OK, this is incredibly disgusting but it is another example of what lawyers sometimes have to deal with in court. James Orr, 66, stopped his trial for robbery and kidnapping when he removed his colostomy bag and began to consume the contents. While this particular act is thankfully uncommon, the courts have to grapple with such acts to terminate trials. Judges are reluctant to reward such conduct with a mistrial, but there are not many good options for the judge. In this case, however, Common Pleas Court Judge Ethna Cooper appears intent upon continuing the trial and prosecutors have argued the act was nothing more than a tactic to stop the trial.
Orr’s attorney Norm Aubin told the court that the first warning that he had was when Orr leaned over and asked if Aubin had anything to eat. When he was told there was not food, he complained and reached for the bag.
The judge had to declare the courtroom a biohazard area and clear it.
Hamilton County prosecutor David Prem believes that Orr did this on purpose and has objected that he is a con man who tried various methods to get out of the trial. He was previously found to have faked mental incompetence.
He will now be evaluated again, but the trial is scheduled to continue.
Orr is accused of first trying to trick a woman at a Chinese restaurant to give him and his partner money. When that did not work, he pulled a gun and kidnapped her and her three children — taking them to a bank to withdraw $1000.
These cases tend to be easier when the disruptive behavior occurs before a judge rather than a jury — as in Orr’s case. The prejudicial impact on the jury is so great that a mistrial is often declared. In a bench trial, the judge is trained to avoid such prejudice and can order the defendant to comply with the rules of the court or watch the trial from a cell by remote television links.
For the full story, click here.
Hahaha, oh my God you poasted this! The Assistant DA who is quoted in the article was my Mock Trial Legal advisor and dad of my good friend. Such a small world.
Oops, wrong thread!
I know of quite a few people whose partners, or spouses are HIV positive, but are deciding to stick around and risk it. Despite asking questions from them, and hearing some explanations,such as “being in love”, “he is soulmate” , etc, I still find the rational behind their behavior quite baffling.
whoolie,
I’d think that’s a call you’d have to make after getting a read on the audience.
So how does one go about this sort of thing. Daintily or pell mell.
“In a bench trial, the judge is trained to avoid such prejudice and can order the defendant to comply with the rules of the court or watch the trial from a cell by remote television links.”
*************************
Not all judges are capable to set the differences apart. They bend over backwards to not appear prejudiced and slam them whole heartily.
I have had many different trials with a judge and/or a jury. One Judge in particular was always so kind as to wish the defendant to a term of a good day and that they should put all of this behind them as the sheriff was clasping the bracelets.
“Hamilton County prosecutor David Prem believes that Orr did this on purpose and has objected that he is a con man who tried various methods to get out of the trial.”
*****************
An effort at a scatological scat, perhaps?
sounds like the one about the guy that took apple juice to the doctors office and put it in the urine sample cup. Came out and in front of the nurse held it up to the light, looked at and told the nurse it looks like it needs to be run through again and proceded to drink it.
Chocalate pudding anyone?