A Tennessee man has sued a police department, claiming officers violated his First Amendment rights after he recorded and publicly criticized one of them.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) filed the lawsuit in 2023 on behalf of Joshua Gibbons against the city of Kingsport, its police chief and several officers. Gibbons has now made the complaint public after the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals overturned his conviction and dismissed the final charge against him.
“They tried to intimidate me, but I’m not backing down,” Gibbons said in a statement. “I can’t let this injustice stand, because my family doesn’t feel safe anymore. There’s no coming back from that raid on our home. They sent eight heavily armed officers to arrest me because I embarrassed them.”
The dispute began in October 2022, when Gibbons recorded a Kingsport Police Department SUV allegedly traveling at high speed at night without its lights or siren activated. The lawsuit says that conduct violated both department rules and Tennessee law. Gibbons followed the vehicle to a fast-food drive-thru, where he filmed himself briefly confronting the officer about the driving.
Joshua Gibbons sued the police department, alleging that officials violated his First Amendment rights. (Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression)
“When he caught up with the officer, the officer did the right thing. He ignored Joshua Gibbons, didn’t arrest him, didn’t view it as a crime, and went and got his hamburger,” FIRE Senior Attorney Adam Steinbaugh told News Media.
Gibbons regularly posts videos of officers performing their duties, saying the recordings help hold police accountable. He later uploaded another video showing an officer making an obscene hand gesture toward him.
According to FIRE, another resident complained to the police department about the officer’s behavior. Officials then reviewed Gibbons’ YouTube channel, allegedly looking for material that could be used against him.
Investigators located the video showing the police SUV speeding. Rather than discipline the officer, the department sent officers to arrest Gibbons, FIRE alleges.
“The First Amendment protects the right not only to criticize and film police, but also to post it online. The police department didn’t treat this as a crime until Joshua posted this online and embarrassed the department,” Steinbaugh said.
Joshua Gibbons endured two trials over nearly four years before a Tennessee appeals court dismissed the charges. (Zelina Photography)
Steinbaugh described the case as “as lawless as it was hypocritical,” arguing that the department’s actions were intended to punish Gibbons and “make an example out of a critic.”
The lawsuit says police obtained an arrest warrant within two hours of learning about Gibbons’ video. The warrant accused him of speeding, using a cellphone while driving and disorderly conduct. FIRE says the document was secured from a court clerk rather than a judge.
Shortly before dawn the next day, eight armed officers arrived at Gibbons’ home and arrested him in front of his elderly mother and daughter. Security and cellphone video captured the raid, which occurred nine days after he recorded and criticized the officer.
Gibbons ultimately went through two trials during a nearly four-year legal battle before the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed the remaining charge.
“That’s a long process that can take a mental toll on someone. I think that Joshua wants to send a message to this department. I think he wants to see some reforms to this department, and we’re happy to support him,” Steinbaugh said.
The lawsuit names the city of Kingsport, its police chief and individual officers as defendants. (Kingsport Police)
At the first trial, a judge cleared Gibbons of the speeding and cellphone allegations but convicted him of disorderly conduct. The judge said he was “offended by the way” Gibbons was “talking to that officer.” Gibbons appealed to the county circuit court, where a jury also found him guilty of disorderly conduct.
In June, however, the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals unanimously reversed the conviction and dismissed the charge. The appellate court concluded there was “no evidence” that Gibbons’ criticism had prevented anyone from carrying out a lawful activity.
The court found that Gibbons had not threatened anyone, acted violently or created a physically offensive or dangerous condition. It also emphasized that “‘profane and insulting’ words alone will not rise to the level of a crime,” particularly when directed at police officers, who “are trained to exercise a higher degree of restraint than the average citizen.”
“If you are a law enforcement officer, you are required by your uniform and by the First Amendment to tolerate criticism. Some of that’s going to be fair criticism, some of it’s going to be unfair criticism. But you don’t get to go and arrest people for it. That’s the message we want to send to this department and to departments around the country,” Steinbaugh said.
Kingsport Police did not respond to News Media’s request for comment in time for publication.