BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 09:15 PM

Ron - Haven't you noticed how Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton fall all over themselves for the chance to get arrested? Gate just simply didn't want to feel left out. That's why he pushed things to the breaking point. All of the evidence supports that.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 09:10 PM

Like I said way back in this thread, Gates was arrested for contempt. Contempt of Cop. It's how they get even with the parties who don't hold the cop or his activities in high regard. Even if it doesn't go anywhere, i.e., charges dropped, it is still damned annoying to be subjected to that process. And cops know it. That's why they do it. It's an abuse of power, just to get even.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 09:00 PM

Also: From MSNBC 29 July 2009:   "NYT:   Cops 'don't get paid to be abused'."

That may be the crux of it.

And in fact that's wrong:   cops do get paid to take abuse.

As a Los Angeles officer, with the force 25 years, is quoted:   "....if you don't have a tough skin, you shouldn't be a cop".

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 08:50 PM

"Or Gates did it!".

Perhaps the magnificent thinker who favored us with that bit of wisdom can tell us just how Gates can write the police report. Or maybe the poster can just start thinking before hitting "send". Which would be a pleasant change.






The truth of the question on the police report, will, I'm afraid, disappoint conspiracy theorists all over the spectrum, despite some Mudcatters' delight in such things.

Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert Haas has said " the report is merely a summary of events." (AP 27 July 2009)





Those of us actually interested in the legal aspects of this--and there don't seem to be many Mudcatters aside from heric, Ebbie and I who are---owe a huge debt to heric for his sleuthing in the actual case history of the law.

"It should have gone to trial".   Only if Massachusetts was in a mood to throw away a lot of money--since the state would never have won.

Consider the results of the trials cited by heric. A case is cited in which "approximately 100 shoppers gathered" to watch. The state lost the case. In another case, the defendant's language was vulgar.   The state lost again. The mere use of obscenities does not make out the crime of disorderly conduct, as was noted there.

Interestingly, there is such a thing a "word-predicated offense" for "fighting words" which "by their very utterance inflict injury or intend to incite an immediate breach of the peace".
"Let's go burn down the fucking cop building", I suspect, would qualify. It's not clear what else would. But "To be disorderly, within the sense of the statute, the conduct must disturb through acts other than speech; neither a provocative nor a foul mouth transgresses the statute".   That's a clue. It takes quite a bit.

And nothing Gates said or did comes remotely close.

Face it:   Sgt Crowley was dead wrong to arrest Prof Gates, despite Gates' star turn in "Professors Behaving Badly". And it's disheartening to see the Cambridge police department stand behind Sgt Crowley.   Just as it's disheartening to see how Gates denies much of what he said.

But the arrest does not prove "racial profiling" by a long shot. And the police support is police solidarity with an angry policeman.

As a WSJ column by Thomas Frank points out, Gates himself, in a 1992 book, said something that fits perfectly the reaction to this incident--across the political spectrum:   "...the routinized production of righteous indignation is allowed to substitute for critical rigor".

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 07:08 PM

So we now have another way to split the players here up..and that is elderly vs. middle-aged. And believe me, many many elderly of all races and persuasions live in terror, some with good reason, some with unnecessary fear. But it is something that needs to be addressed in this teaching moment. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:44 PM

So she said large(r) men?

So she did speak to Crowley at the scene?

Facts are like ghosts.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Peace
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:39 PM

Sorry, Eb. I misunderstood.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 05:08 PM

Rig, read Sgt. Crowley's police report.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 04:41 PM

"She didn't. So it looks like the police did."

                   Or Gates did!

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 04:33 PM

The 911 call that started it was placed by this woman, and they've replayed it enough now to know that she didn't assign race or blame, and even suggested that the men may be the homeowners. That was lost in the police report. In fact, when I first read about it, the story was already leaning to what inflammatory "facts" the 911 caller had inserted into the conversation. She didn't. So it looks like the police did.

Caller in Gates Case Says She Didn't Mention Race

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Lucia Whalen, whose 911 call led to the arrest of the Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his home, made her first public comments Wednesday, saying at no time did she ever mention race to the responding police officer.

Ms. Whalen's statements contradict the police report filed by Sgt. James Crowley, who said Ms. Whalen told him outside Mr. Gates's home that she had seen "what appeared to be two black males with backpacks" on the porch of the yellow single-family house.

Ms. Whalen said that the only words she exchanged with Sergeant Crowley in person were, "I was the 911 caller." She said that he responded, "Stay right there."

