Even Jewish Criminals Deserve Kosher Food

[muman613]

Their are 2 sides of justice (or justice systems). 1 is the Rabbinic which is very limited and like you said if once in 7 or 70 years they had the reputation as "bloody". The requirements and conditions were extremely rare to put someone to death for (prior warnings, and manyyy conditions). Then their is the Kingship (or governmental) who is somewhat less limited for example 1 witness can be enough. I dont know the whole system and how it works but I know enough to know their are 2 sides 1 the Rabbinic and 2 the Kingship and that the kingship is responsible for state security both from the outside and in as well.  The Rabbinic at least from my impression (I could be wrong) was mainly (but not limited to) teach the public the proper ways.
 Perhaps someone can ask Chaim and he will answer on the show.

The Torah clearly lays out the system of witnesses and judges. I believe the King must obey the Torah, as he is commanded to write 2 Torah scrolls and carry one on his person at all times.

But it is true that the King could order his subjects to be put to death. Insulting the King, as in the case of King David, was certainly punishable by death. (I will try to find references a bit later tonight).

[muman613]

Although not fully on topic regarding the original post, concerning insults to the king I found this:

http://blog.webyeshiva.org/machshava/the-torah-scholars-obligation-not-to-ignore-insults

As an example, he notes an episode from early in the reign of King Saul. When he was first crowned king, Scripture tells us that some people belittled the king, doubting that he could save them from their enemies. After he won his first victory, Shmuel suggested renewing the kingship; at that celebration, people wanted to take those original doubters and kill them (I note that those people had apparently not been offended at the original insult—frontrunners and fairweather friends are not a new phenomenon!).

Saul stopped them, which Meiri sees as an exact violation of this Gemara; while he might have been right not to respond himself, anyone who is owed respect, like a king or Torah scholar, cannot stop others from enforcing that respect.

See also : http://www.torah.org/learning/ravfrand/5769/tetzaveh.html

Under normal circumstances this would be admirable. Normally, it is praiseworthy to be amongst those who hear themselves being shamed but do not respond [Yoma 23a]. However, that is not the case for the King of Israel. Regarding the King of Israel, the law is that someone who acts rebellious towards, disobeys, or insults the king must be executed. Shaul was, first and foremost, a humble person and as such was not particular about his honor. However, he should have been particular about that honor.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Muman the king needs 1 witness to execute a criminal.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

The Torah clearly lays out the system of witnesses and judges. I believe the King must obey the Torah, as he is commanded to write 2 Torah scrolls and carry one on his person at all times.

But it is true that the King could order his subjects to be put to death. Insulting the King, as in the case of King David, was certainly punishable by death. (I will try to find references a bit later tonight).

In fact, the king or government in place of a king has extrajudicial powers beyond that of the Jewish High Court.  This was a system of checks and balances that existed for various reasons.   But of course none of this is relevant to a gentile country which is absolutely not subject to the Jewish High court at all.  So that would be kind of like unlimited extra judicial power (although the govt has its own legal and justice system through which it exacts punishment and justice).

[muman613]

In fact, the king or government in place of a king has extrajudicial powers beyond that of the Jewish High Court.  This was a system of checks and balances that existed for various reasons.   But of course none of this is relevant to a gentile country which is absolutely not subject to the Jewish High court at all.  So that would be kind of like unlimited extra judicial power (although the govt has its own legal and justice system through which it exacts punishment and justice).

Yes, this thread has touched on several issues which I originally did not intend to bring up. I don't know the guy who the original article is about, and I am not aware of his case other than what was written, but the fact that the court upheld the right of Jewish prisoners to be granted Kosher meals I am happy about.

[angryChineseKahanist]

Please explain who is defending criminals here?

You are.
I don't care what 'victories' criminals get.
How about victories for good people?

[muman613]

You are.
I don't care what 'victories' criminals get.
How about victories for good people?

No, I am not defending what he did or didn't do. If you read the thread the issue is whether a Jewish prisoner should get Kosher meals. This is a topic which Rabbi Kahane fought and won for, and it is a relevant topic, whether you realize it or not. As a Jew I believe that a prisoner should not be forced to violate his religious convictions. Both Chaim and Rabbi Kahane dealt with this issue.

It is a victory for all Jews to have the right to have Kosher food in prison. Look at the case of Jonathan Pollard, according to some he is a murderer and thus he should be denied Kosher food. I say that no matter what, as a Jew, he should be able to have kosher food in prison.

You are really twisting the entire point of this article. Nobody is saying that this guy is not guilty or is guilty. The issue is that he is a Jew, and he has asked for kosher food and the right has been affirmed. I celebrate that victory.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

A Jewish king has powers to do certain things. A Secular Israeli government doesn't have those powers.

[angryChineseKahanist]

No, I am not defending what he did or didn't do. If you read the thread the issue is whether a Jewish prisoner should get Kosher meals. This is a topic which Rabbi Kahane fought and won for, and it is a relevant topic, whether you realize it or not. As a Jew I believe that a prisoner should not be forced to violate his religious convictions. Both Chaim and Rabbi Kahane dealt with this issue.

