[JeffAtlanta]

Perhaps a better question would be, "Why wasn't he wearing a stun belt?" This was a defendant charged with a crime of violence.

It is reported that he was out on bond. If he was out on bond he would not have been in shackles in the courtroom.

[Bonaparte]

We read two different articles. The one I read said that the reason he was not shackled was because the judge did not want to prejudice the jury. I think the newsies are still trying to get their facts straight. We should know more in the next few days.

Some will disagree with this, but I believe all defendants charged with a crime of violence should be positively restrained while in a courthouse. That means a stun belt at minimum. Of course, if there is only one escorting deputy and he's incompetent, inattentive, etc. then it won't matter what precautions are ordered.

[Bonaparte]

Read this and you will know why this judge was insane to let this defendant in that courthouse without being shackled hand and foot. If that defendant was permitted bond, then the judge was crazy to do that, too.