A woman that was testifying in a circut court had her case dismissed because she was asked to remove her veil...she did not want to remove it for religious reasons so the judge told her to remove it or her will dismiss the case...she refused to remove the veil so her case was dismissed....
Did this violate her religious right??
Do you think this could have been a racist issue??
Do u believe the judge was being unethical????
Please try to be respectful...this did actually happen i believe in Florida i heard it on the radio.....
2006-10-23 02:27:01 · 23 answers · asked by coopchic 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Interesting question.
I don't think it should have violated her religious rights, since a judge has to be able to judge from her features if she is lying or not, but perhaps they should have offered her an accomodation, such as testimony and cross examination in private, or something. Bringing suit is a privilege, and you do have to follow some steps to do it. Saying you won't cooperate with the judicial system while suing someone kind of makes it difficult to complete the case.
What would you have suggested in that case?
Remember, you have to be fair to BOTH the plaintiff and the defendant.
2006-10-23 02:31:35 · answer #1 · answered by DAR 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
This was an issue in Florida. It's her religion and the judge has violated her rights. Look in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution you'll see what I mean. I feel the judge was unethical and didn't respect her beliefs which is very inconsiderate to say the least.
We had a similar issue here in Virginia. The DMV would not let a Muslim get a driver's license with her veil on. They told her if she didn't remove her veil for a picture she was not entitled to a drivers license. What do you do in a situation like this? It's there way of life and beliefs. I think she was being discriminated against. All rights are suppose to be for everyone no matter what beliefs they may have. It seems to me that it could very well be a lawsuit case for both.
2006-10-23 02:41:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
No the case was not dismissed because she is Muslim - it was dismissed because she failed to respect the court "just as every American is required" regardless of religion.
If the Judge would have asked her to denounce Islam - THEN - you would be right. All he did was demand she respect the court. A man can not even wear a hat - even if he is a Orthodox Jewish Rabbi.
Religious persecution does not apply here, although Muslims seem to think they must be exempt from our laws - and all others must comply with the law. Its a matter of equality that this woman must deal with. She is no more special than any other person on this planet.
BESIDES..., cant you imagine that a person wearing a veil in the court claiming to be "such and such" could be someone else posing as "such and such"? Removing the veil clearly identifies the person testifying. Understand?
2006-10-23 02:47:54 · answer #3 · answered by Victor ious 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋
I'm glad everyone got all worked up -- because no such thing ever happened -- at least in Florida. What did happen is a woman refused to remove her veil for a driver's license photo. The issuing agency refused to issue the license because she could not be identified & the court upheld the refusal. The state has always had a policy or refusing to make license photos of people wearing sunglasses, hats or otherwise obscuring their faces. Moreover, she was not veiled for earlier issued licenses.
2006-10-23 03:56:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Western countries have been pretty accommodating to people of different faiths. But there are some situations where a person's religious practices can cause a conflict with the standard procedures that have been followed for many years. In those cases the laws of the country the person is living in should prevail. In a court proceeding it's important to be able to identify the parties involved. Someone who wears clothing that covers her identity could be someone completely different than she claims to be. How else would the court personnel be able to tell?
If a person from a western country travels to a Muslim area, he/she would be expected to conform to the local customs. Why should it be different for Muslims who move to Europe or America?
2006-10-23 02:41:08 · answer #5 · answered by PatsyBee 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I think she should remove her veil. The whole point is (1) to allow an accused to face his accusers, and (2) to allow for proper identification of the witness / victim. If you wear a veil, how can you be certain that the person on the stand is the person who is the actual witness or victim? I say if you want to live here, you have to comply with our laws - even if they clash with your religion - in this case, that means taking off the veil. Edit: @ hotwheels: that's not how the First Amendment works; it doesn't allow you to refuse to comply with content neutral laws simply because you disagree with them as based on your interpretation of your religion. Otherwise, every cultist would be claiming they can legally rape, pillage, murder, etc. without fear of legal retribution. The 1st Amendment simply stops the government from imposing a particular religious view on the people of this country.
2016-05-22 00:55:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's so tricky isn't it? Of course this woman has rights which need to be respected, however, as human beings, we use facial expressions all the time in order to convey or judge feelings and thoughts.
As much as I agree with her rights, in this case, I think I have to take the judge's side and say that she should have removed it for the duration of her court appearance in order that her face and it's various emotive expressions were clearly visible.
I do not really think this is a racist issue in this instance, more one of fairness and equality.
2006-10-23 02:33:03 · answer #7 · answered by Daisy Artichoke 3 · 9⤊ 0⤋
I do not know if this woman is American-born or an immigrant, but if she is an immigrant, how did she manage to get into the country without having a full-face picture taken?
I do not know what went on in the courtroom - does anyone know if the judge offered other options? If he did and she refused she deserves everything she got. If the Judge did not offer other options he was not being very imaginative, which is a pity for justice, no matter what color the litigants are.
2006-10-23 02:54:48 · answer #8 · answered by skip 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
How can the judge be sure she was who she claims she was, if her face was covered with a veil? Plus, an accused has the right to face his accuser- he couldnt really face her if her face was covered, right?
Im all for religious freedom, but I think that this issue is a lot more complex than most people will initially give it credit for. But its already a large issue in Europe, and its goign to become on here as well, be sure to look at the info on both sides before making up your mind.
2006-10-23 02:36:07 · answer #9 · answered by bmwdriver11 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Hmm... her rights may have been violated.
But the person she is suing has rights as well. How can a jury decide if she is telling the truth or not if they can't see her face?
I think that if you want to take advantage of the legal system then you have to make some consessisons. And this is a time that she should have taken off her veil.
2006-10-23 02:41:14 · answer #10 · answered by BigD 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