Response Paper 1

Problem 3B

1. It is permissible for the judge to merely gag Kathy rather than have her removed from the courtroom because it allows Kathy to remain present during the trial. This way she will not be disrupting the trial and the trial judge will therefore allow her to stay in the courtroom. However, if she was warned and continued her disruptive behavior the trial judge could have had her removed from the courtroom, however she was only gagged.

2. The pros of these measures are that it allows the court trials to continue without further interruptions. It also allows a defendant the chance to re-enter the courtroom or be unbound if his behavior changes. The cons of these measures are that it provides the defendant with a feeling that he was deprived of the right to a fair trial if he would be removed from the courtroom. The considerations that should be used in determining what is best against a disruptive defendant is whether or not the defendant is a violent or uncontrollable person in the courtroom and therefore should be shackled and handcuffed. The defendant should be removed or gagged if his behavior is disruptive in the courtroom even after failing to abide by the judges warnings.

3. The approach taken to control Kathy compares with the approach taken in Lee and Cruz because Kathy was escorted into the courtroom in handcuffs just the way Cruz was. They both felt that they were entitled to new trials because being seen in handcuffs has a prejudicial effect on the members of the jury. The restraints should only be employed to prevent harm or injury, and to maintain a quiet trial. Kathy was gagged and bound similarly to Lee because she kept disrupting the courtroom with outbursts and interruptions. Kathy was also told just like Cruz and Lee that unless she controlled the disruptive behavior she would not have the handcuffs taken off and be gagged or even put into another room.

4. I