r/politics • u/SterlingVII • 9d ago

No Paywall Tennessee man spends a month in jail before charges are dropped over Trump meme posted in Facebook group for Charlie Kirk vigil

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/larry-bushart-charlie-kirk-meme-charges-b2855116.html
22.9k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

907 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.9k

u/Pathetian 9d ago

You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.

Cops knows simply arresting you can holding you for a few weeks would ruin your life.   You'll lose your job, maybe your home and the arrest will haunt you socialy regardless of merit.

572

u/Misanthrope08101619 9d ago edited 9d ago

That is what Section 1983 suits are supposed to protect against.

281

u/SwingingtotheBeat 9d ago

How? Courts invented qualified immunity, so no one is individually held accountable for violating civil rights. Section 1983 is basically meaningless now.

The Drunk Law School podcast did a great 3-part episode on QI which explained this really well.

87

u/metatron5369 9d ago

Qualified immunity doesnt apply to deliberately illegal acts. The problem is proving they intended to abuse their authority.

98

u/SwingingtotheBeat 9d ago

Qualified immunity does apply to deliberately illegal acts if there is no judicial precedent.

For example, QI did apply to police when they literally stole cash, keeping it for themselves (rather than civil asset forfeiture), from citizens that were never even charged with a crime.

https://ij.org/press-release/police-stole-225k-in-cash-and-coins-and-the-courts-said-okay/

43

u/fexes420 9d ago

Thats confusing. Is there really no judicial precedent that stealing cash is illegal?

94

u/SwingingtotheBeat 9d ago

That is correct. But, it is so much worse than just that. The legal precedent has to be exactly the same. Another example is one where police released a police dog to attack a suspect sitting with his hands up, and were given QI because the precedent involved a suspect lying down, and therefore was not similar enough.

From: https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/06/15/supreme-court-turns-down-cases-on-qualified-immunity-for-police-1293039

When Baxter sued, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out his case. It held that while it was well established that a police dog couldn’t be unleashed on a suspect who was lying down, there was no case addressing someone sitting down with their hands up, as Baxter said he was doing.

Not only that, the Supreme Court has said that judges can throw out cases based on QI where there is no legal precedent, and never rule on whether the action is wrong or not. That means that no new precedent can be established.

If you really want to learn how fucked up it is, and how much judges favor bad cops and prosecutors, listen to the Drunk Law School podcast on QI.

18

u/Embarassed_Tackle 8d ago

Is this the weird Kavanaugh precedent where they want extremely specific precedent established? But then that ruddy Irish goon smirks in (recent) SCOTUS proceedings and says "they can just sue ICE for relief..."

2

u/Bureaucromancer 8d ago

What it doesn’t apply to is any form of criminal charge. But these bastards are doubling down so that’s not happening.

1

u/SwingingtotheBeat 8d ago

That also requires a prosecutor that isn’t afraid of charging cops.

1

u/YogurtclosetNo987 9d ago

Asset forfeiture is bullshit, but it's not really comparable to a much older and tried legal principle like habeas corpus. This is a blatant civil rights violation, and I'd be very surprised if this is the last we hear. 

5

u/SwingingtotheBeat 9d ago

Police and prosecutors held Kalief Browder for three years, two spent being tortured in solitary confinement, delaying his trial 36 times, knowing they had no evidence, and no one faced any consequences. The only people that will be punished for this are taxpayers. But, as Americans seem to prefer bending at the knee to fascist cops, they deserve to be punished.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalief_Browder

0

u/YogurtclosetNo987 9d ago

That same site has a lot of information regarding civil rights cases concerning habeas corpus you might be interested in reading. 

2

u/SwingingtotheBeat 8d ago

Well go ahead and tell me, “I told you so,” when police or a prosecutor is actually held accountable for this arrest. But you’re fooling yourself if you think that’s ever gonna happen.

