Ohio Judge Ordered Deputies to Tape Man's Mouth Shut During Sentencing

I am very surprised that they did not have one of those sex gags on hand...

Tape is sooo old school.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: DBCowboy

So stupidity equates to being duct tapped where sentencing and judgment are concerned?

You don't see a problem with justice being dispensed in such a fashion?

Nope.

Dumbass won't keep his mouth shut, dumbass won't show the court respect, dumbass gets his mouth taped.

QED

What does his skin color have to do with it?

Oh, I forgot, a lot of racists who can't see past skin color need that detail.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Or throat punched, whichever comes first i imagine.

If you are going to be enforcing law like the judge apparently was, its rather counterproductive to be breaking them at the same time.

Kind of defeats the purpose of law in the first place imho, which serves nobody's best interest.

a reply to: andy06shake

n the end, Williams, who was convicted of aggravated robbery, kidnapping, theft, misuse of credit cards and having weapons under a disability, was handed a 24-year prison sentence.

Looks like he got off easy with just some duct tape. The judge could have thrown in a max sentence without parole.

Let's make sure we forget about the lives this guy traumatized because they don't matter. (sarc disclaimer)

a reply to: andy06shake

I have removed the word "Black" from the thread's title.

Hopefully, that puts pale to any further attempt to implicate racial motivation regarding the subject.

Because as i have already said its not about colour, it's about gagging people in a court of law, and the implications of such.

a reply to: Tarzan the apeman.

Oh, the Mans a criminal based upon the evidence he was convicted.

But duck tapping the fellow is wrong, and doing so may even open up avenues of appeal that were not there before, just a thought.

All life matters.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Necrobile

Have to wonder if the guy with the tape wrapped around his mouth was irked?

It is what it is I'm afraid, and if i, or this article, somehow annoys you or offends your sensibilities then that's your own lookout really.

It's not about race, it's about duct tape and gagging people in whats supposed to be a court of law!

if ya wanna play yer own lawyer, then you do so and you play by lawyer rules. and you shush when told.

or do we really want idiocracy played out in real life?

alol,he was still running mouth after gagged!

a reply to: DBCowboy

i don't disagree with the premise...but have to remember that most folks attending court, especially acting like this, likely aren't sane. Using a muzzle is not an approved medical restraint device.

He may be playing it up for a plea...or he may just have some kind of crazy that is behind the crime and the behavior.

Nonetheless, i've seen someone have to live with a felony for unlawful restraint by putting a piece of scotch tape (from a desktop tape dispenser) on a patients mouth. It was done as a joke, and some busy body nurse was there to observe and report it.

a reply to: andy06shake

This defendant is an idiot, his lawyer is terrible, and the judge was 100% correct in doing what he did.

Mr. Williams needed an additional piece of tape under is flapping jaw, too.

And to share something so racially charged in its title is pathetic. "The Root" is a garbage, racist site and should never be linked to if you want credibility. Race baiting is a cancer, you're purposefully spreading it.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: DBCowboy

i don't disagree with the premise...but have to remember that most folks attending court, especially acting like this, likely aren't sane. Using a muzzle is not an approved medical restraint device.

He may be playing it up for a plea...or he may just have some kind of crazy that is behind the crime and the behavior.

Nonetheless, i've seen someone have to live with a felony for unlawful restraint by putting a piece of scotch tape (from a desktop tape dispenser) on a patients mouth. It was done as a joke, and some busy body nurse was there to observe and report it.

I see your point, but the courtroom isn't a hospital. This is an example of lawful restraint. The judge has the authority to do that.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: DBCowboy

All mouths matter.

But duct tapping such is just overkill in the extreme.

No.



The defendant showed no respect to the court or the officers of the court.

I am so sick and tired of the tacit approval to show such disrespect.

White, black, I don't care.

The criminal screwed up.

first time ive seen you accept denial of free speech

lol

My wife , who is a superior court judge says it was common place many years ago, but has since been made illegal. She expects hot water for the judge in this case.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

How am i spreading or race-baiting anyone?

The word "Black" has been removed from the title because it seems to have caused such an issue.

The point is gagging anyone in a court is wrong on quite a few levels above and bellow any racial concerns.

a reply to: face23785

I don't know if he does or not....typically forms of acceptable restraint are listed in an SOP of some sort. But its typically illegal to do it to dogs....and i'd hope that humans have rights that at least rise to that of a dog.

Doing it with children is considered child abuse.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: face23785

I don't know if he does or not....typically forms of acceptable restraint are listed in an SOP of some sort. But its typically illegal to do it to dogs....and i'd hope that humans have rights that at least rise to that of a dog.

Doing it with children is considered child abuse.

Well, this is in the linked article:

In the 1970 case Illinois v. Allen, the justices unanimously decided that defendants do not have an absolute right to even be present at their trial, let alone speak at it.

The court found that trial judges could “bind and gag him as a last resort, thereby keeping him present; (2) cite him for criminal or civil contempt; or (3) remove him from the courtroom, while the trial continues, until he promises to conduct himself properly,” if a defendant was being disorderly.

I would think, if this violates some law, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think the media should include said law in their coverage. I have unfairly high standards for the media. Expecting them to actually inform viewers/readers places an undue burden on them.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

They wrapped gaffer tape around the Mans mouth in a court of law, and there is even video evidence.

Somehow i imagine there is going to be grounds for appeal down to that fact alone.

So end of the day a convicted criminal may walk away from this and also get a significant payday down to the madness of a judge of the law.

Something not quite right there.

a reply to: andy06shake

Thoughts mine or members matter not.
Because the use of duct tape as restraint
during the course of a crime. Carries a 10
year enhancement.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

They wrapped gaffer tape around the Mans mouth in a court of law, and there is even video evidence.

Somehow i imagine there is going to be grounds for appeal down to that fact alone.

So end of the day a convicted criminal may walk away from this and also get a significant payday down to the madness of a judge of the law.

Something not quite right there.

See the post above yours. Your own link seems to indicate that the judge was 100% within his rights and in compliance with legal precedent. If this violates some law, please cite it. Otherwise this is a non-story, and the original focus on skin color is racist. I advise you to try to look past skin color. It's 2018.