Both Were Wrong, But One Was Wronger
After living through and writing about many constabular and reportorial mishandlings of racially charged cases, I know a seasoned assessment when I see one. Here's the best I've seen in the matter of Harvard Prof. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and Cambridge, MA police Sergeant James Crowley -- a post on Crooked Timber by a New York City police captain and PhD student who's been following the case. (For the link I thank the writer George Scialabba, a Cambridge resident and a true sage in that village of pedants.)
I've known more than a few very good cops, as well as some bad ones, and, based on what I've learned about Crowley, my own not-so-Solomonic assessment is that both he and Gates are decent men who behaved wrongly in a highly charged situation. Gates made it worse, but the larger wrong was Crowley's: He shouldn't have arrested Gates. We won't get anywhere, though, if we don't try to imagine why he did.
On Gates' side, his Harvard colleague (and, in this matter, his lawyer) Charles Ogletree, who is black and a professor in the law school that Barack Obama attended, has often said that whenever he changes from his jacket and tie to an ordinary ski parka and stocking cap, he goes from being a law professor to being "a probable cause."
Unlike Ogletree, Skip Gates is a pretty highly self-signifying guy, an academic performance artist and entrepreneur as well as an authoritative carrier of a lot of black history. At the moment when his neighbor called the police, Gates became, like Ogletree, a probable cause, a black man breaking and entering. But knowing Gates as I've described him, I don't have trouble imagining him becoming a lot more condescending and insulting than was necessary or tactically smart when dealing with an officer who was basically doing his job. (You really have to read the Crooked Timber post I've linked if you want to make your own wise assessment.)
But even if Gates was making a total ass of himself by over-determining the situation and pumping 300 years of African-American history into circumstances that didn't warrant it and that weren't at all likely to end in an arrest, that doesn't mean that the arrest itself was justified in legal or civic terms.
Comments by both Crowley and Gates make clear that by the time Crowley asked Gates to step back outside his own house, Gates was no longer a suspect, and Crowley had no good reason to assume that others were inside burglarizing the house, since Gates had already explained that it he, not someone else, had broken in.
If Crowley (and, by then, the other officers who'd arrived) understood that Gates was the homeowner and that he had indeed been the one who'd forced the front door, they should have wrapped up their visit and gone on to the next job. Even if police protocol and their own discretion warranted a pro-forma search of the house, they could have let Gates rant on while doing it. If Crowley hadn't arrested him, there'd have been no grounds for a suit.
Somehow Gates really got under the skin of an officer who was no rookie but a seasoned veteran and a trainer of other cops. If you would read the Crooked Timber post, you would understand that, as I learned in Brooklyn, most cops who become sergeants have learned to take a lot of real crap from the citizenry without losing their cool. They may still be peremptory and dictatorial in circumstances that hardly justify it, but they don't go around arresting people like Gates in circumstances like this.
If Gates laced into Crowley by accusing him of racism, he was also insulting him professionally and, implicitly, along class lines. A certain prominent Harvard Law School graduate's use of the word "stupidly" can't have helped here. Gates' verbal misbehavior wasn't grounds for an arrest, but ultimately, this is a country, not a courtroom, and both Gates and Crowley -- unlike a lot of younger or meaner people -- have been around the track often enough to know what that means in situations like this.
The law in Massachusetts says that an officer must produce identification when it is requested.
And the officer has the lawful right to ask Gates for a piece or two of identification.
Somehow I believe that one requesting the others identification and not receiving it resulted in a shouting match and it devolved from that point.
Just a guess?
July 24, 2009 7:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Possible that is what happened.
I find it funny that so many can take the officer's account as truth and not consider Gates' account, which differs considerably, when assembling these who's right/who's wrong breakdowns. Sleeper and the captn over at Crooked Timber both do this. The fact that they don't bother to consider Gates' side of it shows their bias. Either party's tale could be correct or it could be somewhere in between. Why would Sleeper even entertain the fact that Gates says Crowley was hostile from his first moment on the scene and refused to give his name or badge number?
I find the "stupidly" remark backlash funny. Sleeper's NYPD Captain calls the arrest "unwise and imprudent." In what universe does unwise and imprudent not equal stupid? Oh I guess that goes down better than the harsh "stupidly."
One person was wrong here - the person with the authority to enforce the law. There is no law that compels anyone to be kind to police officers.
July 24, 2009 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's Gates statement about what happened.
http://www.theroot.com/views/skip-gates-speaks?page=0,0
Also - the 911 caller is not his neighbor. It was some woman who works down the street and observed this "break in" from a window. There were no backpacks, Gates just came back from China and had luggage. The other black man was his driver. He entered the house from the side via key and the driver helped open the door.
