Qualified Immunity Gets the Electric Chair
You ever see someone try to talk their way out of a mess they created, only for a judge to basically respond, “Oh, no”?
That’s exactly what happened when three Superior, Wisconsin police officers—Taylor Gaard, Justin Taylor, and Matthew Brown—tried to pull the “we were just doing our jobs” defense after tasing an unarmed, non-threatening DoorDash driver for not kneeling fast enough.
Spoiler alert: The judge wasn’t having it.
“This is not a close case.”
— Judge James D. Peterson, presumably rolling his eyes so hard they left orbit.
“Do It Now or You’re Going to Get Tased!” — Gaard’s Spa Treatment
Let’s review: Ian Cuypers is delivering food. Makes a wrong turn. Ends up surrounded by cops with guns drawn like he just kidnapped the governor.
He puts his hands up. He backs away. He asks questions. He’s confused and terrified. What does Officer Gaard do?
“Do it now or you’re going to get tased!”
And before the man can process the demand like a human being with a nervous system?
“Cuypers screamed and collapsed to the ground.”
That’s not law enforcement. That’s a dominance display with electricity.
And Judge Peterson wasn’t about to let that slide into the legal DMs with a wink:
“No reasonable jury could find that the use of a taser was reasonable here.”
Qualified immunity: TERMINATED.
“He Looked at Us Funny” — The Gun-Pointing Olympics
Both Taylor and Gaard rolled up on Cuypers like he was a war criminal caught jaywalking. Their excuse for pointing firearms at a guy trying to find his insurance?
“He was digging around in his car.”
aka: glovebox terrorism
And the kicker?
“Target glancing behaviors consistent with imminent assault or flight.”
— Actual police report, not an Onion article.
Judge Peterson gave that one the legal equivalent of a side-eye and a slow clap:
“Gaard was unable to identify any characteristic that distinguishes ‘target glancing’ from simply looking at law enforcement officers.”
Translation: You made that up. Try again.
“The Video Doesn’t Lie—But You Do”
This isn’t a he-said, she-said. This is body cam footage stacked against hot air.
The judge straight-up invoked Scott v. Harris, a Supreme Court case about using video to blow up B.S. narratives. He said the cops’ claim that Cuypers was a threat was:
“So utterly discredited by the record that no reasonable jury could have believed it.”
Judge James D. Peterson
Put that in your squad car and drive it.
“They Could’ve Stopped Her”—But Didn’t
Let’s talk about Officer Brown and Sidekick-in-Chief Taylor. They saw Gaard line up the taser like it was a carnival game.
Could they have said, “Hey maybe don’t shoot the guy who’s complying”? Absolutely.
Did they?
Of course not.
“A reasonable jury could decide… they had at least a few seconds to tell Gaard not to use the taser.”
And that, kids, is enough to torch your qualified immunity in a failure-to-intervene claim.
“He Didn’t Obstruct, You Just Needed a Cover Story”
Remember how they charged Cuypers with resisting or obstructing an officer? That’s legalese for “We need to justify the part where we electrocuted him.”
But Cuypers was acquitted. Because… well, he didn’t resist.
Judge Peterson connects the dots like a crime show montage:
“The court concludes that Cuypers’s non-compliance did not impede the officers from performing their duties, so there was no probable cause.”
In other words: the only thing obstructed was the truth, and it got bulldozed by body cams.
“Callous Indifference” — Fancy Words for “We Just Didn’t Care”
If you thought the cops were just a little overzealous, the judge hits you with a slap of reality:
“A reasonable jury could find that defendants acted with callous indifference to Cuypers’s rights.”
Judge James D. Peterson
That’s the legal version of “they didn’t give a damn.”
He even leaves the door wide open for punitive damages. You know, the kind that say: “You knew better, and you still chose violence.”
Final Scene: “No Qualified Immunity For You!”
Judge Peterson sent qualified immunity to the same graveyard as Blockbuster Video and dial-up modems.
Let’s check the scoreboard:
-
- Gaard (tased him) – NO immunity
-
- Taylor (pointed gun) – NO immunity
-
- Brown (stood around, watched it all go down) – NO immunity
-
- Their credibility – Dead on Arrival
Meanwhile, at City Hall…
Mayor Jim Paine was probably busy picking out throw pillows for his next office raise when this ruling came down.
Because right now? Taxpayers are on the hook for three officers who turned a wrong turn into a constitutional torture chamber.
Read the Ruling :
“This Is Not a Close Case”: Superior Police Try to Hide Behind Qualified Immunity—Federal Judge Shreds It Like a Parking Ticket at a Frat Party
Qualified Immunity Gets the Electric Chair You ever see someone try to talk their way out of a mess they created, only for a judge to basically respond, “Oh, no”? That’s exactly what happened when three Superior, Wisconsin police officers—Taylor Gaard, Justin Taylor, and Matthew Brown—tried to pull the “we were just doing our jobs” defense after tasing an unarmed, non-threatening DoorDash driver for not
Superior’s New Game Show: Who Wants to Replace a Councilman?
Three Ways to Lose One Seat Look alive, 3rd District! Incumbent Garner Moffat isn’t just defending his title this April — he’s duking it out with two fresh challengers, both of whom bring real‑world grit to the race. After scraping by in lower‑turnout races before, Moffat’s mandate might be about as sturdy as a paper canoe in a Nor’easter. The Incumbent: Moffat the … Mandate
City Tells Public “All Good,” Emails Say “Oh Sh*t”
The Curious Case of Officer Justin Taylor, The Quitter Who Didn’t Really Quit Welcome to another episode of “Superior’s Most Questionable Hires,” featuring Officer Justin Taylor — the man, the myth, the liability… who walked out of one taxpayer-funded uniform only to walk right into another. Let’s break this down with all the blunt force of a baton to the public trust. Wait… He Quit, Right? Yep.
Superior School Taxes in 2026: The Credit Shrunk and Your Bill Got Jacked
The New Game in Town: “Your House Went Up, So Pay Up” If you own a home in Superior, Wisconsin, congratulations: your property’s “value” jumped and now your tax bill is doing CrossFit. We’re using an “average” home valued at $165,000 through 2024, then the classic Superior plot twist: 2025: BOOM → $215,000 2026: still $215,000 And now the Superior School District is back in
Superior’s $pending Spree: How Your City Stacks Up Against Wisconsin Neighbors
You’ve heard the numbers. Superior’s city government, school district, and county have burned through over $1 billion since 2018. But here’s the question that keeps taxpayers up at night: Is this normal? Are other Wisconsin cities spending like drunken sailors, or is Superior in a league of its own? Spoiler alert: Superior isn’t just spending more than its neighbors. It’s spending significantly more. And the gap is widening.
