Remember the story from Issue 1656 where an unnamed woman said she was pulled over by a Palm Beach County (Florida, of course!) Sheriff’s deputy who says he saw her holding a phone “in your right hand”?
There is an unsurprising update, but let’s start with that March 8 story:
The Short Arm of the Law
When a woman was pulled over in Lake Worth Beach, Fla., by a Palm Beach County Sheriff’s deputy, she set her phone to record the encounter. The deputy says he saw her holding her cell phone in her “right hand.” She objected, but he wrote her a citation anyway. In a video posted to TikTok, the unnamed woman says she will go to court to fight the charge, and showed she has no right hand or forearm. She has a second line of defense as well, TV news station WPEC says: it’s against the law in Florida to type on a phone while driving, but it’s not against the law to simply hold a cell phone. (RC/WPEC West Palm Beach) …It’s against the law in Florida for officers to make up fake laws.
Update: I made an incorrect assumption by using the word “amputated” in the original story, and have updated it: she was born without her right forearm. My mistake. I also clarified what the law prohibits.
Florida Law
Let’s look at the “Florida Ban on Texting While Driving Law”, (Title XXIII, Chapter 316, Section 316.305), which went into effect in 2013 and was made even stronger in 2019:
(3)(a) A person may not operate a motor vehicle while manually typing or entering multiple letters, numbers, symbols, or other characters into a wireless communications device or while sending or reading data on such a device for the purpose of nonvoice interpersonal communication, including, but not limited to, communication methods known as texting, e-mailing, and instant messaging. As used in this section, the term “wireless communications device” means any handheld device used or capable of being used in a handheld manner, that is designed or intended to receive or transmit text or character-based messages, access or store data, or connect to the Internet or any communications service as defined in s. 812.15 and that allows text communications. For the purposes of this paragraph, a motor vehicle that is stationary is not being operated and is not subject to the prohibition in this paragraph.
(Emphasis added.)
“Holding it in your hand” is clearly not prohibited, and even that’s not what the woman, who has now been named as Katie Thomas, was doing: even when she held up her right arm to prove to him that it’s utterly impossible for him to have seen what he says he saw, the deputy — let’s name him, too: Dep. Yosvani Quesada, who clearly has a vanishingly small …competence — could not admit he was wrong. She made perhaps her only mistake here, and it was genuine: she laughed at his contention. By holding up her arm, she instantly proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that he was mistaken, yet he refused to back down.
The Burden is On the Accused
While the deputy gets paid to go to court to testify in such cases, mere citizens have to take time off work and go out of their way to come to court so a judge can slap the cop upside the head and tell him what an obliviot he’s being as he dismisses the case.
The night before her court date, Katie called the court to confirm the time for her case. A recording told her that the charge was dismissed, with no further information. Not wanting to get screwed if they had made a mistake, the next day she showed up in court anyway, and received written confirmation that the case was dismissed.
The reason for dismissal? “Lack of evidence,” she said in another video, as filed by the deputy himself. Which lack was already the case when he gave her the citation, eh?
Or perhaps, maybe sheriff’s department brass ordered him to drop the case, because they knew WPEC-TV West Palm Beach, my source for the story and this update, had obtained Dep. Quesada’s bodycam video from the case through Florida’s very strong Public Records laws, which clearly demonstrates that he was totally, completely, without any doubt, in the wrong. It also, by the way, shows that Katie was cool, calm, and collected, forcing him to admit that he clearly said “in your right hand.” See the bodycam video below.
He said he “thought” he saw her holding the phone. “So you didn’t,” she retorts. He keeps stammering. “So you didn’t,” she repeats. “Hand to God you did not have your phone in your hand,” the deputy demanded. She raises her arm, agreeing “Hand to God.” That wasn’t good enough for him, since she had raised her right arm. “Hand to God,” she repeats, holding up her left.
The pipsqueak still gave her the citation, with the implied contention that she was driving her car, holding her phone, and “manually typing or entering multiple letters” into that phone, all with one hand. And Katie still was calm and cooperative. Yet he didn’t have the cojones to notify her that the charges were dropped; she still had to, if she wanted to preserve her rights, go to court, wasting hours of her day.
The Deputy Lied
Let’s be clear: the deputy charged that she had violated the law. Even if she did have a right hand and was holding a phone in it, she clearly did not violate §316.305 of Florida Law, and he did not accuse her of typing into her phone. He therefore, in my opinion, lied. This is a great example of why people don’t trust law enforcement. He simply hoped she’d pay the $116 fine — and have a conviction on her driving record, which would affect her insurance rates — rather than take time off work.
Twice, by the way: first to go and plead Not Guilty, which she apparently was able to do with an online appearance (but perhaps still had to take time away from work), and then to attend the actual trial.
Once she made her plea and was clearly going to show up in court to fight, only then did the deputy drop the charges. Why? Because then he would have to testify to what he saw under penalty of perjury. But he knew he had been recorded saying “in your right hand,” which was clearly not the case. Even if he testified he was mistaken and she had to have been holding the phone in her left hand (in which case, what hand was she steering with?), he was still left with the fact that she had not violated the law, as not even he claimed she was “typing multiple characters” on the phone.