Ms. Whalen, 40, her voice cracking, said she was deeply hurt by the reaction to the incident on July 16. She said she and her family had been the target of threats, which led her to speak out.

"When I was called a racist, I was the target of scorn and ridicule because of things I never said," she told the reporters gathered in a park here at midday. She added, "The criticism hurt me as a person but also hurt the community of Cambridge."

On Monday, the Cambridge police released the tape of Ms. Whalen's 911 call in which she told the dispatcher she had "no idea" if two men — who turned out to be Professor Gates and his driver — were breaking into the house, repeatedly mentioning that they might live there. She said that the two men pushed a door in with their shoulders, and that she was unsure "if they live there and just had a hard time with their key."

Ms. Whalen did not mention the men's race until a dispatcher asked her if they were black, white or Hispanic.

"There were two larger men," she said in the audio released Monday. "One looked kind of Hispanic, but I'm not really sure," she said, adding that she did not see what the second man "looked like at all."

Ms. Whalen also told the dispatcher that she called 911 on behalf of an elderly neighbor who saw the men trying to get into the house.

On Wednesday, she said she hoped that with the tapes out, "people can see that I tried to be careful," adding that she never thought that her words "would be analyzed by an entire nation."

She said that she had been the target of threats but that, after reflection, she would make the same call again.

"I respect the Cambridge police as well as Professor Gates and I hope my decision to speak out does not add any controversy to what has been a difficult situation," she said.

The Cambridge police have stood by their report and could not be immediately reached for comment.

The disorderly conduct charge against Professor Gates was dropped, and he and Sergeant Crowley plan to meet with President Obama for a beer at the White House on Thursday.

Ms. Whalen, who works at Harvard Magazine, said she was not asked to join the men at the meeting. Her lawyer, Wendy Murphy, who accompanied her to the news conference, said her client should go if asked.

"The three highly trained guys who acted badly are getting together for a beer tomorrow at the White House, and that's a good thing," Ms. Murphy said. "The one person whose actions were exemplary will be at work tomorrow here in Cambridge."

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 03:55 PM

I came within a hair of walking into a lamppost once because I was looking at an attractive woman. ;-) I hold no grudges against her over the incident, but I have remained a bit nervous of lampposts to this day...

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 03:53 PM

I'm NOT talking of profiling. I'm talking about the perception of profiling.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 03:02 PM

...the discomfort they cause men...   I think that is one aspect of this behaviour that can be greatly exaggerated. Aside from when the men in question might walk into lampposts while distracted, and that sort of thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 02:26 PM

Those girls dressed provocatively don't deserve any trouble, to be sure, but they do, in my opinion, deserve a very good scolding and an appreciation for the harm they cause society, the discomfort they cause men, their contribution to social unpleasantness. It is legally but not morally right to dress that way...there, I said it, so shoot me. And even news anchors etc. going around half dressed...sometimes in a most unattractive manner. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Peace
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 02:19 PM

If profiling took place, indeed it has to be stopped. NO question.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 02:16 PM

heric


re 2:02

Agreed on all points!

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 02:09 PM

I find nothing to argue with in that last post of yours, heric. Agreed on every point.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Peace
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 02:04 PM

Yeah. Even back in the very early 1960s, the cops in Montreal had guns.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 02:02 PM

Come on it matters when then profiler has a gun and when he has the authority of the government and when he works for you. We have to work to stop it even if it can never be stopped.

(Gates, however, should go sit on a popsicle stick.)

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 01:51 PM

Darn right, Peace! I experienced extremely prejudiced profiling by police and other prejudiced people from the moment I started growing my hair long in 1969-70 and generally looking like a musician of the time. And I'm White.

Also, I've heard that it's quite dangerous for a White person to go walking around in certain inner-city neighborhoods in various large North American cities. Why? Profiling, that's why.

Being White (or female) (or male) (or in fact anything at all) can definitely subject you to negative profiling...it depends on where you are, who's doing the profiling, and what's happening at the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Peace
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 01:18 PM

If you think NO White person can know what profiling is like, you would maybe not hold that view had you been a long-haired hippie in Montreal before it became the rage. I was braced frequently by cops, and certainly I received my share of comments: "Hey, queer!" "Faggot!" "Ni##er lover!"

And what of gals who dress as they wish only to be looked at as whores or street-walkers? That's also profiling. Profiling existed long before Bush's regeime gave it a name, but it DID exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 01:05 PM

(My prior guess that verbal abuse could create a "physically offensive condition" was all wrong.)