July 24, 2009 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I find the "stupidly" remark backlash funny. Sleeper's NYPD Captain calls the arrest "unwise and imprudent." In what universe does unwise and imprudent not equal stupid? Oh I guess that goes down better than the harsh "stupidly."
Good point.
One thing that has occurred to me that I haven't seen anyone else bring up: Obama himself has lived in Cambridge, when he was a student at Harvard Law. So he does have some familiarity with the general perception of the Cambridge PD, both within the larger Harvard community and among its community of black students and professors. Granted, that was all quite some time ago, and things may have changed since then, but it's not like he spoke to this situation without any personal knowledge of its background.
July 24, 2009 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
From what I've read, a black neuroscience professor was stopped by Harvard police on campus as a potential robbery suspect and about to be arrested for not having ID. And a maintenance guy who lost the key to his bike was being harassed for trying to take the chain off- kinda understandable except again it was Harvard PD and he was staff in uniform.
The impression I got from being in the area and from people who lived there is that its a blueblood racist town. They tried to open a african american daycare center in the area of Gates house and Julia Childs and some Harvard exec signed a petition to kill it. When it came out his name was on it he said he didnt know what he was signing. My father lived in Boston for the last 20 years of his life and my mother is from there. Mass is one of the most racist and generally hostile places I've ever been. Walking down Huntington Ave and gettin dirty looks from every every white person that passed gave me that ol timey racism feeling.
That was the 90s though so maybe its different now.
July 24, 2009 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cops lie all the time about this stuff. On and off the witness stand. They falsify arrest reports. It's reflexive and they think it's their right to lie about the circumstances surrounding an arrest. It's a safe assumption that Crowley is lying.
July 25, 2009 3:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
The post from Crooked Timber, it's interesting in outlining how this incident played out in the eyes of the police officer, and what the law allows.
But it ducks what to me is the absolute core question in this case, what, to me, seems fundamentally outrageous.
Gates was arrested in his home, having already proven that he lives there.
Call me a simpleton, but regardless of the letter of the law, in a so-called free country a cop should have a much, much better reason than The Owner was being a Prick to arrest someone in their own home under these circumstances.
July 24, 2009 7:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you Eddie. My feeling exactly.
July 24, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope that the reasonable comments here so far will encourage others to read the NYPD captain's analysis that I linked in the first paragraph of the post.
Most white TPM readers are aware of what black men have to put up with from white police -- by which I mean not that all white officers abuse black men but that the statistics, based on verifiable or highly credible accounts, are decisive.
So what's the problem with Gates' reaction? Well, as I say in my post, there WASN'T enough of a problem with it to justify an arrest.
But that's not the end of the story, because this post is not a courtroom. Speaking not as a judge or lawyer but as a writer and journalist who has seen and written about more than a few incidents like this -- I was involved in one thirty years ago - I consider it highly likely that Gates' fatigue after his long journey, his irritation over the problem getting into his house, his knowledge of the history I've just mentioned -- and his well-known penchant for dramatizing that history and himself, which those of us who know him have seen many times -- all combined, under the stress of seeing a white cop at his door, in a reaction that Sgt. Crowley actually didn't deserve.
But while Gates' reaction wasn't justified or appropriate to the situation, even though it is understandable, that reaction didn't justify Sgt. Crowley's arresting him. What we know of Crowley -- that he is an honest, by-the-book cop -- suggests that his own reaction (arresting Gates) was understandable, too, but not justified legally. And, of course, he is an officer of the law, as well as a human being operating under his own quotient of stress, fatigue, etc.
I think that that's why Obama has telephoned Crowley, and Obama's call suggests that my assessment is right. We can all over-legalize and over-moralize situations that call for some recognition that the people involved are basically decent human beings who are operating under stress and reacting all too humanly. That -- and not another example of a racist cops abusing a black man -- is what I see in this case.
July 25, 2009 5:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why do you refuse to acknowledge that Gates version of what happened even exists and that it differs from Crowleys from BEGINNING to end? Are you aware that Gates says the entire episode went down differently as far as remarks from him are concerned? Your deference to Crowley's version shows your bias. The NYPD captain's take is just as wrong as yours.
I wonder if your racial/social profiling of Gates guided your decision to not consider any version of events other than Crowley's. Should we read into this that you are a bigot, a law and order man or just inept at considering more than one side of an issue?
Obama is diffusing the situation. Its an event that never should have taken place. And thanks to persons like you and your captain, was becoming a twisted mess.
Keep copping pleas for police officers who abuse their power and we'll keep reading about old women and children being tasered to death.
July 25, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
This post directly contradicts the blog it links to, and is dead wrong.
"Gates was no longer a suspect, and Crowley had no good reason to assume"
- This is wrong and no amount of racial solidarity can change that.