Deputy Quesada, you’re a gutless jerk: you don’t deserve the honor of wearing that badge.
Side Notes
There is an amusing, at least to me, coincidence in this story: Katie was interviewed for the CBS Morning News to talk about the case. She was interviewed by reporter Cristian Benavides, who happens to be the same reporter who came aboard our ship to interview Kit and me (and other Residents), which story aired last July. That video is on my Residential Cruising site.
His interview with Katie is not online because, as of the time this is being posted, it actually has not been aired yet, other than a brief preview here. It is scheduled to air later this morning, so if you see this in time, you can tune in. I will add it to this page later if I can.
The main point she wanted to get across by doing the interview: “What I’d love people to take away is that, limb difference is normal. Somebody who looks different from you is normal. All of that is normal.”
And it is.
Update: More Media
I still have not been able to find video* of Katie’s appearance on CBS, but I do have some quotes from it. If she could talk with the officer again, she says she would ask, “Why did you ask me to put my hand to God over the situation? If you knew going into it that you were going to write the citation, just write the citation.”
Failing being able to speak with him, Thomas, who is 36, wants him to hear this: “Explain to me your side. Explain to me what you were thinking. How did we get to this point? And then from there, kind of just see where our two sides can kind of come together and say, Hey, look, here’s how we discuss limb difference. Here’s how you address somebody. Here’s things that you probably shouldn’t do, like make them raise their hand to God.” She thought it was ironic that he wouldn’t accept her raising her right hand to God “considering that’s who gave it to me.”
As for the sheriff’s office, they did make a statement: “PBSO remains committed to professionalism, fairness, and the lawful enforcement of Florida statutes.” My response: when will that start, and how do you plan to enforce it?
* Thanks to a commenter (below) for finding the video at CBS.
Update: Deputy Reprimanded
In early August, Deputy Yosvani Quesada was reprimanded after PBSO’s Internal Affairs found that he “misunderstood the legal elements necessary to establish a violation of wireless communication, device hand held while driving-first offense.” In other words, what I editorialized above about him not understanding the law, in that even if Thomas was holding the phone, that is not a violation of the specified law.
“The Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office holds all employees to the highest standards in its commitment to maintaining the public’s trust,” the department continued, and “there are instances when poor decisions result in misconduct. In this case, the actions of Deputy Yosvani Quesada was [sic] identified, thoroughly investigated, and determined to be clear violations of our agency policies and procedures resulting in a verbal reprimand.”
It’s quite the minor slap on the wrist, but at least he got that. Too often law enforcement agencies just let transgressions die down and “forget” to do anything. That brought a little bit of polish back to that badge.
This page has also been updated with the deputy’s full and correct name.
– – –
Bad link? Broken image? Other problem on this page? Please Let Me Know using the Help button in the lower right, and thanks.
This page is an example of my style of “Thought-Provoking Entertainment”. This is True is an email newsletter that uses “weird news” as a vehicle to explore the human condition in an entertaining way. If that sounds good, click here to open a subscribe form.
To really support This is True, you’re invited to sign up for a subscription to the much-expanded Premium edition.
I cannot help but notice a small irony here: you start out by saying you originally made an “incorrect assumption” that Katie’s right forearm had been amputated, and updated the story accordingly. See how simple it is to ethically admit a mistake? That openly stated correction gives you more credibility, not less. It really is that simple, deputy Quesada! If he is not disciplined by the sheriff, it will make me wonder about the entire department. I’m glad I don’t live anywhere near Palm Beach County.
Qualified immunity (along with sovereign, absolute, and maybe a few others) mean there is little to no downside to being wrong. The worst that happens is that the normie is proven right after expending time and money. Very rarely is the LEO person fired, demoted, pay docked, forced to publicly apologize, etc.
It doesn’t simply call the credibility of the department into question. It brings the credibility of police departments in general into question. These cowboys and their bosses never understand (or don’t care, apparently) that every time someone in blue abuses their authority, it calls into question the honesty and integrity of every other interaction with the public.
—
Which makes their jobs harder. It truly is stupid. -rc
I expect another update soon. I expect to hear that an advocacy group will try to force a review of every phone related ticket this officer wrote. That will probably cost the county more money than he brought in with those tickets.
—
It wouldn’t be surprising, except they probably won’t have standing (in a legal sense) to intercede without the various and unorganized accused asking for their help. -rc
I saw the report on CBS this morning before reading this post. The officer’s body cam told the story clearly. When she laughed and revealed her stump, he had a great opening to laugh with her and apologize. Instead, he doubled down. His attitude does not belong behind a badge. Period.
His coworkers should mock him from now until the end of time.