It is a victory for all Jews to have the right to have Kosher food in prison. Look at the case of Jonathan Pollard, according to some he is a murderer and thus he should be denied Kosher food. I say that no matter what, as a Jew, he should be able to have kosher food in prison.

You are really twisting the entire point of this article. Nobody is saying that this guy is not guilty or is guilty. The issue is that he is a Jew, and he has asked for kosher food and the right has been affirmed. I celebrate that victory.

my point is "too bad". as in, a few muslims are good, should we love all muslims?
if in a prison of many jews and two jews are not particularly bad....
or some lib may say to me what if no non-whites are allowed into the usa, then I would never have been here. my answer is too bad, I can go to another part of the world.
etc...you get the drill.

[angryChineseKahanist]

Now he's FURIOUS!
 

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

A Jewish king has powers to do certain things. A Secular Israeli government doesn't have those powers.

Not true.  And it also doesn't have to be a king either.   King is just a form of government.  The great sanhedrin isn't expected to be a police force and isn't capable of that anyway, they have other important functions.   

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

On the one hand, why should a Jewish criminal be denied kosher food?   Jail is the punishment for his crimees not forced violation of his newfound religious beliefs.

On the other hand, this guy did a pretty horrible crime so people don't want to hear about his "rights" and what not.  He didn't afford the victim any rights.

BUT what if he truly regrets what he did and his repentance or attempt at it is sincere?  Is there some need to force him to violate religious convictions?   So why didn't the judge sentence him with that punishment?   I don't think people are justified in the visceral reaction against him getting kosher food.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Feed him kosher food until he gets the chair.

[USAReturn2GodNow1776]

Imagine if someone in the system claimed to follow a religion that says he can only eat caviar, escargot, algae, and some obscure type of beetle that would have to be imported. We can't go to trouble to accommodate every religion. But we should do everything possible to accommodate Judaism and Christianity because this country is based upon Judeo-Christian values.

[cjd]

The problem that starts to develop is that every religious group under the sun will expect special accommodation... Either it's done for all or it should be done for none... About the only way around this is to have a third party commissary service prepare the food and reimburse them at the same rate it costs the prison for the normal meals...

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

The problem that starts to develop is that every religious group under the sun will expect special accommodation... Either it's done for all or it should be done for none... About the only way around this is to have a third party commissary service prepare the food and reimburse them at the same rate it costs the prison for the normal meals...

The court has already established that this IS done.
Chaim also had to fight for kosher food while he was in prison, remember?

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

It is already done. Whether Kosher, Hallal or vegetarian (for Buddists) or for any others. This is part of the American system and as such is should and is provided for all.

[nessuno]

I would be very weary of a Jewish person being tried and executed by a secular gentile court, especially because he did not actually kill anyone. He was an accomplice by being a "look out". In a perfect world, we would have a Jewish court who would be the one to try him.

But back to the story. I am glad he is getting kosher meals. It's none of this backward prison's business if he was sincere or not. He is Jewish and should get kosher meals period. Their argument is petty, he was insincere because he bought non-kosher food? Well if they were withholding kosher food from him what was he supposed to do? Starve to death?

If you live in the United States then you will tried by United States Court System.  Isn't that right?  Should we have a court that follows Sharia Law for Muslims too?  That is why the country is so out of whack.  We keep catering to special interests.  If a person doesn't like the legal system in this country...they should leave.  It's not perfect for certain.  Still, it is probably far better than most other systems. As for him not being guilty of 'murder' in some degree...let us just ask the family of the man who was murdered what they think.

Feed him kosher food until he gets the chair.

 
I agree.   Great post.

[mord]

1 even in Israel he would be tried in a secular court#2 we're in the U.S. i don't know any country in the world where he would get a Jewish Trial that includes Israel. I read the Judges ruling it's obvious from his ruling allowing Kosher Food that he's a practicing Christian .I'll look for his ruling now

[mord]

Here's the ruling the Judge who  wrote the ruling is obviously not secular   http://www.timesofisrael.com/convicted-killer-must-be-served-kosher-food-us-judge-rules/   





 

JTA — A Texas prison inmate should be served free kosher meals, a US appeals court ruled, overturning a lower court decision.

Max Moussazadeh, 35, who is serving a 75-year sentence for a 1993 murder, has a sincere desire to keep kosher, and his religious rights were infringed upon, the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled earlier this month. The 2-1 ruling by the appeals court panel rejected a decision by a US District Court.

After Moussazadeh filed a federal lawsuit in 2005 complaining that the prison system did not provide kosher food, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice started a kosher food program at one of its prisons. Moussazadeh and the other prisoners requesting a kosher diet were transferred there.

But Moussazadeh was transferred later to a high-security prison that does not provide free kosher meals, though he can purchase kosher products from the commissary.

The prison system argued that his commitment to a kosher diet was insincere because Moussazadeh had gone through the general food line at the commissary on occasion and had purchased food without kosher supervision.

