A disCOURTeous yawn ended US man in jail

By: Jerome Tan (09) 3B

A man imprisoned for yawning. Yes, you heard it right. And he was slapped the maximum penalty of six months of jail promptly after that. The reason? The yawning was "loud and boisterous" and "was offensive to the court". This sparks a little controversy: Has the judge overreacted? I shall hence explore the implications of the judge’s decision and its reasons, taking the stand that the judge has indeed reacted disproportionately.


Having done intensive research on various riveting cause célèbre court cases, this case amused me most. In essence, my experience tells me that the judge’s decision will lead to disgruntlement and the loss of respect from the masses. My justifications are as follows:


Firstly, the penalty was too harsh. How is it that a few seconds of yawning disruption can earn one a six-month jail term? Six months are way out of proportion. Fortunately, the man, Williams, was liberated after three weeks, though this has not amount to any more justice to the case. Some may even question whether this is a misemployment of power or that the judge, Daniel Rozak, is attempting to defend his ego. If one takes a step back and reflects about the judge’s role, is it not his duty to protect citizens instead of intimidating them? One quintessential example proves the point that Williams’ punishment was indeed too harsh. In Judge Richard Schoenstedt's court one year, a woman disrupted the closing arguments of a trial by shouting, "This is bull ..." as she was led away. Held to the floor by a deputy, she "continued to be disruptive" even after being brought back before the judge. She received a seven-day sentence for contempt. Similarly, many others in other Will County courtrooms were awarded far less severe sentences for seemingly more flagrant offenses. As such, one can compare these cases to reach an undeniable conclusion that Rozak has been overly harsh, and few will be pleased by his decision.


Secondly, sentencing someone to jail for a mere yawning is a waste of time and taxpayers’ money. Not only will there be numerous time-wasting processes and complications, the prisoner will have six months of his life fritted away over so insignificant a “crime”. In addition, “the average annual cost per prisoner [in the U.S.] was $23,876” (extracted from Orlando Sentinel). This means that a profusion of taxpayers’ money will go into housing, feeding and providing welfare and other necessities to Williams and other prisoners. So ludicrous it may seem, and Rozak has clearly not spared a thought for these people who have been toiling so hard to sustain those behind bars.


However, most will agree on the proposition that Williams should be held responsible for his actions for being arrogant and disrespectful in a courtroom. A respectful person would have his mouth covered and suppress the yawn; the court of law must be respected. Said Charles Pelkie, spokesman for the Will County state's attorney's office, “This was a very loud, boisterous, deliberate attempt on the part of this individual to disrupt the proceedings and show disrespect to the court, it was not a guy who involuntarily yawned.” (But Mayfield, Williams’ cousin, disagreed, saying it was "not an outrageous yawn." Williams has also written to his family to say that he cannot believe he was in jail "for nothing.")


Nevertheless, the point I was driving at is that the penalty was too harsh that people will be discontented. I do agree that Williams was being disrespectful, but he could have first been given a stern warning, or at most be severely admonished by the judge for inappropriate behavior in a courtroom. This is as far as this should have gone.


Indeed, I feel that Williams was rather unmindful of his behavior in court, but the penalty given to him was unjustified and have negative implications. Maybe drowsy spectators in the courtroom might want to stifle their yawns from now on.