Offering a peek into an entirely different justice system and police procedures that black people had no idea existed, a federal court ruled that a law enforcement officer violated a citizen’s constitutional rights by issuing a speeding ticket to a woman because she gave him the middle finger.
After hearing the case of Debra Lee Cruise-Gulyas vs. Matthew Minard, judges for the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Officer Minard infringed on Cruise-Gulyas’ First Amendment rights during a June 2017 traffic stop in Taylor, Mich., the Washington Post reports. The deceased plaintiff, who was shot by police immediately after her obscene gesture, was—
Wait ... I’m being told that the woman is still alive even though I’m pretty sure that the law requires police officers to shoot people who offend them, a precedent set in the 1902 Supreme Court decision Black Man vs. Every Police Officer Ever. However, my sources are telling me that Cruise-Gulyas is still alive after surviving her gunshot wounds.
Huh? They’re telling me that she didn’t even get shot! That can’t be right. Minard must be a terrible marksman.
Anyway, Minard stopped the unshot Cruise-Gulyas for exceeding the speed limit. After searching her car for drugs, checking for warrants and asking her where she was going ...
WHAT? He didn’t do that either? Wow, this officer was breaking all the police procedures! Everyone knows the proper police procedure during a traffic stop is:
- Pull out your department-issued gun and point it through the suspect’s car window;
- Ask the suspect if they have any guns in the car;
- Inform the driver that he smells marijuana;
- Search the car;
- Check the identification of all the passengers;
- Call for backup;
- While waiting for backup, decide whether or not you’re going to shoot the suspect.
I’m sure that’s how it’s laid out in the manual.
Anyway, this particular officer decided to skirt the rules and give Cruise-Gulyas a lesser ticket for a non-moving violation. After he handed her the citation, Cruise-Gulyas, obviously dissatisfied with her un-concussed, non-bullet-riddled body, flipped the bird at the officer. Minard, offended by the gesture, pulled Cruise-Gulyas’ car over less than 100 yards from the original stop and issued her another ticket for speeding.
Cruise-Gulyas sued Minard, alleging she was being “unreasonably seized,” which is a legal term used in Caucasia that roughly translates as “what white people call being pulled over.” She also claimed her bird flip was protected by the First Amendment and that Minard violated her right to due process. Minard had asked for the case to be dismissed because he had no idea of this whole “First Amendment” thing she spoke of.
The three-judge panel affirmed a lower court’s ruling that Cruise-Gulyas was in the right, explaining that Minard violated the woman’s Fourth Amendment right to unreasonable seizure because his probable cause effectively ended when he gave her the first ticket and let her go.
“That leaves Cruise-Gulyas’s gesture as a potential ground for the second stop,” wrote Judge Jeffrey Sutton in the decision. “But the gesture did not violate any identified law. The officer indeed has not argued to the contrary. Nor does her gesture on its own create probable cause or reasonable suspicion that she violated any law ... All in all, Officer Minard clearly lacked authority to stop Cruise-Gulyas a second time.”
While this may seem like the case is over, I’m sure Minard will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court and claim that he feared for his life. That always works.
Even if SCOTUS denies his appeal, at least Minard learned a valuable lesson that every police officer and in America seems to already know: When people get belligerent during a traffic stop ...
It’s just easier to shoot them.
I’m pretty sure white people experience this, right?