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 01:01 PM

Here's the statute:
M.G.L.A. c. 272, § 53:

"Common night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female, common railers and brawlers, persons who with offensive and disorderly acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite sex, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, idle and disorderly persons, disturbers of the peace, keepers of noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent exposure may be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than six months, or by a fine of not more than two hundred dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment."

Disorderly conduct is punished by this (which can be called the "disturbers of the peace statute"), but is derived from the common law:

A person commits the offense of being a disorderly person if, "with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof," he or she (1) "engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior" or (2) "creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor." See Alegata v. Commonwealth, 353 Mass. 287, 303-304 (1967); Commonwealth v. A Juvenile, 368 Mass. 580, 587-597 (1975).
----------------------------

The phrase "disturbers of the peace," as used in the disturbing the peace statute, is construed in accordance with the common-law definition of the offense, making it a crime to disturb the peace of the public, or some segment of the public, by actions, conduct or utterances, the combination of which constitutes a common nuisance.

A two-part test is used to determine whether a defendant's conduct constitutes disturbing the peace, the first asking whether most people would find the conduct to be unreasonably disruptive, and second asking whether it did in fact infringe on someone's right to be undisturbed; the first prong is normative and protects potential defendants from prosecutions based on individual sensitivities, while the second prong requires that the crime have a victim, and thus subjects potential defendants to criminal prosecution only when their activities have detrimental impact.

Time and place are factors to be considered in determining whether activities are "unreasonably disruptive" for purposes of a disturbing the peace charge.

----------------------------------------------

While acknowledging the constitutional protections that surround speech, the Commonwealth asserts that the defendant's loud and angry verbal tirade rose to the criminal level of tumultuous disorderly conduct under subsection (a) quoted above. The Commonwealth argues that tumultuous behavior, "while perhaps not physically violent, may nevertheless be characterized as involving riotous commotion and excessively unreasonable noise so as to constitute a public nuisance." Commonwealth v. A Juvenile, 368 Mass. at 597, 334 N.E.2d 617. We conclude, however, that on the evidence presented, the defendant's loud tirade could not be prosecuted as tumultuous behavior under this definition.

The Commonwealth concedes that "there was absolutely no evidentiary support for the hazardous or physically offensive condition prong of the statute. There was essentially no live issue at trial concerning a hazardous or physically offensive condition." (Com. Br. at 21) Instead, the evidence (including the testimony of the two arresting officers) showed only that the defendant verbally protested his arrest, taunted the officers with possible legal action, and railed about the officers' hurting his neck. Words alone are not sufficient to establish tumultuous conduct. The only exception for a word-predicated offense under G.L. c. 272, § 53, is for "fighting words," that is, words, "which by their very utterance inflict injury or intend to incite an immediate breach of the peace." Commonwealth v. A Juvenile, supra at 591, 334 N.E.2d 617, quoting from Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 572, 62 S.Ct. 766, 86 L.Ed. 1031 (1942). The Commonwealth does not contend, nor could it, that the defendant's speech in this case constitutes fighting words. That the defendant's language was vulgar and unpleasant did not translate the speech into tumultuous, disorderly conduct. "To be disorderly, within the sense of the statute, the conduct must disturb through acts other than speech; neither a provocative nor a foul mouth transgresses the statute." Commonwealth v. LePore, 40 Mass.App.Ct. 543, 546, 666 N.E.2d 152 (1996). "[T]he mere use of obscenities in public does not make out the crime of disorderly conduct...." Commonwealth v. Johnson, 36 Mass.App.Ct. 336, 338, 631 N.E.2d 71 (1994).

The Commonwealth further argues that the defendant's nighttime eruption outside the apartment complex was noisy enough to cause people to gather and neighbors to look out their apartment windows and, as such, was extreme enough to constitute disorderly conduct. However, the mere fact that persons may be drawn to a scene because of noise and "verbal cacophony" does not mean that a defendant has engaged in criminally tumultuous disorderly conduct. See Commonwealth v. A Juvenile, supra at 593, 334 N.E.2d 617, quoting from Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 25, 91 S.Ct. 1780, 29 L.Ed.2d 284 (1971). On this issue, we note that in Commonwealth v. A Juvenile, supra at 582, 334 N.E.2d 617, "a crowd of approximately 100 shoppers gathered" to watch the episode. That level of crowd gathering did not qualify the juvenile's verbal tirade as tumultuous, disorderly conduct under that prong of the definition; nor did the lesser assemblage of the estimated ten or so persons who gathered outside the apartments in the instant case. (Moreover, in this case the evidence was mixed concerning the timing of onlookers gathering because certain of the onlookers came outside during the originating domestic violence incident and with the arrival of the cruisers-both of which events preceded the defendant's arrest and loud verbal protest.)