“A finding of sincerity does not require perfect adherence to beliefs expressed by the inmate, and even the most sincere practitioner may stray from time to time,” Judge Jerry Smith wrote for the majority, according to Courthouse News. “[A] sincere religious believer doesn’t forfeit his religious rights merely because he is not scrupulous in his observance; for where would religion be without its backsliders, penitents, and prodigal sons?”  Yes this was obviously a Christian not a leftist secular

[בַּחַמַל]

Jews are entitled to Kosher food in captivity more than any other religious group because Jews were in America the longest.

I have nothing against vegetarians, but Moslems should not receive Hallal in prison. What's next?  Food without onions and garlic for the Ayurvedics?

[Rubystars]

I think it's ridiculous to think that a Jewish person should only be reported to a Jewish justice system. What if his victims were non-Jews? How would you feel if a Muslim murdered a Jew and the only other witnesses to it were other Muslims, and they wouldn't report him to the regular police but only to a Shariah court? Do you think that the victim's family would stand a chance of getting justice that way? If a Jewish person does something evil he should have to face the same secular justice system that anybody else faces.

[muman613]

I think it's ridiculous to think that a Jewish person should only be reported to a Jewish justice system. What if his victims were non-Jews? How would you feel if a Muslim murdered a Jew and the only other witnesses to it were other Muslims, and they wouldn't report him to the regular police but only to a Shariah court? Do you think that the victim's family would stand a chance of getting justice that way? If a Jewish person does something evil he should have to face the same secular justice system that anybody else faces.

The Jewish court is a higher level of authority than a secular court. But today we do not have the Jewish High court so there is no ability to operate according to the Jewish law regarding capital offenses. But a Jew, during the time that the Sanhedrin exists, should only deal with justice according to the Jewish law. This is what some of us were discussing above.

This has nothing to do with avoiding prosecution. It has everything to do with Torah law.

See this article for an explanation, it deals with non-capital litigation in court:

http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/litigation_in_secular_courts1.html

Litigation In Secular Courts
Rabbi Simcha Krauss

The Shmona Esrai, which a Jew says three times a day, contains our innermost and most profound prayers. In it we express and articulate our most basic needs - we pray for national liberation, the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the redemption brought by Mashiach. And in practically the same breath, we pray "restore our judges as of yore."

The juxtaposition of the rebuilding of our people and the restoration of our judges is not haphazard, but expresses rather an important concept: we believe that the sanctity of Jerusalem and the Beth Mikdash derive from the Shechina, the Presence of the Almighty which dwells therein eternally.1 Now there exists another institution of which we also say that the Shechina is there - that institution is the Court of Jewish Law, the Beth Din.

Rambam states so openly:

"The Shechina is with every proper Jewish Beth Din. Therefore, the judges should sit with awe and fear,.."2.

We may actually draw the analogy between the sanctuary and the Beth Din further. Of Batei Din too it can be said that, "even though they are desolate, the Shechina is there." It is true that Batei Din and Dayanim with full, complete, total and absolute authority In all areas of Jewish life ceased to exist with the end of the traditional Semicha3. Still, throughout history Batei Din judged, adjudicated, heard litigation and decided In accord with Torah law. Dayanim, though their area of jurisdiction was circumscribed and limited, still saw themselves as, and indeed were, carrying out the "shlichus" - the commission of the original Sanhedrin4. Wherever a Beth Din judges In accord with the canons of the halacha, wherever halacha comes to life, wherever you have a "proper Beth Din", there you have the Shechina.

This may be the underlying motif for the extreme stringency with which the Halacha views going to a non-Jewish court, generally called Arkhaoth Shel Nochrim, to settle litigation.

We shall explore here the question of whether, or to what extent, it is permitted for jews to sue other Jews In the secular courts maintained by the countries In which they live. Ancillary questions are whether a Jew may practice law In such courts, or act as a witness therein.

It is best to begin with the Braitha In Maseches Gitin5 "R. Tarfon used to say: 'In any place where you find gentile courts, even though their law is the same as the Israelite law, you must not resort to them since it says, "These are the judgments which thou shalt set before them." (Ex. 21:1) this is to say, "before them" and not before gentiles. Another explanation, however, is that it means, "before them" (i.e. judges) and not before laymen"6

This Braitha actually contains two prohibitions. First there is the issur against resorting to gentile courts. Second, there is an issur against resorting to Beth Din Shel Hedyotes (laymen). The Braitha itself, however, does not spell out the severity of going to gentile courts.

Rashi spells out the severity of this prohibition. "... for he who brings Jewish law to be adjudicated before gentiles desecrates G'd's name and makes dear (or gives value) to idols, for it is written 'For their rock is not our Rock, even our enemies are judges.' When our enemies are judges, it is a testimony to the superiority of their idol."7.
.
.
.

[Rubystars]

If I am victimized by a criminal I don't want him to be tried by a court that would be more likely to acquit him because they share his culture and religion.

[muman613]

If I am victimized by a criminal I don't want him to be tried by a court that would be more likely to acquit him because they share his culture and religion.

I believe that the court operates the same whether the victim is Jewish or non-Jewish. Jewish law does not hold Jews above non-Jews except in regards to obligations a Jew has...