[Sandy]

This has the potential to set a dangerous precedent.

There's nothing precedent-setting about this. If the bullet can be removed without general anesthesia, the suspect loses. If general anesthesia is required, the suspect wins. Considering that the bullet is just under the skin, I suspect it can be removed fairly easily using nothing but a local anesthetic. If so, the suspect doesn't stand a chance.

[jonesboheim]

If the bullet can be removed without general anesthesia, the suspect loses. If general anesthesia is required, the suspect wins.

Ok so who decides whether general anesthesia is required or not? What if one physician says he can do it and another disagrees? What if the suspect has a high-risk medical condition such that a doctor recommends against removal at all? If the patient dies while undergoing surgery, who is responsible?