*3 Finally, the Commonwealth's depiction of an extreme, tumultuous event is not persuasive. In this respect, Commonwealth v. Lopiano, 60 Mass.App.Ct. 723, 805 N.E.2d 522 (2004), is instructive. In that case, the police came upon Lopiano fighting with his girlfriend in a car and ordered him to exit. Lopiano approached the police officer yelling and flailing his arms, protesting that the police were violating his civil rights. The court held this episode did not "support a reasonable inference that 'the noise and commotion caused by the [defendant's] behavior was ... extreme.' " Id. at 726, 805 N.E.2d 522, quoting from Commonwealth v. Sholley, 432 Mass. at 729, 739 N.E.2d 236. Accord Norwell v. Cincinnati, 414 U.S. 14, 16, 94 S.Ct. 187, 38 L.Ed.2d 170 (1973) (reversing a conviction for disorderly conduct where the defendant's protestations to the arresting officers were protected speech).

The judgment is reversed and the verdict is set aside. Judgment shall enter for the defendant.

So ordered.

Mass.App.Ct.,2008.
Com. v. Mallahan
72 Mass.App.Ct. 1103, 889 N.E.2d 77 Unpublished Disposition

(Following his arrest for assault and battery arising out of a domestic violence incident, the defendant launched a screaming tirade at the arresting police officers. The defendant's loud yelling continued for some ten minutes, as the officers walked the defendant, in handcuffs, from an apartment toward the police cruiser. The defendant's rantings included warnings that he would sue the officers, as well as loud protestations interlaced with profanities that he had done nothing wrong, including that he never "fucking touched that bitch." When they reached the cruiser, the defendant stiffened his body upright. One officer placed his hand on the defendant's head in order to move the defendant into the cruiser. The defendant sat on the cruiser's seat but left his feet outside. The defendant, who recently had neck surgery, yelled that the police had hurt his neck. The officers removed the handcuffs and called the fire department. An ambulance transported the defendant to South Shore Hospital and then to Massachusetts General Hospital.

During the originating domestic violence incident, approximately six people in the housing complex had emerged from their apartments and gathered outside. As the cruisers arrived with sirens on, additional residents emerged or peered out their apartment windows. At one point, it was estimated ten persons were outside.)

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 12:35 PM

"contempt of cop can not be punished"

Oh yeah? ;-) Try being openly contemptuous of cops in any town or city in Ontario, Canada, heric. Chances are very, very good that they will find some way of arresting you and/or charging you with something. They're extremely creative when put to that test, I assure you, and they can virtually always come up with something.

Showing contempt to a cop is exactly like showing contempt to a bull in a pasture or waving your hands wildly at a nest of hornets. The bull will usually charge. The hornets will sting. You can complain all you want that there is no specific law giving the bull the right to trample you as you run around trying not to get trampled and gored, but it won't do you any good at all. Only fools who can't manage their own hasty emotional impulses openly show contempt to cops, bulls, and hornets.

It's a game. Never forget that. You must play the game wisely or you will lose.

Gates figured he was somebody "important" AND somebody being discriminated against solely because of his skin color, and he reacted from those assumptions. He was not playing the game wisely.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 12:27 PM

Here is what I meant when I postulated that virtually NO White person can know what it is like:

Leonard Pitts, Jr., Columnist


"The second argument is naive. One white guy I know recounts his own experience - cop barged into his home at 3 a.m., rousting him from bed, demanding I.D. - and says: "This (expletive) happens all over the place and it has nothing to do with race."

"And I say: I'll see your 3 a.m. roust and raise you Tony, jacked up on a street in Harlem, Bill, with a cop's gun to his head, Bryan, pulled over for an air freshener on his rear-view mirror, James, ordered to pull down his pants and lie on the curb, Robert, threatened with injury for drinking beer in the parking lot with friends after work. And that's just among guys I know, including three preachers.

"Now, broaden it to include the bridegroom shot to death on his wedding day, the African immigrant killed while reaching for his wallet, the Maryland man beaten senseless as he lay in bed, the Miami man beaten to death for speeding, the dozens of men jailed on manufactured evidence in Los Angeles and manufactured police testimony in Tulia, Texas, the man sodomized with a broomstick in New York.

