When a gunshot echoed around the St. Louis Civil Courts building June 17 and staffers heard that an inmate had attacked a deputy and briefly escaped, it reaffirmed for many the need for another way to control criminal defendants in court.

Although no one was seriously injured in the St. Louis episode, the escape of a convicted rapist in Atlanta in March cost a judge and three others their lives.

That escape prompted sheriff's officials to propose buying leg restraints and controversial stun or shock belts for prisoners.

But judges, prosecutors and other court officials have a problem. They must maintain a delicate balance between courtroom safety and a criminal defendant's right to a fair trial.

Higher courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have repeatedly ruled that visibly shackling criminal defendants during a trial is "inherently prejudicial" and should not be allowed except in special circumstances.

The use of visible restraints "negates the presumption of innocence," said Washington University law professor Peter Joy.

In May, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that a Missouri man should not have been shackled during the penalty phase of his trial, when a jury was deciding whether he would get the death penalty.

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that shackles imply that the "authorities consider the offender a danger to the community" and quoted a Florida ruling that said shackles "can be a 'thumb (on) death's side of the scale'" for a jury ruling in a capital case.

Many courts envision stun belts as the solution. The belt is mostly or fully hidden, yet can incapacitate a person for up to eight seconds with the push of a button.

In St. Louis, the stun belts will be tested in jury trials with defendants perceived to be a danger or a flight risk. That approach would not have deterred the June 17 escape; that prisoner was handcuffed during his sentencing hearing and escaped after asking to go to the bathroom.

But Presiding Judge John Riley said that if the stun belts prove effective and reliable, and money is found to buy them, the belts could eventually be used for anyone being transported from jail or prison to the courthouse.




Critics say the stun belts can misfire or be misused to torture inmates or amuse deputies. Others are concerned that a defendant cannot fully and properly participate in his defense if he is constantly worried about being shocked.

St. Louis Circuit Judge Evelyn Baker, in a May meeting of judges, expressed similar concerns. "We've got some sheriffs who will push the button to see what will happen," she said. Baker was quickly reassured that such misconduct would not happen.

Denise Lieberman, spokeswoman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri, said the dangers of stun belts "are often underestimated, and they're perceived to be a more minimal use of force than they actually are."

Lieberman said the law provides that reasonable force, not excessive force, can be used to restrain someone.

"Reasonableness is a case-by-case determination," she said. "You'd have to have somebody that was unable to be restrained otherwise."

Lieberman also said that while stun guns and stun belts are perceived as a lesser use of force than a weapon, "the shocks can be fairly significant."

"We're always against the use of excessive force," said Redditt Hudson, the ACLU's racial justice associate. "There is the potential for abuse anywhere where there is discretion in the criminal justice system."

Hudson said minorities often suffer disproportionate abuse.

Stun belt rulings

Courts also have begun examining stun belt use. In a ruling last year, the 3rd District Appellate Court in Illinois ruled on a case dealing with what was described as Will County's across-the-board policy that felony defendants had to wear a stun belt.

The judges said that by adhering to the sheriff's "draconian shackling policy," the lower court "failed to protect defendant's right to a fair trial."

That court has repeatedly said that judges must hold hearings before forcing defendants to wear a stun belt.

But state supreme courts, including in Florida and Texas, have let convictions stand even when defendants have accidentally been shocked during their trials.

St. Louis sheriff's officials cited the U.S. Marshals Service as one agency that has successfully used stun belts.

"U.S. Marshals (Service) has never experienced the accidental discharge of a stun belt," spokeswoman Nikki Credic said.

Credic said activation of the belts is "pretty rare" but is allowed when there is "substantial escape risk or risk of injury or death to deputy U.S. marshals" or others in court, or when a prisoner purposely tampers with the device or takes action to avoid constant visual supervision.

"It's taken really seriously," she said.

An informal survey of Illinois and Missouri court security officers found that stun belts are rarely used.

Many court security agencies simply station extra law enforcement officers, either in or out of uniform, in the courtroom during high-profile trials.

Sgt. Dan Collman of the Madison County sheriff's office said its stun belt is used only in "high-profile cases where there's been a documented problem or perceived problem or security risk."

Collman said his office has never had to activate the belt because it is so "extremely effective" psychologically. Just putting the belt on and talking to prisoners about the effects seems to have an effect, Collman said

When prisoners "get a little hot" and are about to get out of their seats, Collman said, deputies tell them, "sit back down" or just mouth the words, and they do."

Collman, who has been shocked by the belt, said it "kinda causes a gigantic cramp. As soon as it stops, it's as if it never happened."

Collman said his office bought a belt after fighting to control defendants in court three to four times. Collman said use of the belt has cut down on physical contact and the use of batons to control defendants.

St. Charles, Franklin, Cole, Jefferson and St. Louis counties in Missouri do not use stun belts, spokesmen said.

Some counties, including St. Charles, Jefferson and St. Louis, have passive leg restraints that fit underneath a prisoner's pants and lock if sudden movements are made. The St. Louis sheriff's office also has one of the devices, and another has been ordered.

Chief Deputy Mel Weith said that the St. Clair County Sheriff's Office has one stun belt that "has been used sparingly over the years." Weith said he could not recall the last use of the belt.

Monroe County Sheriff Dan Kelly, who does not use stun belts, said court rulings are inconsistent about the use of restraints.

"One (lawyer) has a stack of paper six inches high that says you can. One has a stack of paper six inches high that says you can't," he said.

Kelly said leg restraints hidden under a table are probably not good enough to prevent a defendant from grabbing a deputy's gun during a struggle. This is not a two-minute wrestling match, Kelly said, but "goes down in seconds."

"The ideal thing is to make sure that you restrain them in such a way that they can't do that."

Reporter Robert Patrick
E-mail: rpatrick@post-dispatch.com
Phone: 314-621-5154