Man sues cops who jailed him for 37 days for trolling a Charlie Kirk vigil

Larry Bushart, a former police officer, has taken legal action against law enforcement officials who he claims conspired to keep him incarcerated for 37 days. His imprisonment stemmed from a controversial social media post that criticized the attention given to a vigil for Charlie Kirk, a conservative figure. Bushart's legal troubles began when he shared a meme featuring former President Trump, which he intended as a commentary on societal responses to gun violence. Frustrated by what he perceived as a disparity in media coverage regarding gun violence victims, Bushart posted several memes in a Facebook group. One of these included a quote from Trump about needing to 'get over' a school shooting, which was interpreted by some, including Perry County Sheriff Nick Weems, as inciting panic among parents about potential violence at a local high school. Despite Bushart's assertions that his post did not threaten violence, Sheriff Weems maintained that it incited 'mass hysteria.' In an effort to keep Bushart behind bars, Weems set an exorbitant $2 million bond. However, Bushart's lawsuit contends that no one who commented on the Facebook thread perceived the post as a threat, and there are no records indicating that any concerned citizens reported the meme to authorities. Moreover, Bushart argues that Weems' actions were driven by personal offense taken at his posts, particularly since Weems was actively promoting the vigil for Kirk at the time. The lawsuit claims that Weems abused his authority to retaliate against Bushart for expressing his views, pushing for an arrest that allegedly violated Bushart's First Amendment rights. It is further alleged that Weems conspired with investigator Jason Morrow to omit crucial details from the arrest affidavit that could have undermined the justification for Bushart's detention. Bushart's case raises significant questions about freedom of speech and the extent of law enforcement's power in situations involving social media expressions. The outcome of this lawsuit could have broader implications for how similar cases are handled in the future.