"And if this expletive has nothing to do with race, then where are the stories of white men sodomized with brooms or shot while reaching for wallets? Are we supposed to believe it coincidence that the men this happens to always happen to be black?"

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 11:16 AM

yeah you're right that was not objectively written. Home for yard might be a fair synonym, but there were public witnesses. Also: The Mass. case it cites does not say that a risk of social unrest is required, just that the display might have "an impact" (see "annoyance," above) on the public. It also doesn't exclude cops from "the public" entirely - it says they are "different." hmm

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 11:02 AM

HERIC,

RE THE ARTICLE-

"Gates being arrested in his own home for questioning a police officer, an act that was neither seen nor heard by a member of the ''general public'' outside Gates' home – is as close to a certain illegal arrest as it gets.
"

False on two points.

1. Gates was arrested after following the policeman out of the house.
2. There was a (small) crowd of the general public there, which the police claim were shocked at Gate's words. So, it was obviously heard and seen.

In any case, the person making the claim ( in the article ) was not there. It should have gone to trial, and the guilty party, be it Gates OR the policeman, held responsible.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 29 Jul 09 - 10:31 AM

sorry to bring this back up but here's a concise summary stating that contempt of cop can not be punished as disorderly conduct



(I still find it hard to believe I could torment a parking meter monitor just for fun, but whatever.)

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Peace
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 05:38 PM

Paris, Ann and Sarah arr forming a singing trio. Their promo shots will involve the play, "Macbeth" and then they'll do a world tour.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 05:33 PM

BB - Yeah...I guess. (smile)

Say, what is up with Paris Hilton lately anyway?

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 04:23 PM

fuggetaboutit? no can do. World Beer Summit on Thursday. The entire world will be watching to take the measure of Obama and whether he has the abilities to ratchet down world regional tensions and conflicts. (Glad Gates isn't my friend. . . )

"As Crowley enters the premises of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., he should be careful. I hope he doesn't find himself cast as racially insensitive or on the wrong end of a lecture about how to do police work by those who have never had to do it.

After all, nothing ruins a good beer like the taste of condescension."

http://www.bellinghamherald.com/615/story/1006144.html

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 04:18 PM

LH,

Hey, even this vital news item was upstaged by M. Jackson death info alerts.

You really need to understand what is important.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 04:00 PM

Or we could just forget about it and all get on with something that actually matters?

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 03:43 PM

To be fair, the 911 transcript and the recordings at the ECC ( of the police radio calls, with whatever can be heard of the background) should all be released and examined. The witnesses ( per the police report) should give testimony, and the truth should be determined beyond a reasonable doubt. Both sides should present their versions, and a jury of their peers should determine who is lying.

I think that's called a trial.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Charley Noble
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 03:37 PM

The 911 transcript of the original call is now on-line and the person calling did not identify the two "intruders" as Black men. She also said that they had suitcases and might not be intruders.

Interesting! What was the original news story based on?

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Peace
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 11:27 AM

Two strong-will guys with different takes on the issue. In the words of Forrest Gump, "S--" well, you KNOW what happens. Maybe Gates was tired and pissed off with the airline. Maybe the cop just came off a domestic and was in no mood.

But unfortunately America has the example of LA and four cops kicking the crap out of a Black man. And enjoying it. How Obama got into it is beyond me. But then I dream lots and avoid the news as much as possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 08:54 AM

Of course another irony is that both men have the reputation for trying to bridge racial gaps.

Maybe Jeri, or whoever it was, has it right to just diagnose testosterone poisoning--in both of the main figures in this drama.

201

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Leadfingers
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 08:49 AM

200

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 08:32 AM

It's a matter of interpretation.   And of free speech.   And as the quote pointed out--I got mine from Slate, and the anonymous blogger seems to have used the same quote but not given attribution--that there is absolutely no question that accusations of racism, which was --- and is, and ever shall be, world without end--the main theme of Professor Gates--are protected free speech.

It would be interesting to know for sure whether cursing out a policeman would be covered free speech--but that is totally immaterial to this case, since Gates did nothing of the kind.

I also found out something else I didn't know about Professor Gates:   it's unlikely he will ever have any financial problems again--he sold for $10 million a a web-based company he started. (Source:   WSJ 25 July 2009).

