Muslim man accused of shooting two teenagers calls for judge to be removed from his case over comments he made about Sharia law
- Zakaria Zaatiti applied for bail on charges of shooting two teenagers in August
- The 23-year-old accused sought to have the Melbourne magistrate disqualified
- His lawyer Shaun Ginsbourg cited Ross Maxted’s questions about Sharia law
A Muslim man accused of shooting two teenagers wants to remove a magistrate from his case because of perceived bias about Sharia law.
Zakaria Zaatiti, 23, appeared in Melbourne Magistrates Court on Tuesday to apply for bail over allegations he shot two males aged 16 and 18 at Roxburgh Park in August.
But before the bail hearing began, his lawyer Shaun Ginsbourg applied for magistrate Ross Maxted to disqualify himself from the case.
A 23-year-old Muslim man is applying to have a Melbourne magistrate disqualified from his case for his perceived bias on Sharia law (a woman in Aceh is caned in May for adultery)
Mr Maxted refused Zaatiti bail in September.
‘Essentially Your Honour made comments in the course of cross-examining my client’s father about sharia law,’ Mr Ginsbourg said.
The barrister said those comments constituted ‘apprehended bias’ in regards to the strict Islamic legal system.
Mr Maxted said there were legal precedents which prevent magistrates from removing themselves from a case simply because an accused person requests it.
Under Sharia law, women are required to cover themselves in burqas to avoid arousing men
Australia is not an Islamic country. Sharia law doesn’t apply here.
‘I should not readily accede to a disqualification application if I feel that it’s not required by law,’ he said.
Mr Ginsbourg said three key comments made by Mr Maxted on September 21 support his application for the magistrate to remove himself from Zaatiti’s second bid for bail.
‘I was left with an uncomfortable feeling that there may be two sets of loyalties in this, of one to sharia law and one to the court,’ the magistrate said in the previous hearing, according to a transcript read by Mr Ginsbourg.
This is not about “uncomfortable feelings”. This is about Mohammedan infil-traitors trying to force us under sharia law.
The magistrate was referring to Zaatiti’s father, who had offered to be his son’s surety.
‘Your Honour draws a distinction between a person being loyal to sharia law and on the other hand, the person being loyal to the law of the land,’ Mr Ginsbourg said.
His Honour must draw this distinction, because sharia doesn’t apply in Australia. And must not be considered, not ever.
‘Your Honour expressly draws a link between concerns about his loyalties to those laws and his loyalty to sharia law.’
The defendant clearly expressed his disdain for our laws and his loyalty to sharia law. Why should that disqualify the judge who calls him on it?
The defence barrister said the magistrate had ‘no rational basis whatsoever’ to find Zaatiti senior’s adherence to sharia law undermined his credibility.
It does. Because under the sharia the perp is allowed to lie to the infidel.
Mr Maxted said the comments were observations, not findings, about the suitability of Zaatiti’s father as the ‘eyes and ears of the court’ if his son was released on bail.
‘What has his professed loyalty or adherence to sharia law got to do with that question?’ Mr Ginsbourg said.
‘I’m not answering questions from the bar table,’ Mr Maxted said before adjourning the matter to Wednesday.
No consideration should be given to this insidious meddling with our law. These moronic attempts to subvert the law should be laughed out of court.