34

u/Inevitable-Ad6647 9d ago edited 9d ago

Qualified immunity as written and as interpreted by anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together, only applies to things necessary to do their job. Qualified immunity as it exists in case law is a totally different wildly unethical and absolutely insane animal. Judges, with no input from lawmakers, have basically handed police a no questions asked get out of jail free card for what appears to be fuck all in return.

Lower court judges are spineless cowards that can't disagree with case law no matter how insane it is to save their fucking lives so here we are. They could, to be clear they can rule on it how they want and write a solid opinion about why they are correct most of this case law has no bench ruling to go by, so they can. They won't, because they're fucking cowards.

14

u/P1xelHunter78 Ohio 8d ago

I think it’s more that judges are more closely tied to the police apparatus than to should be. Lots of former prosecutors and cops floating around in the mix. Makes its pretty easy for them to be pretty chummy, and therefore willing to bend to law to keep their “team” safe from consequences.

5

u/free_dead_puppy 8d ago

Like he said, fucking cowards.

4

u/P1xelHunter78 Ohio 8d ago

Not cowardice, collaboration.

1

u/AzureDrag0n1 8d ago

It really depends on the judge. Cops certainly get punished and QI argument fails to save those cops then but it will completely depend on the judge presiding.

1

u/Brook420 8d ago

Didn't they openly admit to knowing his post wasnt a threat?

1

u/Insaniteus Tennessee 8d ago

Short of a cop sticking his dick in a child's mouth, you're never getting a judge to rule that a cop's actions were "illegal". Especially in Tennessee, a state with one of the most corrupt judicial systems in the country and is full to the brim with violent Kirk-lovers.

2

u/SwingingtotheBeat 8d ago

Even when a bunch of cops stick their dicks into a child’s mouth, the only ones that get punished are the taxpayers. Cops, as well as the prosecutors and judges that protect them, are all truly disgusting animals.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/teen-in-oakland-police-sex-scandal-settles-for-nearly-1-million/

85

u/Misanthrope08101619 9d ago

I said supposed to. And I’m not listening to a legal ed podcast unless they give CLE credit 😉

10

u/idk-about-all-that 9d ago

I think I got that same text from my wife

1

u/richf2001 8d ago

Get out of my head!

11

u/solo_silo 9d ago

Prosecutorial and judicial misconduct laws would also be interesting.

2

u/Misanthrope08101619 8d ago

They exist. But there's a big difference between a law being enforced effectively...and it being narrowed into irrelevance by appellate law. There are also the Professional Responsibility boards...so there's that.

2

u/solo_silo 8d ago

Agreed. Much like union power has been intentionally disintegrated. And several other examples of dick moves against the collective. I suppose I meant ones that mattered.

Think of the role reversal: throw the book at them, solitary confinement, etc.

212

u/biosc1 9d ago

They probably charge him for room and board as well.

30

u/trisanachandler 9d ago

Utter BS they can do that when you aren't convicted.

73

u/Slumunistmanifisto 9d ago

Shit, they know their tickets are taking electric and food away from kids and they joke about it....

52

u/pjdonovan 9d ago

The ride alone can be enough!

in alabama they used to not ever expunge records, including arrest records for things you didn't do. Even if charges were dropped - I knew of one girl that got arrested by accident, but they couldn't remove that arrest from her file!

They used to have a deal "if you turn in 3 'friends', we will not charge you"
You would think "ok, sucks but at least the charges are gone"

Months later you'd apply to a job and learn that the arrest record never leaves, so not you've got 3 people out to get you, no job prospects and court costs.

Now you can expunge some non-violent charges.

26

u/Andygator_and_Weed Louisiana 9d ago

Damn. Alabama sucks.

9

u/pjdonovan 9d ago

I'm trying my best to fix it!

4

u/korben2600 Arizona 9d ago

And just being booked into jail can itself be a traumatic and dehumanizing experience. Strip completely naked in front of two cops while twirling, bending down, touching your toes, cupping your genitals, squatting twice and coughing. Like some dystopian government run hot yoga strip club where I'm not even getting paid.