I wonder if "Professors Behaving Badly"   would get good ratings.   I might even watch it.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 01:51 AM

Isn't it bizarre, Ron, with 10,000+ articles showing this Gates thing at any given time on google, that the experts aren't telling us how this works. For all I know, the standard of proof might be different in Gates' wrongful arrest case than it would be in an administrative proceeding to determine whether Crowley can be punished. It could be that Gates has to prove he had a legitimate purpose other than causing annoyance or alarm. It could be that someone has to establish that Crowley did not reasonably believe that Gates had any purpose other than to cause annoyance or alarm. The standard might even be that no reasonable officer could have believed that Gates was without legitimate purpose and only wanted to cause annoyance or alarm. And with a close reading of the statute (if the anonymous commenter gave us the right one), it doesn't even require that there be any actual risk of public alarm - only the "purpose" underlying the tumultuous behavior is the question.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 12:33 AM

One of uncounted numbers of ironies in this situation is that Sgt. Crowley's behavior was absolutely perfect, in contrast to that of Prof. Gates--until the arrest.

But no matter how you slice it, Gates' bad behavior--I heard he was auditioning for a new reality show "Professors Behaving Badly"---did not rise to the level of a criminal offense.   There was no justification for the arrest.

And it does therefore support those who like to read racism into any clash between a white policeman and a black person--though in this case it's unlikely.   Therefore it was stupid, as President Obama says.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Jul 09 - 12:02 AM

I think you make several very good points in your post, Donuel. Yes, cops are in a very powerful position vis-a-vis anyone they decide to question, and they have their ways of taking advantage, as you suggest....and, yes, you DO have to suck up to them and be a "nice guy" or you're giving them a golden opportunity to give you a whole lot of trouble...specially if they already don't like you for some reason.

So you need to stay cool.

It's certainly something that was always on my mind when encountering police officers who stopped me for any reason whatsoever. (sometimes they stopped me just because I apparently fit their profile of a "long-haired young guy who might be...hell, probably is...a drug user") Was I scared? Yeah. Definitely. But I stayed cool.

Gates didn't stay cool. That may have been for a number of fairly obvious reasons since he was already tired and frustrated, but that was the mistake he made.

As to what Obama said...yesh...both sides probably did act stupidly.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: robomatic
Date: 27 Jul 09 - 10:14 PM

Ah, Bruce, many wouldn't agree with you, but thanks!

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: heric
Date: 27 Jul 09 - 10:10 PM

In my first I spoke in an extremely biased and prejudicial fashion against the police. I'll probably be apologizing. We'll see.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Peace
Date: 27 Jul 09 - 10:07 PM

You always did have lots of class, Robomatic.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 09 - 10:06 PM

old dude, only in America...?

Well to be fair there are militia crooks all over Africa and drug cartel militias all over South America.
Their leaders survive on the corrupt status quo.


Pretty much all wars have a foundation of racism and ethnic superiority ideology.

Check out the documentary "War of the Worlds - a view of WW1 WW2 and the Cold War.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: robomatic
Date: 27 Jul 09 - 09:59 PM

In my first post to this thread I believe I came down on the neighbor even used a medium non-nice adjective. I wish to backpedal HARD on that. I read in the NYT they released the call she made and she couldn't have been more precise. She said clearly that the people gaining entry could be homeowners, she wasn't sure. She did not refer to race of her own volition, the dispatcher asked her for more information.
I now am inclined to believe the caller was an ideal neighbor and did absolutely nothing to be critical of. I retract anything in the least critical about her.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jul 09 - 09:53 PM

The first question the officer asked was for "the suspect" to step outside of the house. You see he needs a warrant to go in or drag him out. But unless "the supsect" steps outside the house, the officer can not go in unless invited (sorta like the vampire lore)

Police do this to motorists as well. Without a warrant they try to gaod people into searching their trunk. If you agree they can put whatever they want in your trunk.

The disturbing the peace charge can be whatever the police want it to be.

Gates should know by now that no one REALISTICLY have Constitutional rights until after the fact. To have them in retrospect you must first survive police encounters and comply with their demand for respect and authority. If you don't suck up to their ego - you fucked up.

Don't forget...

There is a reason why these guys wanted to be cops.



BTW Obama said both sides acted stupidly, but that has been lost in the rasist media bloosport that passes for journalism these days.

Chronkite used to say that people should get the news they need, not the news they want.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: Peace
Date: 27 Jul 09 - 09:43 PM

The tape could be requested by the court. All calls are recorded.

Subject: RE: BS: Henry Louis Gates arrested - profiling
From: meself
Date: 27 Jul 09 - 09:39 PM

What I want to know is - why haven't we been informed as to the body-type of the 911 dispatcher? I suspect a cover-up.