down because I wouldn’t work on Shabbos. When I sued in federal court – I kept making the point -what hardship, let alone minimal hardship existed why they legally didn’t have to accommodate me. They only proved that they needed Sat. employees, never why they couldn’t accommodate me. This question was ignored all the way to the Supreme Court. So systemic Anti-semitism has two options. One like in Europe where they did mistreat Jews financially and physically. And the other couvertly, like here, where they write laws protecting “Shabbos” observers in employment, but don’t enforce these laws in the whole federal court system.