A criminal court judge held up a bag he said contained his pistol, which turned out to be a stapler, while the real gun sat on the floor by his foot, in what may be the least controlled experiment in the history of the New York judiciary
Order In The Laboratory
MANHATTAN. A New York County Criminal Court judge has been censured by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct after conducting what he described as an experiment involving his own licensed pistol during a hearing, according to Gothamist’s report on the judge who brought his gun into court. Judge Jeffrey A. Gershuny was presiding over an August 2025 hearing about whether a gun a police officer said he found in a bag should be admitted as evidence. To test whether a person could tell if a bag contained a gun, the judge held up a shopping bag that he said contained his pistol. It contained a stapler. His actual gun was on the courtroom floor by his foot.
Scientists across the city have reviewed the methodology and agree that while the experiment lacked a control group, peer review and any recognizable safety protocol, it did produce one undeniable finding: you cannot always tell what is in a bag.
The Experiment, Step By Step
According to the commission’s findings as reported by Gothamist, the judge repeatedly claimed a gun was inside the bag, and the officer repeatedly said he could not see one. Court officers warned against the plan. The judge proceeded anyway. The commission found that he failed to safeguard his firearm and intentionally deceived a witness.
A professor of research methods at a Manhattan university, asked to evaluate the design, said it had several weaknesses. First, the hypothesis was unclear, she said. Second, the subject was deliberately misled. Third, the actual dangerous variable was on the floor. Fourth, the experiment took place in a courtroom, where the usual rule is that you bring evidence, not stationery. I would give it a C minus. Mostly for the stapler.
The Stapler Speaks
The real star of the episode, many New Yorkers agree, is the stapler. For decades, the stapler has quietly held New York’s legal system together, binding motions, briefs and affidavits in courthouses across the five boroughs. Now it has played a starring role in judicial history, standing in for a firearm with a dignity few office supplies could manage.
A paralegal in Lower Manhattan who has used the same stapler for eleven years said she felt a new respect for it. It has stapled ten thousand documents, she said. It has never asked for recognition. And now it has been mistaken for a gun in a courtroom. That is more excitement than most staplers get in a lifetime. Mine is jealous.
The Outcome
The judge ruled the gun in the original case inadmissible, saying the officer had told a convoluted story about seeing a bulge, and said the experiment played a role in that decision. Prosecutors then declined to pursue the case. The commission noted that the judge was apologetic and cooperative, and he has stopped bringing his gun into court.
The Recommendation
The commission asked the state Office of Court Administration to review the rules on judges bringing firearms into courtrooms and to make sure judges know them. Legal observers welcomed the move, noting that most New Yorkers assumed the rules on guns in courtrooms were already fairly clear, given that ordinary members of the public must pass through metal detectors simply to pay a parking ticket.
A Brooklyn defence attorney said the case had become a talking point in courthouse hallways. Every lawyer has a story about an unusual judge, he said. A judge who sings. A judge who brings a dog. A judge who reads poetry from the bench. This is the first time I have heard of a judge running a live-fire psychology study. It has raised the bar for eccentricity. Nobody wants to compete.
The Bag Question
Underlying the comedy is a genuine legal issue. Cases involving searches of bags and the visibility of weapons raise real questions about police observations, probable cause and constitutional rights. Officers often testify that they saw a bulge or the outline of a gun, and courts must decide whether those observations justified a search. The judge’s experiment, however unorthodox, was an attempt, in his telling, to understand that question. The commission’s point was that a courtroom is not the place to test it with a real firearm and a misleading witness.
New Yorkers React
New Yorkers, who have seen most things, reacted to the story with a mixture of disbelief and pride that something this unusual could still happen in their city. A bodega owner in Chinatown summarised the mood. In New York, he said, we have pizza rats, naked cowboys and men who walk turtles on leashes. Now we have a judge with a stapler in a bag. Every year, the city finds new ways to surprise me. I am almost proud.
The Last Word
Asked whether he would like to conduct an experiment of his own, a court officer in Lower Manhattan, who has spent twenty years guarding courtroom doors, considered the question carefully. Yes, he said. I want to test whether judges can follow the rules everyone else follows. My hypothesis is yes. I will need a control group. And absolutely no staplers.