Ohio Judge Silences Suspect with Duct Tape

[Guest PapaB]

This cracked me up!

Ohio Judge Silences Suspect with Duct Tape - WJW

Words that should be heard in court more often - "Mr. Smith, get the duct tape".

[Guest m&pc9]

Read some of the comments, Some people are just stupid.

[Guest PapaB]

I left my own comment:

Some of you crying about this guys rights being violated seem to forget - "You have the right to remain silent". Sometimes it's just a good idea. Judges that coddle criminals don't do society any favors. Thumbs up for Judge Belden.

[E4 No More]

Just to stir the pot with ya'll, show me where in The Constitution of The United States does it say that you have freedom of speech except in a court of law. My old presecuting attorney couldn't answer that question.

[Guest TurboniumOxide]

He can speak all he wants, it's just that no one will hear it through the duct tape.

[E4 No More]

He can speak all he wants, it's just that no one will hear it through the duct tape.

That would also mean that you have the right to have a gun all you want in your house and without ammo.

[Guest m&pc9]

So if you have to go to court you can sit there and say bla bla bla from 9am till 5 pm. And waste taxpayer money. That makes since to me.

[Guest TurboniumOxide]

That would also mean that you have the right to have a gun all you want in your house and without ammo.

I am sincerely trying to understand your analogy, but I am failing.

What comes to mind is this:

So he should be allowed to have a gun in court too? That is a right just like the 1st.

[E4 No More]

I just find it...ironic...that many on this site get their panties in a wad whenever their rights are perceived as violated, or will be violated, (Obama care, gun registry, etc), but they're ok with another's right being violated because they don't like what's being said. That's all.

Nowhere is there an exception to freedom of speech. The Supreme Court has ruled that it applies to all governments, yet the courts violate it all of the time.

Here's an example of what I have witnessed in Smyrna's Traffic Court:

Subject gets fined and ordered to produce the money. The subject mutters to himself; not the judge, a profanity. I was close, but still didn't hear what word the guy said, but it was clear from his body language that he didn't say it to the judge, (who by the way was a crooked bastard). It was like, "S__t! Where am I going to get that?" type of thing. The judge ordered him to do a month of weekend of labor for cussing in his courtroom.

Edited September 2, 2009 by SWJewellTN

[E4 No More]

I am sincerely trying to understand your analogy, but I am failing.

What comes to mind is this:

So he should be allowed to have a gun in court too? That is a right just like the 1st.

I'm saying that some - not you in particular - want to hold the government to the letter of the constitution when it suits them, but not when it doesn't suit them.

P.S. As I said before I'm stirring the pot a little: hoever, one of the reasons that I left the police department was because of corruption in the whole system.

Edited September 2, 2009 by SWJewellTN

[Guest TurboniumOxide]

I agree with you actually. But I don't know what the solution is. They need to conduct business.

[E4 No More]

I agree with you actually. But I don't know what the solution is. They need to conduct business.

If I were Emperor Jewell I have what I think is a good solution to the corruption part, which would take care of a lot of the superfluous stuff too.

But I'm not Emporer Jewell, so we have to deal with corruption however we can.

P.S. Part of the solution would be to go back to a true circuit court system. No more city judges for sure.

[Guest PapaB]

Nowhere is there an exception to freedom of speech. The Supreme Court has ruled that it applies to all governments, yet the courts violate it all of the time.

The Supreme Court has also ruled that it's not a limitless right. Freedom of Speech is about the ability to speak against the gov't without fear of imprisonment, not about the ability to speak incessantly. There is no law allowing you to interrupt court proceedings, even if you use speech as the method of interruption.

You're allowed to respectfully disagree with the court, and even to voice that disagreement. When you become disrespectful they have the right to punish you, whether you like it or not.

[E4 No More]

The Supreme Court has also ruled that it's not a limitless right. Freedom of Speech is about the ability to speak against the gov't without fear of imprisonment, not about the ability to speak incessantly. There is no law allowing you to interrupt court proceedings, even if you use speech as the method of interruption.

You're allowed to respectfully disagree with the court, and even to voice that disagreement. When you become disrespectful they have the right to punish you, whether you like it or not.

See example above. Tell me that applies.

[Guest PapaB]

Your example doesn't show whether or not the defendant had been respectful or acted like a jerk prior to that point. I stand by my statement "When you become disrespectful they have the right to punish you, whether you like it or not." Let's assume he was respectful and the Judge was a jerk. You have to take that into account when deciding how to act.

[Smith]

Anarchy is NOT in the Constitution. However, the rule of law and order is. It is the premise of why we have a Constitution in the first place. The understanding that man can orderly and respectfully live together under an agreed set of acknowledged rights IS the Constitution. It's kinda like the folks that like to hail a Biblical commandment yet forget the purpose of that commandment. That was the very reason Jesus was killed.

Legalism is a caner on society. I'm afraid we are covered in it.

[E4 No More]

Your example doesn't show whether or not the defendant had been respectful or acted like a jerk prior to that point. I stand by my statement "When you become disrespectful they have the right to punish you, whether you like it or not." Let's assume he was respectful and the Judge was a jerk. You have to take that into account when deciding how to act.

Sorry, I thought that it was inferred when I said the guy was talking to himself when he cussed. He was totally respectful during the proceedings.

For the record, I don't think anyone has the right to disrespect the court when the court is acting in a respectable manner. I've just seen too many judges overstepping their authority because they usually get away with it, and I take issue with those that do just as I take issue with prosecutors and LEOs that do as well. Power corrupts afterall.

[Mark@Sea]

During proceedings involved in my divorce, lo these many years ago, I sat in a courtroom while my first wife (lucy-fer satan, I think her maiden name was) asked for a protective order.

I was not allowed to say a single word the entire time. Well, that isn't quite true. I really wanted to tell the judge that the county prosecutor wanted a word with him concerning my lovely soon-to-be ex (boy, I really could pick 'em back then), but the only words I managed to utter were "Your Honor..." when the judge told me to sit down, shut up, or go to jail.

So I ended up spending 30 days on a friends' couch, and lost everything I owned (she even took the curtain rods).

Months later, when all the facts came out before a different judge, she was ordered to return everything - but she left the state and I lacked the funds to pursue the matter. Shoot, by that time I often lacked the funds to pursue lunch.

I hope to find it in my heart to forgive that judge one day.

Today ain't lookin' too good, though....

[Guest SUNTZU]

I like this bill.

GOP Congressman Intros 'Rangel Rule,' Eliminating IRS Late Fees - Political News - FOXNews.com