I was not suggesting that you implement a mechanic to jail other players. I was saying that, if it were implemented, players should have the choice of having their character jailed.
Also... I don't know your background with roleplay. But you should know that even when your character is at the mercy of another, you must have consented to another player's request for power over your character. Consent is an unsaid thing, usually, but it is a major piece of the game. The point of jailing, ICly, is to restrict the freedom of the suspect. OOCly, however, it is to provide potential for the development of a plot and the characters involved.
There have been occasions in the past in which players were unable to consent to what happened to their characters. The GM team is guilty of this (I might be wrong, although I doubt it). I have heard of trials being conducted against a player's wishes and players being denied escape from jail. It is not godmodding to escape capture. The restriction of the player's choices is unfair and powerplaying. Yes, a GM can do that, especially when the GM is roleplaying a human character like a guard. (By saying they can do that, I mean that when they do, they are violating the rules. They are not exempt when they are roleplaying.)
It seems to me that many of you have lost sight of what roleplay is. There is a very clear line between OOC and IC. The difference between the player and the character. You may attempt to force a situation upon a character, but doing so with a player is inappropriate.
Arresting a character, preventing the character's escape, and putting the character on trial can be done without abuse. Only when that character's player agrees with the course of events. And by agree, I mean the player invites it. Freezing the player, teleporting the player, and then roleplaying as if the previous actions were acceptable is an example of powerplaying. It is completely OOC behavior, as the player is being forced to tolerate it, and every last ounce of fun is lost. It is no longer play.
Remember that this is a game. Look at the board game Risk. We, as players, are on equal ground. Our pieces may have a strategic advantage (Australia...), but we, as players, must be equal for this game to be fun. If I were to discreetly swipe away a few of your men, I would be violating the rules of the game. In roleplay, this would be, for example, powerplaying. It is cheating. But If I were to destroy your men during a round of attack, it would be fair, as we are both consenting to battle by continuing the game. By rolling the dice, we are avoiding unsportsmanly conduct by avoiding forced shortcuts (like if I were to hide your pieces).
Now, I would say the game of Risk is analogous to a single roleplay. You are not your pieces on the battlefield, just as you are not your character. You, the player, can quit any time you wish. And, when the other players are fair, it can be fun to lose, especially after a tough game.
So, while a character may not choose to be jailed, the roleplayer has chosen to allow that character to be jailed. Nothing should happen to anyone who does not will it.