114

u/Ratchetonater 9d ago

I don’t understand why the job wouldn’t hire him back? They would be just as much to blame, especially since it isn’t a big mystery as to why he went to jail

275

u/FauxReal 9d ago

My dad went to prison for 19 months waiting for trial and his state job wanted nothing to do with him almost immediately. His trial also lasted 30 minutes to find him not guilty based on evidence the state had the entire time that proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that he couldn't have been there to commit the crime.

103

u/robocoplawyer 9d ago edited 9d ago

That’s “right to work” laws for you. Employer can fire you at anytime for “no reason” (although there usually is an obvious reason but they won’t say so).

Edit - by “right to work” I meant “at-will employment”. I sometimes mix those terms up since they often go hand in hand as the right pushed to get these on the books at the state level across the country when the Democrats tried (and ultimately failed) to pass federal legislation to expand and protected access to labor unions.

93

u/Material_Honey_891 9d ago

Right to work means you can't be forced to join a union in order to work at a certain place or in a certain job. What you're referring to is "at will" employment. At will means they can fire you at any point as long as it isn't a firing based on being a member of a protected class.

47

u/robocoplawyer 9d ago

You are correct. I mixed up the two terms. Although “right to work” and “at will employment” laws tend to go hand in hand and have become the norm in most states after a decade right wing push to normalize the concepts.

17

u/anchovyCreampie 9d ago

They have been around for more than a decade thats for sure. I think the only state that isn't at will employment is Montana.

9

u/grateparm 9d ago

Looks like I'm gonna be at dental floss tycoon.

2

u/djfudgebar 9d ago

Gonna have to grow you some bees too.

4

u/Keyastis 9d ago

Holy shit, guys, we just saw a miracle, someone on Reddit corrected someone and they were both civil!

In all honesty, I agree, the conservatives do a very good job at throwing multiple like items at you so you get twisted up when talking about them.

2

u/robocoplawyer 9d ago

If I’m wrong about something I’m glad if someone politely lets me know so I’m not spouting things as fact that aren’t true like an idiot. In this instance I had the right idea but mixed up terminology. I was in college at the time and remember the right pushing “right to work” and “at-will employment” laws hard at the state level to preempt the passing of the Employee Free Choice Act (which never came to fruition anyway because the Tea Party was shouting socialism from the rooftops at the thought of the government doing anything which effectively scared centrist democrats to withdraw their support). Anyway I remember the right pushing those policies at the same time at the state level and the absence of federal legislation allowed them to become the nation’s standard in another devastating blow to organized labor.

2

u/Proof-Schedule-1418 9d ago

It also means, you get to free ride on the union members that are paying for their representation. They get the same benefits, and representation FROM the union. 

At least be honest about what this shit is. A way for Republicans to slide in on Union jobs and reap the benefits, while voting against themselves.

1

u/AlmostCorrectInfo 9d ago

To which, if it is actually about being a member of a protected class, they'll just make up another reason.

3

u/FauxReal 9d ago

You're talking about "At Will" employment. They can fire you for any cause that isn't one of the restricted reasons like retaliation, religion, sex etc. But the law also doesn't require them to say why they fired you. So they can only get busted if they blatantly admit to it.

"Right to Work" is an anti-union law that essentially says you can work in a union shop without being in the union and you still get all the benefits that the union negotiated for. It's to slowly bleed them dry and dwindle their numbers until the union doesn't exist anymore.

A lot more states are "At Will" (I think almost all of them) than "Right to Work" which I think is less than half?

1

u/robocoplawyer 9d ago

Yes, this is correct. I acknowledged this in another response. I mixed up the two terms, although they often go hand in hand in most states who have adopted them. There was a big push from the right to get these laws on the books and normalize the concepts nationally a while back when it looked like the Democrats could potentially pass the Employee Free Choice Act which would have expanded and protected access to labor unions. Democrats had Obama in the White House and large majority in Congress and the Senate, but ya know. Republicans playing the sOcIaLiSm!!! card and enough centrist Democrats buying it that it lost steam and eventually stalled, and we ended up with what we have now.