—
They probably are. The question is, to his face, or behind his back? -rc
I would think that the officer would be immune from pulling her over and questioning her. For him to tell her, to her face, that she was holding a cell phone in her right hand and then writing a ticket for that offense ought to land him in jail. It demonstrates that once he lies, he is mentally unable to admit a mistake and instead doubles down on that mistake. Case dismissed or not, a judge ought to sentence the officer to some sort of punishment. This is the same kind of reasoning that got Renee Good killed in Minneapolis.
What I’m waiting to see is someone calling out the cop’s order to raise her “hand to God”. What happens to someone who doesn’t believe in any sort of deity? If they refuse to engage in what is genuinely a violation of their right to religious freedom [Torcaso v. Watkins], will they be arrested for failing to obey?
Part of the outrage over this incident is that Katie has no recourse for the expense of defending herself. At the least, she spent a significant amount of time waiting for a virtual court appearance at which she pled ‘not guilty’, but then she had to actually go to the courthouse, wait in line to determine that her case had been dropped, and get back to work. Every one of us has a price for our time. It’s certainly not true in Florida, but there are jurisdictions in which Katie could request payment from the plaintiff (Deputy Gonzales) for the time she wasted defending herself from obviously spurious charges.
No, Deputy Gonzales is not the plaintiff; that term applies to civil cases. He might be termed the “complainant,” though the term is not universally used.
—
He “should” become known as the Defendant…. -rc
This just shows the complete and utter police corruption. While she had proof that what he said wasn’t true, think about all the others who were innocent and were found guilty by this lying, corrupt officer. The officer should be fired.
I sat and watched traffic court years ago and there was an officer who came in and admitted that the speeding ticket he wrote was bogus, that the required traffic survey indicated that the speed limit should have been higher, making the posted speed limit illegal. What is more, he stated that his chief told him to keep writing these fraudulent tickets. Everyone who contested the tickets wasted time and money to deal with it, but the charges were dismissed, but all the others who falsely thought that it was valid, had their money stolen from them.
Ironically, what we feared most 40 years ago (cameras everywhere) have been the best thing to happen to the innocent, and exposed Big Brother and their multitude of abuses. What truly concerns me is, how many abuses are we unaware of that happened before the proliferation of cameras?
Now, the next logical step is to hold these cops accountable. End qualified immunity and stop making the taxpayers have to pay for these mistakes. Doctors are responsible for their actions. Anyone else can be fired for not doing their job. Why do the police get special dispensation?
“Hand to God you did not have your phone in your hand,” the deputy demanded.??
America is a weird country. Although I think I should have used another adjective starting with ‘f’!
—
“Gerry, Boise, ID” above did call that out as “genuinely a violation of their right to religious freedom”. -rc
It’s a fine line: He wasn’t asking her to believe in the ‘Divine Power’ she was swearing to, nor to believe that doing so invoked any supernatural consequences; just to perform the common social ritual as if she did.
Yes, you’d have the *right* to refuse to do so, but would refusing be the *wise* thing to do? Ideally, you’d never find yourself in those circumstances to have to choose, but if you find yourself there, why choose a confrontation and antagonism versus a little performative piety?
—
I do see your point, but it’s an awfully slippery slope. I’d call it a civil rights violation. -rc
The officer has an ego problem and should be counseled and sent to be retrained in how to perform his job. Plus he’s an idiot in my opinion. Also should be reprimanded.
The officer should be fired in my opinion. He was just wrong here on so many levels. Katie was innocent and he knew it and he still charged her with a crime.
Here is the link you were looking for: Extended Interview: Katie Thomas on viral traffic stop.
I think this deputy’s history needs to be scrutinized. How many times did he pull over young women driving alone?
—
Thanks for the link. Your question shows just how important professionalism is: when the cop demonstrates a lack, it’s natural to question just how far that lack goes. This is why a slap on the hand isn’t enough. -rc
Surely the department should be reprimanded too for allowing someone to be on duty without being sufficiently trained.
—
Oh, I’m sure he passed his training. That doesn’t mean he actually understood everything. -rc
I’m curious as to why you focused on the part of the law about typing multiple characters and not on the other condition specified in the law, “or while sending or reading data on such a device”. Someone holding the phone in their hand is likely to be at least reading data on it, though obviously this would be harder to prove than if you’d seen them tapping away.
They could, of course, also be doing a number of other things like silencing an alarm, declining or accepting a call, changing their Spotify playlist, or whatever – none of which seem to be in violation of the law, which is quite narrowly targeted to nonvoice interpersonal communication.
In fact it seems like you could be browsing the Web and be OK because that’s not interpersonal communication… although I’m sure even Florida has some kind of law about reckless driving or not driving with due care and attention.
The law here is much stricter: “It is illegal to hold your phone in your hand or have it resting on any part of your body, including your lap, while driving. This applies even when you are stopped in traffic or at traffic lights.” You can’t even accept a call unless you can do it hands-free.
—
The laws vary greatly from state to state here, too. I focused on what stood out to me as primary in the law. Bottom line is, she didn’t violate it as accused, which is the point. -rc
Like the sexual harassment training seminars and Effective Pursuit Tactics course and other training they take separately during the course of their careers, sounds like the police need an “Admitting When you are Wrong” class.