Editor's note: Danny Cevallos is a CNN legal analyst, criminal defense attorney and partner at Cevallos & Wong, practicing in Pennsylvania and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Follow him on Twitter: @CevallosLaw. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- When police arrested Eric Frein, accused in the death of a Pennsylvania state trooper, they symbolically used the equipment of their fallen brother, Cpl. Bryon Dickson, to take Frein into custody.

They drove the suspect in Dickson's police vehicle, put him in Dickson's handcuffs, took him to the barracks where the shooting occurred, and held Frein there until he was moved to the correctional facility in Pike County.

This drew some immediate attention. Some have questioned if these customs constitute the law enforcement equivalent of taunting, possibly prejudicing the arrest and evidence. Others might criticize the expenditure of government resources for purely symbolic gestures—like transporting an ordinary pair of handcuffs great distances, when a pair of local zip-ties could do the job. So, should we discourage these law enforcement traditions?

The legal verdict? Nah.

Let the police do this. And that's coming from a criminal defense attorney.

Using a fallen comrade's equipment to bring in a suspect is hardly new. It's been going on for years, though I could find little information about the origin of this department ritual.

Is using a slain officer's cuffs tantamount to a public statement about the guilt or innocence of a suspect? Sure, but then again, so is an arrest and indictment. The origin of the cuffs is the least of an arrestee's legal worries.

Should we be spending government resources transporting a specific set of handcuffs or a police vehicle for its symbolic relevance? One might argue that if bringing those handcuffs costs even one dollar more than just using local handcuffs, a merely symbolic gesture may not be warranted.

The reality is that our government spends money on symbolism all the time. Does our government "need" to pay the head coach at the Naval Academy $1.5 million? Is the United States required to send athletes to the Olympics? Do we really even need the White House Rose Garden?

None of these are technically necessary to the operation of our government, but there is value to demonstrating the majesty of democracy, both at home and abroad. When viewed against some of the other things our government spends money on, requisitioning a pair of special handcuffs for a special arrest hardly seems excessive. Government symbolism has real value; and value sometimes costs real dollars.

Should the police be engaged in any symbolic taunting of suspects? In the vast majority of cases, no. Not just because suspects are presumed innocent, but also because taunting suspects would undermine community confidence in police, and possibly undermine the arrest itself. As it is, an arrest is a public event, and already humiliating enough on its own.

But cop killings are different. Law enforcement is highly protective of its own; a slaying of a fellow officer breaks down all barriers between different departments and agencies. In this case, it is no longer business, it's very personal. After all, it could have been any of them ambushed that day.

Police deal with constant scrutiny—by the community, defense lawyers and even their own prosecutors. Oh, and they can get killed doing their job. It's no surprise they develop an us-against-the-world mentality, which makes the bond among them even stronger.

While departments must closely referee to guard against excessive celebration with suspects, we can probably look the other way when it comes to some strategic use of otherwise standard equipment to honor a comrade.

Read CNNOpinion's new Flipboard magazine.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.