This is part 1 of a 3 part series where we will present the trial transcripts, and we’ll combine the audio from the police cameras so you can hear what Ian actually heard that night.
Superior’s Taser Fiasco: A Crisis of Accountability
In the streets of Superior, Wisconsin, bad decisions don’t just happen—they’re crafted with precision. Take the case of Ian Cuypers, a 22-year-old DoorDash driver who made a wrong turn down a one-way street and found himself at the mercy of questionable policing and prosecutorial overreach.
Instead of a citation or a simple warning, Cuypers was tased, mocked, and dragged through a prosecution that was as unnecessary as it was costly. This debacle raises critical questions about the city’s leadership, priorities, and willingness to address systemic flaws.
A Traffic Stop Spirals Out of Control
On February 28, what should have been a routine traffic stop escalated into a full-blown fiasco. Officer Justin Taylor, just two days into solo patrol duty, stopped Cuypers and called for backup as though he had cornered a dangerous criminal. Within minutes, four more officers arrived, transforming the scene into an over-policed spectacle.
Confusion reigned as conflicting commands were barked at Cuypers. Despite his attempts to comply, Officer Taylor Gaard determined his efforts insufficient and deployed a Taser, striking him in the back and legs. Cuypers, unarmed and with no criminal record, posed no threat. Yet, the motto in Superior seemed to be, “When in doubt, just Tase.”
The Fallout: Jokes and Justifications
As Cuypers sat handcuffed and humiliated, officers reportedly joked about finishing his DoorDash delivery and speculated about going viral. The professionalism on display was, at best, questionable. And when the dust settled, the police doubled down by charging Cuypers with resisting or obstructing an officer—a move designed to justify bad policing with worse paperwork.
Taxpayer Dollars Wasted on a Losing Case
The absurdity deepened when City Attorney Frog Prell, not the district attorney, prosecuted Cuypers personally under a city ordinance. His case was flimsy at best, as demonstrated by the jury’s swift acquittal in July. But the damage was already done. Cuypers endured months of legal battles, was diagnosed with PTSD, and moved to Denver to escape the aftermath.
Lawsuit Signals Deeper Problems
Now, Cuypers is suing the city and the officers involved, citing excessive force and constitutional violations. His claims are backed by strong evidence, including violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The financial and reputational toll of this lawsuit could be substantial, with taxpayers footing the bill for the city’s mistakes.
What Superior Needs to Answer
This incident raises uncomfortable questions:
- Why did the city attorney take on this case, knowing its weak merits?
- Who approved wasting taxpayer dollars on a losing prosecution?
- Why hasn’t Superior’s leadership publicly addressed these issues?
Lessons and Next Steps
The Cuypers case highlights systemic issues that demand immediate attention. Superior’s residents must demand transparency from their leaders—not just about this incident but also about broader policies governing police conduct and prosecutorial discretion.
When local government prioritizes shielding its reputation over pursuing justice, it’s not just the victim who suffers. It’s every taxpayer in Superior, paying for a debacle that should never have happened.
