An Alabama judge acquitted a “No Kings” protester who was arrested on disorderly conduct charges for wearing a giant inflatable penis costume, which the arresting officer viewed as an “obstruction.” 

Fairhope Municipal Court Judge Haymes Snedeker found Renea Gamble, 62, not guilty on April 17 of misdemeanor charges, including disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, as well as city violations for providing a false name to law enforcement and disturbing the peace.

The case stems from a nationwide October 18 anti-Trump “No Kings” protest. Gamble arrived at the demonstration in Fairhope, Alabama, wearing a large inflatable penis costume. The Fairhope Police Department was mobilized to respond to unlawful activity occurring at the protest, including water bottles being thrown at demonstrators, according to reports.

Fairhope Police Cpl. Andrew Babb testified that he viewed Gamble’s costume as an “obstruction,” citing safety concerns. Babb told the court that he did not arrest Gamble because he found the costume offensive, and was attempting to “de-escalate” the situation.

However, bodycam footage of the arrest entered into evidence by Gamble’s attorney, David Gespass, includes Officer Babb telling Gamble that her costume would not be tolerated in a town that “has values.” Gespass said, “That’s all he talked about when he was confronting her was, ‘I am not going to put up with this in my town.’ 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.”

City Attorney Marcus McDowell argued, according to AL.com, that “there is no constitutional right to wear a total erect penis on the side of the road.” McDowell rejected the defense counsel’s free speech violation claims.

He also had Gamble’s husband, Larry Fletcher, testify about his decision to withdraw bail money before the protest in anticipation of Gamble’s arrest.

After two hours, Judge Snedeker acquitted Gamble of charges. “There is a standard that needs to be met,” said Snedeker, explaining that while the officer may have had probable cause for Gamble’s arrest, he was not convinced that the threshold was met to render a conviction.

Additionally, Snedeker said he believed that Officer Babb was not intending to suppress Gamble’s free speech rights. After court proceedings, the defendant told reporters, “This fight is not over.” 

Attorney Gespass announced his intention to sue the police department for First Amendment rights violations on behalf of Gamble.