[layman]

No police officer, anywhere in this country arrests a simple, non-violent, drunken driver without handcuffing him/her, behind their back, prior to transporting.

This only makes common sense ... but unmentioned in this article is the fact that the law requires that the perp cannot be brought into the courtroom wearing handcuffs because this would not be fair to the perp. The law, obviously, is an ass.

[NonValueAdded]

Yeah, what layman said. This was in the courthouse so common sense had no place there.

If you look closely at what the delightfully named Deputy Sgt. Rambo said, there are some liberal judges there who IMHO in the past were critical of security measures. Well, I'll bet there is a new day a dawning at the courthouse and resistance to prisoner control will be a thing of the past. And if not, hey, guess where all the 120 lb. deputies will be working!

[G.Mason]

" This only makes common sense ... but unmentioned in this article is the fact that the law requires that the perp cannot be brought into the courtroom wearing handcuffs because this would not be fair to the perp. The law, obviously, is an ass."

I am unfamiliar with Georgia law, and have been far removed from New Jersey for to long to be sure, but N.J. had no such law.

The assignment judge of the county court and the Sheriff made those decisions between them, and the rules and regulations came from that.

[FreedomCalls]

"unmentioned in this article is the fact that the law requires that the perp cannot be brought into the courtroom wearing handcuffs because this would not be fair to the perp"

Are you sure? I thought it was only a judicial ruling and not an actual law that made that requirement so as not to violate the "fair and impartial trial" aspect of the Constitution.