'Never before have we seen any behaviour like this': Appeals court overturns conviction after judge shocks defendant three times with stun belt

'While the trial court’s frustration with an obstreperous defendant is understandable, the judge’s disproportionate response is not'

While stun belts can be used in courtrooms for defendants who may pose a security risk, their use is not authorised in the case of a defendant refusing to answer a question (Getty)

A judge administered multiple electric shocks to a defendant on trial as a “punishment” for not answering his questions properly, an appeals court has heard.

Judge George Gallagher ordered Terry Lee Morris to be shocked three times during his 2014 trial in Fort Worth, Texas, where he was accused and subsequently convicted of soliciting sexual performance from a 15-year-old girl.

The Texas Eight Court of Appeals in El Paso has overturned the judgement on the basis the shocks “violated” Morris’ constitutional rights, the Texas Lawyer website reported.

“Never before have we seen any behavior like this, nor do we hope to ever see such behaviour again," the judges said in their ruling.

While stun belts can be used in courtrooms for defendants who may pose a security risk, their use is not authorised in the case of a defendant refusing to answer a question, the appeals court found.

“While the trial court’s frustration with an obstreperous defendant is understandable, the judge’s disproportionate response is not," Justice Yvonne Rodriguez said in the ruling. "We do not believe that trial judges can use stun belts to enforce decorum.

“A stun belt is a device meant to ensure physical safety; it is not an operant conditioning collar meant to punish a defendant until he obeys a judge’s whim. This Court cannot sit idly by and say nothing when a judge turns a court of law into a Skinner Box, electrocuting a defendant until he provides the judge with behaviour he likes.”

The appeals court has now ordered a new trial for Morris.

“As the circumstances of this case perfectly illustrate, the potential for abuse in the absence of an explicit prohibition on nonsecurity use of stun belts exists and must be deterred. We must speak out against it, lest we allow practices like these to affront the very dignity of the proceedings we seek to protect and lead our courts to drift from justice into barbarism,” said Justice Rodriguez.