Judge Acquits Penis Costume-Wearing Grandma While Saying Some Dumb Stuff About Probable Cause
from the first-amendment-isn't-subjective dept
Last fall, an Alabama police officer decided he wasn’t going to allow a 62-year-old woman to exercise her First Amendment rights — not if she was going to do so from inside an inflatable penis costume.
Yes, these are sentences we actually have to write here at Techdirt — things that seem so implausible you’d expect them to be generated from the sloppiest of AI prompts. It’s a real thing, though. It happened to Fairhope, Alabama resident Renea Gamble. It was inflicted by Fairhope PD officer Andrew Babb, who took apparently personal offense at Gamble’s inflatable penis costume and her “No Dick-Tator” sign she carried during a “No Kings” protest.
You can watch the arrest in all of its ingloriousness below. It’s alternately comical and horrifying. Horrifying, because it involves officers assaulting a 62-year-old grandmother. Comical, because multiple attempts are made to fit the person and costume into a police cruiser before deciding it might be easier if the person and costume were separated… which then leads to an officer discovering it’s kind of difficult to shove a non-resisting inflatable penis costume into the truck of a police car.
This arrest and resulting prosecution gained national attention. Rather than encourage the city to drop the prosecution, it seemingly emboldened it. Prosecutors waited until people had moved onto the next outage before dropping additional charges on Renea Gamble, including “disturbing the peace” and “giving a false name to law enforcement.” (The latter charge stemmed from Gamble telling the arresting officers her name was “Auntie Fa.”)
Officer Babb — as captured by his own recording — presented a very subjective take on the First Amendment when arresting Gamble. He not only demanded Gamble explain what he was supposed to tell his own kids if they happened to see her costume (wtaf?), but said her particular form of expression was inherently unlawful because Fairhope was “a family town.”
The officer was as wrong about free speech as the town officials who supported this arrest and prosecution. Fair hope mayor Sherry Sullivan called the costume an “obscene display.” City council president Jack Burrell said the costume “violated community standards,” without bothering to assess what the community’s standards actually were.
Fortunately/unfortunately for him, a local radio station did exactly that, arriving at the opposite conclusion:
In December, a Mobile-based talk radio station held a listener poll to choose its annual Alabamian of the Year, with “Inflatable Fairhope Protest Penis” receiving the most votes.
Much more legitimately fortunate is the disposition of Renea Gamble’s criminal case. As AL.com reports, it has been tossed by municipal judge Haymes Snedeker. However, Snedeker’s acquittal comes with some caveats that will make it a bit more difficult for Gamble to pursue a civil rights lawsuit in this particular venue:
Judge Haymes Snedeker, after a trial lasting more than two hours, said he did not believe Fairhope Police Cpl. Andrew Babb was attempting to suppress 62-year-old Renea Gamble’s free speech rights during their encounter at the anti-Trump protest. He also said there may have been enough probable cause for Babb to arrest her.
However, Snedeker said he was not 99.9% certain that Gamble should be convicted of crimes stemming from the actions that led to her arrest. She was found not guilty of misdemeanor charges of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, as well as a municipal violation for disturbing the peace and giving a false name to law enforcement.
Snedeker gives the officer too much credit, especially when his own statements during the arrest made it clear he was singling Gamble out because he didn’t agree with her particular form of free expression. The recording shows Gamble wanted to manhandle this penis because he was employed by a “family town” and didn’t want to have to explain to his kids what this costume might represent. He didn’t present anything approaching legal justification prior to pinning Gamble to the ground and handcuffing her.
The judge said all of this despite the officer’s testimony being completely undercut by the recording of the arrest.
Babb testified that he was using de-escalation techniques he was trained to employ as a police officer. He said he was concerned about safety and viewed Gamble’s costume as an “obstruction.” He said he did not arrest her because he was personally offended by the costume or her anti-Trump message.
[…]
[Gamble’s lawyer David] Gespass disagreed, arguing that body camera footage revealed the true nature of the arrest. In the footage, Babb tells Gamble that her costume would not be tolerated in a town that “has values.”
“That’s all he talked about when he was confronting her was, ‘I am not going to put up with this in my town,’” Gespass said. “He said nothing about her causing any problems with traffic. Certainly, if you watch the video, he is not de-escalating anything. He approached her aggressively.”
That wasn’t the only stupid thing said by the government. Here’s the prosecutor attempting to salvage an obviously bogus prosecution:
“There is no constitutional right to wear a total erect penis on the side of the road,” he said. “I’m sorry.”
Hmm. Seems wrong. Pretty sure in this context it’s protected speech. And all of these qualifiers suggest no prosecution would be happening if Gamble had simply let a little bit of the air out of the costume to appear a bit more flaccid.
Both the cop and the prosecutor (Marcus McDowell) are welcome to say dumb things in their own defense during testimony. For the judge to suggest this arrest might have been supported by probable cause demands a better explanation than what was given here. If the standard is only that one cop felt something violated the law, the First Amendment is meaningless. It’s the sort of thing that tells citizens their rights only matter once they’re violated… and even then, they still may not mean much. The judge blew the call here and the local cops know it. Gamble still has a target on her back and the cops have the judicial leeway to keep arresting protesters they personally don’t like.
Filed Under: alabama, andrew babb, david gespass, fairhope pd, free speech, haymes snedeker, no kings, penis, renea gamble, trump administration


Comments on “Judge Acquits Penis Costume-Wearing Grandma While Saying Some Dumb Stuff About Probable Cause”
The process is the punishment. The process is the message. Those pigs can do the same shit over and over and never see a single consequence.
This is a lie. That cop is a Trump-humping Nazi, and so is the prosecutor.
I hope more bepeckered show up to Alabama protests in different states of flaccidity. I’m extremely interested in the fine point of Alabama law defining exactly how rigid a cock needs to be before it becomes obscene.
Re:
I also think size doesn’t matter, so it has to be hard enough to enter a police car without much difficulties and flabby enough to be handcuffed easily.
And I agree Alabama police officers need some “Gentle Pecker Manipulation 101” training courses.
From the source article: “She decided to escalate the situation,” McDowell said during closing arguments. “She made (a withdrawal for) bail money the day before.”
That’s not an indicator of guilt, you fucking dumbasses. It’s an indickator that your city has highly emotional cops roaming the streets who are too hysterical and easily triggered to appropriately do their jobs. The lady who had her bail money ready WAS ACQUITTED. So being prepared w/ the bail money is an indictment of which party’s behavior in this sequence of events? We are in hell.
Re: Can I be blamed?
I really want to read “ball money” here.
Re:
It should be probable cause for HIS violation of her First Amendment Rights.
“leads to an officer discovering it’s kind of difficult to shove a non-resisting inflatable penis costume into the truck of a police car.”
So was the costume also charged with resisting arrest . . . or just obstruction?
Re:
oh… cum on now! it was charged with contempt of cop! for being a bigger dick then him!
I think with this ruling isn’t just a win for the inflatable dick lady, but also the people who aren’t wearing costumes and still look like giant puffy dicks. We expect to be hassled by the man.
Protests 101
What do you do to get Attention??
Anything LEGAL, I would hope.
Next time get a Heard of Chickens out in the road, and just throw Feed to keep them in place.
Not my Chickens.
DICK around and find out!
just another small town that thinks the constitution does not apply here!
and now that our super hero dad of the year with a magic badge has been seen mounting a giant penis! he should be good and ready for an interview at the Babylon Bee! where he can copsplain his heroic deeds by jumping on a big dick, saving the town from a giant penis!
What is that?
If I glanced at that costume in passing I would not immediately think “that is an erect penis” or that it was any kind of genitalia.
Re:
Even my 2 year old could tell you that it’s a penis!
Not sure what age the cops kids are but they probably already know what a penis is and so his argument about explaining it are redickulous.
I wonder who the biggest dick in the story was…
Okay, I don’t wonder.
I hereby promote Andrew Babb to the rank of Deputy Dickhead and award him with the One-Eyed Trouser Snake Medal of Fuckwittery.
DROP IT
why do people insist on using “drop” with the “new record dropped today” meaning, when talking about charges? “Charges were dropped” has always meant: the charges are no longer being persued. At least in this one instance can we drop, and i mean get rid of, this stupid word which now has two completely different meanings?
Re:
Because they’re not using it that way. Context is why “I cooked” and “I’m cooked” mean two different things despite both phrases using the word “cooked”; language is funny like that.
Rub us the right way
We need a crowd of 10,000 people with these costumes to go storm the capital…