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

originally posted by: SummerRain

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

The criminal was infringing upon the free expression rights of the judge.

a reply to: face23785

Whos skin colour the judges, the officers or the Man with the gaffer tape around his mouth?

I think its everyone else that seems to have an issue with the shade of the gentleman in question.

It's not about skin colour it's about whats considered acceptable in a court of law!

It's about health and safety never mind basic human rights, and if indeed it is legal in the US to gag someone with gaffer tape at the bequest of a supposed judge, in this day of age, i will be rather surprised.

The judge could be doing with some advice "Dont do that again!" and some sensitivity training would not go amiss, that's a given.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: notsure1

No matter the Mans ethnicity, duct taping an already hand, and i assume, leg cuffed defendant in a court of law seems rather an extreme nevermind downright wrong to me.

You have to stop talking to hear.

Have you ever known one of those persons? The ones who seem to love to hear themselves talk, but never hear what anyone else has to say?

It's a form of bullying, IMO.

Anyway, judge wanted him to hear what the judge had to say. So, since he would not stop talking on his own, it had to be forced.

I don't see that being cuffed has anything to do with this.

Physically silenced at your own trial.

If they'll do it to him, they'll do it to you.

originally posted by: SlowNail
Physically silenced at your own trial.

If they'll do it to him, they'll do it to you.

One would think that someone who struggles with impulse control might be in need of a psychological evaluation to ensure his rights were being observed. Instead, they removed his first amendment right while defending himself in court.

originally posted by: SlowNail
Physically silenced at your own trial.

If they'll do it to him, they'll do it to you.

Sounds to me that he said plenty.

It's the hearing what the judge has to say - - that is at issue.

a reply to: Annee

So shutting people up with tape which is illegal nevermind medically unsafe is somehow the only option or disposal?

Being cuffed means he is already restrained, when you add gags into the mix you have to wonder whats next a bag over his head prostrated before the judge?

It actually happens a lot. People need to shut up when told to or out comes the tape. No rights violated he needs to get over himself.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Annee

So shutting people up with tape which is illegal nevermind medically unsafe is somehow the only option or disposal?

Being cuffed means he is already restrained, when you add gags into the mix you have to wonder whats next a bag over his head prostrated before the judge?

Talking when you are supposed to be listening is a form of Control and Bullying.

Its important that he hear what the judge has to say.

By not shutting up as ordered - - he is trying to control the situation.

The judge needed him to hear what the judge had to say.

Logic is Logic.

Restrained or not - - has nothing to do with him shutting up and listening to what the judge has to say.

a reply to: Annee

But it has everything to do with gagging a person in a public building and whilst in custody.

This is not moving forward its headed in the opposite direction.

Whats the bet guys going to appeal this and most lightly win just down to the judge's actions?

Justice has to be seen to be done but not like that.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Annee

But it has everything to do with gagging a person in a public building and whilst in custody.

This is not moving forward its headed in the opposite direction.

Whats the bet guys going to appeal this and most lightly win just down to the judge's actions?

Justice has to be seen to be done but not like that.

Sometimes simplicity is the best answer.

Not everything needs to be complicated.

a reply to: mikell

It does not happen over here to my memory anyway.

Our courts get up to some strange forms justice sometimes and how its despensed, but no gaffer tape unsafe gagging as far as im aware so far.

a reply to: Annee

Do you realize that its complete and utterly unsafe to gag someone in such a fashion and the man could have died?

Killing people in court with out a death sentence seems quite complicated to me.

a reply to: andy06shake
It took a half dozen cops to tape a man's mouth WHO IS HANDCUFFED.

I think, specifically this is actually violating free speech. Contempt of court is the *legal* way to deal with this.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Annee

Do you realize that its complete and utterly unsafe to gag someone in such a fashion and the man could have died?

Killing people in court with out a death sentence seems quite complicated to me.

That would be the extreme.

There's always potential for the extreme.

I get claustrophobic in courtrooms - - therefore, I should never be required to enter one.

Doesn't really work that way, does it?

a reply to: andy06shake


You are all upset about a criminal having his mouth taped shut, yet you supported one of your own citizens being arrested and tossed in jail without a fair trial for speaking freely outside of a courthouse?

Man, can't make this stuff up........

a reply to: Annee

No it does not work that way, but the gagging of this Man in an extremely unsafe manner sure did.

I really cannot understand how anybody can find this kind of thing acceptable!

It's just so wrong in this day of age, kind of this one would expect to hear about in a third word nation really.

a reply to: seeker1963

Our courts did not assault or gag Tommy through, just stuck to the laws of the land.

And Tommy has had a few fair trials in his days, none of which resulted in anyone being gagged with duct tape just found guilty of fraud and a few other criminal acts.

Just a thought.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Annee

No it does not work that way, but the gagging of this Man in an extremely unsafe manner sure did.

I really cannot understand how anybody can find this kind of thing acceptable!

It's just so wrong in this day of age, kind of this one would expect to hear about is a third word nation really.

I remove emotions - - then break things down to the simplest form.

Judge tells man to stop talking - - man refuses - - judge uses simplest method.

"We" really do complicate things more then we need to.

a reply to: Annee

I guess shooting him in the head would also have shut him up?

Or maybe cutting out his tongue would have sufficed?

This is medieval treatment any way you care to look at it is exceptionally poor form in this day of age, issued at the whim of a man who holds a position of power that should darn well know better.