Well, this is a bit of a doozy. This case — via the Institute for Justice — involves a possible First Amendment violation but somehow ends with a judicial blessing of cops who make things up after the fact to justify an arrest that has already taken place.

That’s literally what happened here. Mason Murphy was walking down a Missouri road when he was accosted by Officer Michael Schmitt. From the opening of this very unfortunate decision [PDF]:

Schmitt stopped his car, approached Murphy, and asked Murphy to identify himself. Murphy refused to identify himself, and Schmitt put Murphy in handcuffs after nine minutes of argument. Murphy asked why Schmitt arrested him, and Schmitt refused to answer.

So far, it would appear no criminal act was committed and that the cuffing of Murphy by Schmitt was in retaliation for Murphy’s refusal to identify himself and, First Amendment-wise, his refusal to shut up.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    21 year ago

    Everything after that first sentence was tongue in cheek explanation for context and was directed towards anyone else reading it.

    Not to you amigo, sorry if that wasn’t clear. It’s hard to keep up with all the abortions of justice (the only abortions conservatives want!).

    • mo_ztt ✅
      link
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ah, makes sense, no worries.