Once a respected figure in Douglas County’s probate court, Christina Peterson now finds herself at the center of a federal lawsuit against the City of Atlanta, alleging excessive force during a 2024 arrest.

Peterson, a former Democrat judge, was arrested outside the Red Martini nightclub in Buckhead, Atlanta, in 2024, initially charged with simple battery and felony obstruction, though prosecutors later dropped the case.

She filed a federal lawsuit last Tuesday, naming the City of Atlanta and the arresting officer as defendants, claiming officers used excessive force by violently slamming her to the ground and applying compressive force to her neck and back.

Body-camera footage shows her pushing at an officer during a sidewalk dispute before being restrained, while a preliminary police report noted she appeared to be under the influence.

The issue has sparked intense debate over police conduct and personal accountability, especially given Peterson’s high-profile status and subsequent fall from grace. Many question whether her actions justified the response, or if this incident reflects broader concerns about law enforcement tactics.

Arrest Details Raise Eyebrows

Looking at the footage, Peterson’s behavior during the arrest doesn’t exactly scream innocence—she’s seen running toward an officer and swiping at him before being taken down. While restrained, she shouted, “Don’t touch me!” as captured on video, the Daily Mail reported. But does a heated moment warrant what her lawsuit describes as a violent takedown?

Inside the patrol car, Peterson didn’t hold back, telling officers, “Google me,” as if her name alone should command respect. It’s hard not to see this as a sense of entitlement, especially for someone already under scrutiny for judicial misconduct. The public doesn’t owe anyone a free pass based on status.

Peterson insists she was a “Good Samaritan” intervening in a fight involving another woman, Alexandria Love, who backed her story at a press conference the next day. Yet, police reports suggest she punched an officer working security, which muddies the noble intent narrative. If you’re helping, why escalate with violence?

Judicial Fallout Adds Context

Just days after the arrest, the Georgia Supreme Court removed Peterson from her judicial post, citing 12 of 30 ethics charges that warranted discipline. The ruling barred her from holding any judicial office in Georgia for seven years, a stunning blow to her career.

This wasn’t just about the nightclub incident—it was the culmination of deeper issues.

The Judicial Qualifications Commission had already flagged Peterson for “systemic incompetence” in April 2024, recommending her removal. One glaring case involved PJ Skelton, a citizen trying to fix a name on a marriage certificate, whom Peterson accused of fraud and jailed for 20 days—later reduced if a $500 fine was paid. Skelton paid but still spent 48 hours locked up, a decision a panel called an overreach based on an innocent mistake.

Investigators also criticized Peterson for holding after-hours courthouse weddings without security, ignoring sheriff directives, and posting social media content about her acting side gig. Legal but frowned-upon practices, like keeping birth and death certificate fees on top of her salary, pushed her annual pay over $265,000. For a public servant, that kind of self-enrichment raises red flags.

Lawsuit Challenges Official Narrative

Peterson’s lawsuit marks her first legal pushback against the city over the arrest, aiming to challenge both the officers’ tactics and the broader story surrounding that night. She reiterates claims of being harshly restrained, framing herself as a helper caught in a bad situation.

But public trust in such claims erodes when personal conduct and past rulings suggest a pattern of poor judgment.

Her attorney, Marvin Arrington Jr., argues this case shows how even well-meaning actions can be punished in today’s climate.

Body-camera footage, which Peterson calls “taken out of context,” remains a key piece of evidence for both sides. If it’s so misleading, why not provide clearer proof of her Samaritan role? Without that, the public is left with grainy clips and conflicting accounts.