Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ShowMeMom

About the SC not allowing shackles -- It was funny that here's a guy, the jury has already said he is such a threat to society that he has to be locked up forever, and yet seven supreme court justices, without any indication in law OR in the constitution, simply decided that being in shackles would sway the jury to think the person was even MORE dangerous.

He is a convicted murderer, but what really scares the jury is that he has to wear shackles?

Schumer says we only want a couple of originalists on any court. The originalists ruled right on this case.


264 posted on 05/23/2005 10:10:02 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT (http://spaces.msn.com/members/criticallythinking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies ]


To: CharlesWayneCT

If the reasoning is that the shackles influences the jury to give a harsher sentence....couldn't the opposite be said?

If I am on a jury that convicts a person of murder, but he/she is allowed to walk around WITHOUT shackles, then perhaps I am persuaded that he/she isn't dangerous anymore, and am too lenient in sentencing...

There are WAY too many convicts that commit crimes upon release from prison as it is....


288 posted on 05/23/2005 10:17:34 AM PDT by Txsleuth (Mark Levin for Supreme Court Justice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson