tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6757696342634699253.post620765057759156211..comments2024-02-24T18:44:39.324-08:00Comments on Trials & Tribulations: The Latest on the Nicholas Sheley CaseSprockethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03837416113512618694noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6757696342634699253.post-81238340835129451602009-09-20T18:37:54.162-07:002009-09-20T18:37:54.162-07:00Judge Mathers ordered the court reporter to keep S...Judge Mathers ordered the court reporter to keep Sheley's final outburst on the record(before being dragged out of the courtroom). I think this being in the transcript will give the state some back bone if they were to decide to file a motion requesting he be shackled. <br />I found a ruling from the 6th circuit of the USSC of a case in Michigan People v. Ruimveld, 639 N.W.2d 812 (Mich. 2002). The court found it was an error to shackle the defendant and in this case the lower court also refused the defense request to cover the shackles.3 of the 4 judges ruled it was a harmless error and withheld the conviction. The first case the court cited in it's ruling was Illinois v. Allen.<br /> <br />In Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337(1970), the Court held that where a prisoner was intentionally disruptive at trial, and where he was informed that he could remain in the courtroom as long as he ceased his disruptions, his constitutional right to be present throughout his trial was<br />waived when he chose to continue disrupting the proceedings.<br />In so holding, Justice Black noted for the Court that:<br />[t]rying a defendant for a crime while he sits bound and gagged before the judge and jury would to an extent comply with that part of the Sixth Amendment’s purposes that accords the defendant an opportunity to confront the witnesses at trial. <br /><br />But even to contemplate such a technique, much less see it, arouses a feeling that no defendant should be tried while shackled and gagged except as a last resort. Not only is it<br />possible that the sight of shackles and gags might have a significant effect on the<br />jury’s feelings about the defendant, but the use of this technique is itself something<br />of an affront to the very dignity and decorum of judicial proceedings that the judge is seeking to uphold.<br /><br />Id. at 344. Nonetheless, the Court held that in some situations, binding and gagging a defendant might be appropriate, due to safety or security concerns for all parties involved in the trial. Id. <br /><br />If Sheley isn't shackled I think the far side of the courtroom will be a popular spot in the gallery.<br /> <br />Liz, I can see why you would think a chair is Sheley's weapon of choice; however, Sheley's MO seems to be one that he uses whatever he finds nearby to attack, the last two incidents have involved chairs, but he also used a bar off the wall in a shower in an attack an inmate(they found the screws on him after). We also know that several of his 8 victims in the alleged killing spree were attacked with an ax (they just happened to be in a jeep he stole) there is mention of other unidentified weapons he allegedly used. I assume those will come out in court during the murder trials.katfishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17677596326492200191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6757696342634699253.post-27825493100185932162009-09-19T21:21:54.090-07:002009-09-19T21:21:54.090-07:00many thanks for a great report - where does the la...many thanks for a great report - where does the law stand on being shackled in front of a jury? Would this give a reason to appeal? <br /><br />He seems to see chairs as the weapon of choice (dragging the chair as he leaves) - or do I have that wrong?Liznoreply@blogger.com