2d Cir.: QI for police officer who cuffed woman backwards and continually tightened them even after she cried out causing never damage bc it was not clearly established that she didn't have to *verbalize* her distress. supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/1… 
To its credit, the panel notes that this case is now clearly established law that individuals subject to excessive force in handcuffing don't have to actually verbalize "excuse me, officer, you've cut off the blood to my hands causing me excruciating pain" before suing them.
Also, the final footnote in this decision is a doozy. TLDR: she says they knew each other bc the officer had previously had a relationship with her daughter; police officer denies.
