Shocking behaviour in US courts.

fagin

Philosopher
fagin
Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
7,070
Location
As far away from casebro as possible.
"A Texas court of appeals has ordered a new trial for a convicted sex offender after a Fort Worth judge instructed his bailiff to administer an electric shock to the defendant three separate times with a stun belt for failing to follow courtroom decorum."


https://www.law.com/texaslawyer/201...on-use-of-stun-belts/?slreturn=20180207132332

Sounds like his 'defence' attorney wasn't much better.

"Bill Ray, a Fort Worth defense attorney who represented Morris at trial, said he did not object to Gallagher shocking his client at the time because Morris was allegedly behaving like a “loaded cannon ready to go off.”"
 
Not much in the link without registering. I thought standard procedure if the defendant refuses to behave themselves would be to remove the defendant and allow them to watch on TV.
IANAL
 
I'm shocked to hear this. It's just a pity that such an electrifying story is behind a paywall. Without the rest of the article, it's hard to say what other potential difference there might be without more current information.
 
FWIW: WP paywall is negated by 'incognito' browsing, or similar.
 
Matthew Best said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...conviction-thrown-out/?utm_term=.5f647626ec51

I particularly liked this line:

"The judge, contacted by The Post, declined to comment, citing judicial ethics."
Click to expand...
LOL. The only place in a court room that judge belongs is as a defendant himself. As I read that article, it seems very much that "judge" Gallagher punished defendant Morris for no other reason than that Morris had filed a motion that Gallagher recuse himself. I wondered about this sentence though:
Morris told Gallagher he had a history of mental illness.
Click to expand...
Who is the "he" in that sentence? From the article, judge Gallagher seems the most obvious suspect.
 
Octavo said:
I'm shocked to hear this. It's just a pity that such an electrifying story is behind a paywall. Without the rest of the article, it's hard to say what other potential difference there might be without more current information.
Click to expand...
Summary: the judge was miffed that the defendant had the capacity to put up an effective resistance.
 
And really, stun belts in a courtroom? What kind of third world country are you?

Besides the judge, also the Kapo, sorry, I mean the bailiff who carried out his orders should be prosecuted for aggravated assault and torture.
 
Last edited:
Octavo said:
I'm shocked to hear this. It's just a pity that such an electrifying story is behind a paywall. Without the rest of the article, it's hard to say what other potential difference there might be without more current information.
Click to expand...

I see you're amped for this story.
 
ddt said:
Summary: the judge was miffed that the defendant had the capacity to put up an effective resistance.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the defendant will need help from a P.I., probably best to bring in Sherlock Ohms!!
 
ddt said:
Summary: the judge was miffed that the defendant had the capacity to put up an effective resistance.
Click to expand...

bobdroege7 said:
Potential for a mistrial, ground for dismissal, will the circuit court take a look, switch Judges?
Click to expand...

fuelair said:
Sounds like the defendant will need help from a P.I., probably best to bring in Sherlock Ohms!!
Click to expand...

The puns in this thread are revolting. You should all be charged.
 
IIRC, you're only allowed to engage the stun belt to prevent escape or in self defense/defense of others. It's not to be used for pain compliance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom