this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2026
578 points (99.7% liked)

News

37302 readers
3501 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The trial of Renea Gamble had been underway for almost two hours when Marcus McDowell, the city attorney of Fairhope, Alabama, called a surprise witness.

“I call the gentleman in the red shirt,” he said, pointing toward a long-haired man in the second row. It took a moment to realize that he was referring to Gamble’s husband, 63-year-old Larry Fletcher.

Gamble’s defense attorney objected. He’d received no advance notice. But Fletcher shrugged and made his way forward.

Fletcher was with his wife when she was arrested at a No Kings protest in October 2025. She was wearing a 7-foot-tall inflatable penis costume and holding a sign that read “No Dick Tator.” Video of the incident went viral, turning Gamble into a minor celebrity and local free speech icon. Most people assumed the city would eventually drop the misdemeanor charges filed against her. Instead, McDowell added more, including giving a false name to law enforcement for identifying herself as “Aunt Tifa.”

Fletcher wore black Levi’s and a collared shirt with a Ferrari logo – a nod to his work rebuilding fuel injection systems for high-end cars. Sitting in the front row, Gamble looked a bit stricken watching the man she’d known since her childhood in Baton Rouge. “I know what she was thinking,” Fletcher later said. “She’s like, ‘Oh man, this could go out of control real easy.’”

McDowell asked Fletcher if he’d gone to bail his wife out of jail after her arrest. Yes, Fletcher said.

Did he make any statements to any of the jailers? Fletcher wasn’t sure. McDowell motioned toward one of the many law enforcement officers standing on the side of the room and asked if he looked familiar. Fletcher said he’d seen him around.

McDowell cut to the chase: Did Fletcher remember telling this man that he had gone to get bail money the day before the protest?

His objective was suddenly clear: The city attorney was suggesting that Gamble had gotten arrested on purpose.

If this was meant as a gotcha, things didn’t go as intended.

“I always make sure I have bail money!” Fletcher replied emphatically, as if this should be the most obvious thing in the world.

Did he have bail money on him now?

“Yeah!” Fletcher exclaimed, then gestured broadly. “With this many cops around? Come on.”

The room erupted with laughter. Moments later, Fletcher was back in his seat. Gamble reached back and held his hand.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KelvarCherry@piefed.blahaj.zone 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Okay this is great that she's free and all, but can we stop for a second and think about what happened here? A woman was grabbed off the street, beaten and brutalized (I've seen the arrest footage), and ripped out of her life, while being 100% peaceful and obedient.

I'm so sick of the one-sided violence, while we're told to obey and be peaceful and whatever else.

[–] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Why do you write this like it's surprising. I'm so sick of the left acting like "WHY DID THEY BEAT US UP ARE YOU NOT SHOCKED LOOK AT ME I'M DISGUSTING"

How about figuring out a way to protest that doesn't let them make these arrests so easy. The right figured out you can drive massive trucks into the streets to overwhelm the city's ability to arrest people. If you mass arrest people they leave behind lots of vehicles and there's only so many trucks that can remove them and only so much space in impound lots and this creates a situation that fucks the police over. The left on the other hand dresses in penis costumes and stands around until a cop kicks their head in. What the fuck are we doing

[–] KelvarCherry@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 15 minutes ago

Sounds like we have the same observations and feel the same frustrations about them. I look forward to being branded an agitator :')

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 83 points 2 days ago (4 children)

His objective was suddenly clear: The city attorney was suggesting that Gamble had gotten arrested on purpose.

Genuinely curious, what's the angle here? It's not illegal to intend to get arrested. Like, that was a defining thing of the civil rights movement.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

The angle is that she knew she was "committing a crime"

[–] rainwall@piefed.social 43 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

To undermine her as a sympathetic victim. The city prosecutor was trying to head off the civil suit, so he's trying to set it up like her action were intentional provocation. If it was all a devious plan to provoke the cops to get paid, then maybe the jury in that case would not award her any money.

Instead, it fell flat on it's face immediately and made it clear just who the villains are. People carrying around bail money because the local cops are so unhinged is not a winning answer for him at all.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Genuinely curious, what's the angle here?

Fully upright I think?

[–] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 4 points 23 hours ago

"Your honor, the defendant clearly intended for me to illegally arrest her!"

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Seems like he's implying that she was asking for it therefore she deserved to be arrested.

[–] tomkatt@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

she was asking for it

Oh, so the penis costume was too short and too tight? Or it just gave the prosecutor an erection? /s

Such utter bullshit.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 107 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

https://www.al.com/news/2026/04/fairhope-protester-acquitted-of-charges-after-inflatable-costume-arrest-during-anti-trump-rally.html

She was acquitted of all charges, including the trumped up extra ones the city attorney pulled out of his ass.

But my favorite bit was this:

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.

I'm betting he was 100% sure that she was going to appeal if he found her guilty of anything and that he would be made to look like a goddamn fool by the appeals court who would read this and call his ass out. And you know that everybody ~~in~~ and his mother would send money to her to fund her appeal if it got to that.

[–] who@feddit.org 33 points 2 days ago (5 children)

And you know that everybody in his mother would send money

Um... Did you by any chance use automated dictation to write your comment?

[–] rants_unnecessarily@piefed.social 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 13 hours ago

Her lawyer: Dick Johnson

[–] Zidane@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Actually we started a line to get in, you can cutsies behind me if ya want

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] treesapx@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

I definitely heard a record scratch and forgot the rest of the comment when I hit that. Not exactly an innocent "for all intensive purposes."

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ClanOfTheOcho@lemmy.world 134 points 2 days ago (7 children)

I need someone who understands law better than myself to clarify here -- not only did the prosecutor call a witness not on the list, but that witness was the spouse of the defendant?? I realize this is Alabama, and I may be a caveman lawyer (#notalawyer #notyourlawyer), but isn't this wildly inadmissable? If this story is true, shouldn't Cracker Jack lose their legal degree accreditation, because that seems to be where these participants got theirs? Or do l need to return to my cave?

[–] NotEasyBeingGreen@slrpnk.net 1 points 20 hours ago

I believe that the prosecution cannot call witnesses not on the list, but that the defense has more leeway?

[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 93 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I was thinking the same thing. Seems like that city attorney has taken a big ol'soak in a tub of reputational harm.

He can probably expect a promotion to the Trump administration any day now though. They seem to revel in hiring incompetent lawyers.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 11 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm pretty sure they're still looking for a permanent replacement for Pam Bondi. He should submit his resume!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tomatolung@sopuli.xyz 58 points 2 days ago

Long read here, but the story illustrates how the city attorney was scrambling less just to convict her than preempt a lawsuit she's likely to file against the city. Doesn't directly answer your question, but the context makes this clear that there were some desperation moves here.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago

Municipal court has slightly different rules, I think. At any rate, the defense objected and that would make it appeal-able post-conviction.

I mean, this court is set up for you to argue with the traffic cop as to how fast you were going. Calling witnesses usually isn’t a part of it.

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago

My understanding is that calling someone not in the list is rare but not completely disallowed. You'd need some heavy justification and how the other side doesn't object with better justification. I didn't read the pay-walled article but the summary in the post made it seem very lackadaisical how it was handled. That would be very concerning.

[–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago

As I understand it, litigators have pretty wide latitude to call whomever they want to provide factual testimony in support of their case. At worst, in some jurisdictions the opposing council has a right to be prepared and can ask for a recess while they do so.

And AFAIK states that grant spousal privilege limit that to private conservations, not overt acts or utterances made to a third party.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] deacon@lemmy.world 66 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This lady is my goddam fucking hero and I want to learn at her feet.

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 51 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Turns out her husband is pretty fucking awesome, too!

[–] deacon@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago

The whole family seems totally rad. I am inspired.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 14 points 2 days ago

WE LOVE YOU AUNTY TIFA

[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 87 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (8 children)

The dirty pigs tried to intimidate her in the courtroom, too:

The trial took place at the Fairhope Civic Center, home to the city council chamber and — on the first and third Wednesday of every month — municipal court. Outside the building, dozens of people gathered to support Gamble, while a small army of cops stood watch from inside.

Dude-bro really thought he was the morality police. Fuckin' scumbag.

[...] In his body camera footage, Babb repeatedly scolds Gamble for the costume, demanding to know how she would explain it to his kids. “I’m not trying to violate your freedom of speech,” he says as he unzips the penis suit. “I’m trying to preserve a town that has values.” Now McDowell was conjuring an alternate reality in which Gamble had teetered precariously at the edge of the road, endangering motorists, while the protest itself was veering close to a riot.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 98 points 2 days ago (4 children)

"I'm not trying to violate your free speech" is not a magic phrase to to turn infringements on free speech into non-infringements.

[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 52 points 2 days ago

"I'm not racist, but..."

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 37 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

He wasn't trying, he was succeeding.

"I'm effortlessly violating your free speech"

[–] Klear@quokk.au 22 points 2 days ago

Sigh

*unzips the penis suit*

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 43 points 2 days ago

Yeah they lied and said she was a traffic hazard, that it had nothing to do with the costume. They lied about calling for backup. They lied about escalating the situation. They threw her to the ground and squeezed the cuffs on her (arthritic) hands tightly so she cried out. She’s an ASL interpreter, her hands are her business.

I hope she sues the fuck out of them.

[–] nao@sh.itjust.works 37 points 2 days ago

how she would explain it to his kids

It's a play on words. Dick-Tator. Get it?

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago

Same energy as "No offense but [extremely offensive thing]"

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] baeb66@lemmy.today 54 points 2 days ago (1 children)

When you graduate dead last at a third tier law school, you end up as a prosecutor in HeeHaw, Alabama.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

and trying to prosecute mee-maw.

[–] Saber_is_dead@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

who's dressed as a pee-pee

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Aunt Tifa :)

i hope they give her an award, she's fabulous.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 days ago

“You can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride.”

Or losing your job, your home, your health, and various other consequences of being in jail.

[–] nulluser@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So, what is an appropriate amount of cash to have on hand for bail for this sort of thing? (Asking for a friend.)

[–] discocactus@lemmy.world 37 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ironically it's also the amount that makes possession of cash suspicious and subject to seizure.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 7 points 1 day ago

It's called "Civil Forfeiture" which is legalese for "literally legalized highway robbery."

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 33 points 2 days ago

"Snedeker said that while he believed that police had probable cause to arrest Gamble, the city’s evidence was not strong enough to convict; Gamble was not guilty. The room broke into applause."

[–] mister_flibble@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

This story continues to entertain. I'm so glad this nation is really concentrating on the important things. Hilarious.

load more comments
view more: next ›