Skip to comments.
Court bans shackling of murder defendants
AP - StL Today ^
| May 23, 2005
| Gina Holland
Posted on 05/23/2005 9:57:00 AM PDT by EveningStar
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-193 next last
To: Diddle E. Squat
The Republicans could not have asked for a better timing of the release of this decision. Absolutely correct. Time to go NUCLEAR. Now more than ever. There must be NO deals.
To: billclintonwillrotinhell
Someone posted on another thread that since this court likes to look to foreign law, perhaps they would prefer cages like they use in some of the European countries!
42
posted on
05/23/2005 10:28:26 AM PDT
by
Txsleuth
(Mark Levin for Supreme Court Justice)
To: visualops
How does this play in Fulton County?
43
posted on
05/23/2005 10:29:29 AM PDT
by
pointsal
To: redgolum
And the guy that overpowered the guards, shot a few, and managed to get out of an Alanta court house is what? A fluke? Yes, actually.
44
posted on
05/23/2005 10:30:40 AM PDT
by
Modernman
("Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde)
To: SuziQ
Scalia and Thomas were probably the only two Supreme Court justices who didn't solicit European authorities for their opinions on this case. President Bush sure as hell better put another Scalia and/or Thomas on the high court if he gets a chance. We can't afford another Souter.
What's amazing is that Republicans have nominated 7 of the 9 current Supreme Court justices, but only 2 of those 7 came through with some common sense on this case.
To: Txsleuth
Someone posted on another thread that since this court likes to look to foreign law, perhaps they would prefer cages like they use in some of the European countries! Cages for criminal defendants or cages for out-of-control Supreme Court justices? ;-)
To: EveningStar
Oh, here's a great idea. F-ing morons.
To: EveningStar
NO!!
After what happened in Atlanta they can still make that decision?
When you're up on a capital murder charge, you don't have a lot to lose and it's a matter of time before there's more violence in the courtroom.
48
posted on
05/23/2005 10:36:09 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: EveningStar; All
To: petro45acp
I agree - shackles and irons are no longer required, thanks to the advance of technology. A stun belt or harness hides under clothing just fine.
50
posted on
05/23/2005 10:36:19 AM PDT
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: EveningStar
No doubt Judge Lefco will be thrilled to hear of this insanity.
And the Judges in Georgia too.
51
posted on
05/23/2005 10:36:38 AM PDT
by
OldFriend
(MAJOR TAMMY DUCKWORTH.....INSPIRATIONAL)
To: PBRSTREETGANG
With or without air holes?
52
posted on
05/23/2005 10:36:38 AM PDT
by
doc30
(Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
To: Zacs Mom
There's a belt that does that. Has a remote for the bailiffs.
Stun Belt Used for First Time on Defendant in L.A. Court
http://ljr.net/latimes/stun/
To: FormerACLUmember
Perhaps if the great unwashed tromped through their courtroom, SCOTUS might have a different take on the subject.
54
posted on
05/23/2005 10:36:43 AM PDT
by
NonValueAdded
(NEWSWEEK LIED, PEOPLE DIED)
To: EveningStar
How'd I get here? I just woke up one morning and here I was. I want to go home, back to planet Earth.
55
posted on
05/23/2005 10:36:48 AM PDT
by
Spiff
(Don't believe everything you think.)
To: billclintonwillrotinhell
56
posted on
05/23/2005 10:37:49 AM PDT
by
kayak
(Have you prayed for your President today?)
To: Steve_Seattle
I love it: The Constitution clearly emanates that the jury may not know what the defendent is charged with. Evidence is presented, and the jury is simply asked to decide, "Is the defendant guilty?"
57
posted on
05/23/2005 10:38:56 AM PDT
by
johnb838
(Liberalism = Leninism.... Liberalism = Bolshevism)
To: redgolum
Damn, how do you ignore what happened there? The SCOTUS must be taking the brown acid.
58
posted on
05/23/2005 10:39:36 AM PDT
by
thegreatbeast
(Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
To: mlc9852
Their logic is truly frightening.Yes. In addition, as far as I could tell from the article, their decision had no legitimate constitutional basis. Nothing specific was cited, in reference to the Constitution, as to why shackling was unconstitutional.
The court is becoming more and more blatant in basing their decisions on mere personal opinion, ideology, foreign law, etc. Who knows, maybe astrology will be the basis of their next decision. They are a contemptible disgrace to the nation and even the concept of justice.
59
posted on
05/23/2005 10:40:06 AM PDT
by
Orca
(Impeach! Impeach! Impeach!)
To: RetiredArmy
It's really more like Leninism, designed to destroy Bourgeois society, than simply socializm. Socializm is merely a tool and a phase.
60
posted on
05/23/2005 10:40:38 AM PDT
by
johnb838
(Liberalism = Leninism.... Liberalism = Bolshevism)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-193 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson