Electric shock delivered at trial to Texas defendant results in reversal of conviction - Sensationalist Headlines

[quote]A Texas court of appeals has ordered a new trial for a convicted sex offender after a Fort Worth judge instructed his bailiff to administer an electric shock to the defendant three separate times with a stun belt for failing to follow courtroom decorum. Moreover, in a case of first impression the appellate court ruled that stun belts, which deliver a 50,000 volt punch, may not be used by Texas judges to enforce proper courtroom behavior or when a defendant refuses to answer questions. The defendant, Terry Lee Morris, was tried and convicted of soliciting the sexual performance of a child and was sentenced to 60 years in prison. Morris appealed his conviction alleging that 396th State District Judge George Gallagher violated his constitutional rights by repeatedly shocking him for failing to answer questions regarding compliance with decorum absent any valid security concerns.[/quote] [url]https://www.law.com/texaslawyer/2018/03/06/electric-shock-delivered-at-trial-to-texas-defendant-results-in-reversal-of-conviction-curb-on-use-of-stun-belts/?slreturn=20180207133126[/url] [quote]“Mr. Morris, I am giving you one warning,” Gallagher said outside the presence of the jury, according to the appeals court. “You will not make any additional outbursts like that, because two things will happen. No. 1, I will either remove you from the courtroom or I will use the shock belt on you.” “All right, sir,” Morris said. The judge continued: “Now, are you going to follow the rules?” “Sir, I’ve asked you to recuse yourself,” said Morris. Gallagher asked again: “Are you going to follow the rules?” “I have a lawsuit pending against you,” responded Morris. “Hit him,” Gallagher said to the bailiff. The bailiff pressed the button that shocks Morris, and then Gallagher asked him again whether he is going to behave. Morris told Gallagher he had a history of mental illness. “Hit him again,” the judge ordered. Morris protested that he was being “tortured” just for seeking the recusal. Gallagher asked the bailiff, “Would you hit him again?”[/quote] [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/03/07/barbarism-texas-judge-ordered-electric-shocks-to-man-during-trial-conviction-thrown-out/?utm_term=.6083b5c2ae28[/url] Had no idea this kind of device existed, let alone that they were being used this way. Glad it's been curbed.

What the fuck kind of country am I living in right now where things like this are happening.

Your human rights Ain't got no might Deep in the heart OF TEXAS *clap clap*

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;53184133]What the absolute fuck? Why is this a thing, and why are we using it on humans? I guess the whole "rights" thing is just something that applies when we feel like it, eh judge?[/QUOTE] He's probably one of those "YOUR NO LONGER HUMAN" sort of guys.

This sounds like one of those Star Trek episodes where the captain is thrown into a ridiculous court system with cruel and unusual procedures.

This is so cartoonishly evil that it's almost unbelievable

Gee whiz bill I sure ain't ever heard of no 8th amendment to the constitution

[quote]The stun belt works in some ways like a shock collar used to train dogs. Activated by a button on a remote control, [B]the stun belt delivers an eight-second, 50,000-volt shock to the person wearing it, which immobilizes him so that bailiffs can swiftly neutralize any security threats. When activated, the stun belt can cause the person to seize, suffer heart irregularities, urinate or defecate and suffer possibly crippling anxiety as a result of fear of the shocks.[/B] The stun belt can also be very painful. When Montgomery County, Md., purchased three of the devices in 1998, a sheriff’s sergeant who was jolted as part of his training described the feeling to The Washington Post like this: “If you had nine-inch nails and you tried to rip my sides out and then you put a heat lamp on me.”[/quote] Jesus, Texas.

What the fuck, it's like the judge enjoys using it

[QUOTE]“Mr. Morris, I am giving you one warning,” Gallagher said outside the presence of the jury, according to the appeals court. “You will not make any additional outbursts like that, because two things will happen. No. 1, I will either remove you from the courtroom or I will use the shock belt on you.” “All right, sir,” Morris said. The judge continued: “Now, are you going to follow the rules?” “Sir, I’ve asked you to recuse yourself,” said Morris. Gallagher asked again: “Are you going to follow the rules?” “I have a lawsuit pending against you,” responded Morris. “Hit him,” Gallagher said to the bailiff. The bailiff pressed the button that shocks Morris, and then Gallagher asked him again whether he is going to behave. Morris told Gallagher he had a history of mental illness. “Hit him again,” the judge ordered. Morris protested that he was being “tortured” just for seeking the recusal. Gallagher asked the bailiff, “Would you hit him again?”[/QUOTE] Krylenko lives again, apparently. Fucking hell.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;53184743]Jesus, Texas.[/QUOTE] [I][B]Eight seconds.[/B][/I] What the fuck.

Texas is still the dirty, unwashed, slow cousin of actual civilizations it seems.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;53184862]Texas is still the dirty, unwashed, slow cousin of actual civilizations it seems.[/QUOTE] I'm disappointed in my state (that's why I posted this) but don't start that shit. If this was representative of Texas as a whole the article would be about him getting away with it, and he didn't. Now the guy is getting a fair trial.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;53184862]Texas is still the dirty, unwashed, slow cousin of actual civilizations it seems.[/QUOTE] I, too, like generalizing a state the size of a number of European countries combined based on the actions of a single individual.

[QUOTE=thejjokerr;53184891]I didn't read into the background of the guy but why was he forced to even wear that kind of device? Did they think he was going to suddenly rape someone in the court room?[/QUOTE] Seems to be procedure for flighty/combative sorts. I'd never heard of it until I read this article, though.

I can see such a device being useful in certain situations but enforcing decorum isn't one of them.

this is what happens when your job qualifications are a pulse and a burning adherence to conservative doctrine.

I know that when training police officers, they taze you so that you know what it feels like so you don't abuse the tazer. They should probably do the same with these devices and the judge.

[QUOTE=OvB;53184976]I can see such a device being useful in certain situations but enforcing decorum isn't one of them.[/QUOTE] there are some judges that seem to have grown too crusty for their occupation, it really makes you wonder. [video=youtube;WTWdP5DMdsM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTWdP5DMdsM&t=589s[/video] then again the courts can get really fucking weird. (This was an actual court transcript.)

Sex offender or not this is fucking appalling behaviour from two court officials. I hope both the judge and the bailiff were thrown out and given assault charges for this, I wouldn't blame the original defendant if he filed suit against them either. In fact these two idiots may have potentially exonerated an actual predator through their courtroom bullshit.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;53184898]Seems to be procedure for flighty/combative sorts. I'd never heard of it until I read this article, though.[/QUOTE] This is literally what you have handcuffs and more heavy duty versions of(like shackles and chains) for, you don't need to fry people to make them submit if you restrain them in the first place. This device ought to get banned. I have had my accidents with mains voltage electricity before and another one with one of those electric fly swatters, I can't even imagine the pain inflicted by anything in this voltage range, and in [B]8 seconds[/B] I am normally of the "pedophiles aren't human" conviction, but I also believe in due process, and zapping the shit out of a suspect at a court trial is not due process at all.

Cruel and unusual punishment.

What the fuck is wrong with a contact stun gun or a taser or some pepper spray? Why the fuck do you have to use a goddamn dog-style shock collar on them?! It's fucking cruel to use that shit on dogs, let alone humans.

[QUOTE=Chris Morris;53192949]What the fuck is wrong with a contact stun gun or a taser or some pepper spray? Why the fuck do you have to use a goddamn dog-style shock collar on them?! It's fucking cruel to use that shit on dogs, let alone humans.[/QUOTE] What makes you think any of your other suggestions are ok?

[QUOTE=helifreak;53192955]What makes you think any of your other suggestions are ok?[/QUOTE] I'm talking about their usage for causing compliance in violent prisoners, not its usage in a courtroom. The mere idea of a fucking stun belt is so wrong in every way. An eight-second 50k volt shock? Directly around the abdominal area? Why? Plus the everpresence of the stun belt on their person allows easy abuse as we've seen here.

[QUOTE=Chris Morris;53192963]I'm talking about their usage for causing compliance in violent prisoners, not its usage in a courtroom. The mere idea of a fucking stun belt is so wrong in every way. An eight-second 50k volt shock? Directly around the abdominal area? Why? Plus the everpresence of the stun belt on their person allows easy abuse as we've seen here.[/QUOTE] Right but you replied in a thread about courtroom use and made zero mention of violent prisoners.

Oh my gooooood. Why is the west allied to this shithole country.

[QUOTE=Helix Snake;53184129]What the fuck kind of country am I living in right now where things like this are happening.[/QUOTE] America in 2018. Much like America in 1938. [editline]11th March 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=SeamanStains;53193064]Oh my gooooood. Why is the west allied to this shithole country.[/QUOTE] Because up until about a year ago we weren't a shithole country.

This is something you'd hear out of a trial in Space Station 13, not an actual courthouse.

[QUOTE=Zakkshockv2;53193074] Because up until about a year ago we weren't a shithole country.[/QUOTE] Let's be honest here, we both know this isn't true.