Carman Deck as he appeared at his double murder trial in Jefferson County in 1996.
Posted on 05/23/2005 9:57:00 AM PDT by EveningStar
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court, brushing aside warnings by two justices that it was jeopardizing courthouse safety, ruled Monday it is unconstitutional to force capital murder defendants to appear before juries in chains and shackles.
Justices threw out the sentence of Carman Deck, who was shackled in leg irons and handcuffed to a chain around his belly when he faced a Missouri jury that put him on death row.
Carman Deck as he appeared at his double murder trial in Jefferson County in 1996.
(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...
Absolutely correct. Time to go NUCLEAR. Now more than ever. There must be NO deals.
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!
Yes, actually.
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.
Cages for criminal defendants or cages for out-of-control Supreme Court justices? ;-)
Oh, here's a great idea. F-ing morons.
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.
Has any of the court's critics actually read the decision (as opposed to relying upon press reports and specualtion)? Here is the link -- http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04slipopinion.html
I believe the court got this one right.
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.
And the Judges in Georgia too.
With or without air holes?
Perhaps if the great unwashed tromped through their courtroom, SCOTUS might have a different take on the subject.
How'd I get here? I just woke up one morning and here I was. I want to go home, back to planet Earth.
Yes ... to both.
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?"
Damn, how do you ignore what happened there? The SCOTUS must be taking the brown acid.
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.
It's really more like Leninism, designed to destroy Bourgeois society, than simply socializm. Socializm is merely a tool and a phase.
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.