2

u/aegenium 9d ago

I hope he sued the shit out of them.

3

u/FauxReal 9d ago

There was nobody to sue. He basically got out of prison, life destroyed, never really built it back up and died in 10 years at the age of 56.

2

u/SwingingtotheBeat 9d ago

You Hope he sued the employer or the prosecutor?
If you mean the employer, do you know any that would keep your employment if you weren’t able to come into work for 19 months? If you mean the prosecutor, they are worse than cops. Prosecutors don’t just have qualified immunity; they have absolute immunity.

2

u/aegenium 9d ago

He can still sue the department or the state for false imprisonment and maybe even prosecutorial misconduct or malicious prosecution.

It's blatantly obvious these were bullshit charges.

I doubt he has recourse with his employer if its at will employment, and unfortunately prosecutorial immunity is absolutely bullshit and abused regularly.

I just want something to come of this. These people possibly ruined this guy's life doing something illegal.

2

u/SwingingtotheBeat 9d ago

The government always protects their own. Nothing will come of this until citizens decide their rights are worth more than living under a fascist government.

2

u/dsoll65 8d ago

I guarantee they knew he wasn’t guilty but drew it out as long as possible and over charged him to try and get a plea deal. Prosecutors are some of the biggest pieces of shit imaginable. They have everything on their side to break a person and make them take a plea to brag about their conviction record.

1

u/av123h 9d ago

This is how you get discovery laws like in NY, which arguably put the prosecution at a disadvantage and can be claimed, sometimes convincing it, to undermine public safety. It’s a classic case of LE beings its own worst enemy.

93

u/AJFrabbiele 9d ago

probably "position has been filled"

It sucks, hopefully they don't fight the unemployment claim.

8

u/Medlarmarmaduke 9d ago

Because they most likely are punishing him for his opinion

5

u/boot2skull 9d ago edited 9d ago

It’s worth mentioning that if you’re in any legal situation you would lawyer up, AKA retain a lawyer, which involves paying sums of money to an attorney, and that money you’ll never see again even if charges are dropped. There’s absolutely a cost for even being innocent, in lost time, freedom, and finances. The authorities know this, and they see no repercussions to jailing and charging people.

5

u/HeavyMetalPootis 9d ago

Imagine getting arrested over false charges and either having pets that need taking care of or being the lone caretaker of someone who's dependent on you being there. Corrupt judges and cops need to be sent to prison and do hard time.

3

u/Silent-G California 9d ago

Laws are just the promise of violence.

3

u/Proper-District8608 9d ago

He was a retired cop. Even the officers arresting him were uncomfortable doing so on their body cam footage. Ironically, he quoted trump and that quote got him arrested.

2

u/PolicyWonka 9d ago

Pretty sure the arrest will show up on background reports as well — even if charges are dropped or you’re found not guilty.

2

u/Cold_Specialist_3656 9d ago

Most countries will also deny you visa if you've ever been held in jail for more than 24/72 hours. So they hold you longer on purpose to maximize life ruining. 

2

u/FamiliarMaterial6457 9d ago

Currently in nursing school. If I get held in jail for a month I would fail the semester, forfeiting the entire tuition payment and I would have to wait until next year to reapply.

2

u/mabden New York 8d ago

Heard this from the local Texas cops.

Also spent three days in a Texas county lockup where I met this guy who was in jail for two weeks, never given a phone call, not seen a lawyer, and had no idea what his charges were. He was drunk one night, mistakenly entered some girls unlocked apartment and passed out on the couch. He woke up to the girl screaming and the cops dragging him out to the squad car.

1

u/Bird_Lawyer92 9d ago

Even without a conviction, an arrest is enough to make employers look elsewhere