From the linked blog:
"The police cannot be expected to leave a location simply because the person there is screaming at them and ordering them around, even if that person is apparently innocent and likely lives there. They should still thoroughly investigate."
And this "investigate" is what Obama, his friend Gates and the liberals have a problem with. As mentioned elsewhere, they believe that the policeman should have left as soon as Gates's ID was verified.
The policeman is SUPPOSED to investigate the circumstances of what is going on.
If a woman called the police because her estranged husband broke into their home and engages in spousal abuse, she won't get much help from Obama and the liberals because they think the police should leave as soon as they verify the husband's ID.
In my view, this incidence shows that Obama instictively and reflexively invoked identity politics that only complicated the issue:
- the government prototocol of requried actions by police in cases like this
- a president accusing police of racial profiling on national TV, while admitting he doesn't know the facts and is defending a friend
- the political "taking sides" over the incident on the basis of ideology
July 24, 2009 8:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is perhaps too dumb to warrant a response, but I'm bored this morning and grumpy as hell.
"If a woman called the police because her estranged husband broke into their home and engages in spousal abuse [..] they think the police should leave as soon as they verify the husband's ID."
What kind of bug-fcuk stupid thinks this is in any way comparable? The crime in Gates' case was breaking and entering. As soon as Gates is ID'd as the suspect, there is no potential crime, because he is the homeowner. End of story. The crime in your example is spousal abuse, or assault, or something along those lines. If the spouse is ID'd, that's not proof of any form that there has been a crime or not, so you investigate further.
I presume that's the best example you could come up with, and I must ask: How does anyone not see how these situations differ?
Bigger picture of course is the authoritarian fetish for, literally, policing what people do in their own homes. Obviously not saying it's smart to be rude to anyone, let alone the police, in your own home; but whilst it is your own home, I think it's pretty reasonable to expect that being rude, on its own, should never lead to your arrest. And that's what happened to Gates, and I think it reflects very poorly on the Cambridge PD.
July 24, 2009 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The crime in your example is spousal abuse, or assault, or something along those lines"
No, the suspected crime is a break in reported to 911.
The abuse is what remains unseen if the policeman doesn't investigate and instead leaves as soon as a man's ID is established.
Grumpy doesn't help with cognitive abilities, evidently....
July 24, 2009 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well I know, I shouldn't pit my limited cognitive abilities against someone comparing one situation, where a B&E suspect turns out to be the homeowner, to another where a B&E suspect turns out to be a person who's not supposed be in there.
That's wrong of me.
July 24, 2009 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
No you shouldn't.
If you tried, you'd probably figure out that it's unlikely that a policeman responding to a 911 call on a break-in in progress would be doing a database search on temporary restraining orders.
July 24, 2009 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you a complete lunatic? You make no sense.
July 24, 2009 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apple, meet orange.
July 24, 2009 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lalo, the investigation of the original suspected crime was OVER by the time of Gates's arrest. The cops had vacated the premises.
The arrest on Gates's front porch was in reaction to nothing more than the verbal abuse (no threat of violence) that Gates was hurling Crowley's way.
Abuse, by the way, that I think was an overreaction and not justified -- but protected free speech.
The lead cop up till now appears to have acted calmly and professionally (though he should have given his badge number as requested).
Where the stupidity takes over is touched on by Jim Sleeper:
"If Crowley (and, by then, the other officers who'd arrived) understood that Gates was the homeowner and that he had indeed been the one who'd forced the front door, they should have wrapped up their visit and gone on to the next job."
The key fact is that "other officers" had arrived on the scene. Crowley had the skill, training and backbone to quietly absorb Gates's tongue-lashing as long as it was just the two of them.
But he couldn't allow himself to been as a pussy by his fellow officers.
As Obama said, I wasn't there. But I'd bet real money that's what it all comes down to.
Shorter Gates: I won't be bullied by any cop.
Shorter Crowley: I won't be embarrassed in front of my friends.
July 24, 2009 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is the best comment written on TPM regarding this issue.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/david_seaton/2009/07/cops.php#comment-3537421
July 24, 2009 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
So wrong.
Investigate what?
As a former police officer I can tell you that responding to this home with an idea of the suspects from the 9-11 call, once I saw old man Gates I would 95% be sure the call was wrong.
I would inform Gates why I was there, ask who he was and ask him if he was the one "trying to break in ".
After I knew he was all of the above there was NO reason to further investigate anything.
And I would have walked away.
There is no question in my mind that Gates passed this cop off with his words.
And there is no question in my mind Crowley arrested him ,(no doubt as he has MANY other people) for speaking words that offended him.
This time he got caught and had to 'UN-arrest" Gates.
I would love to know from the courts and the prosecutor in that district how many times this sort of arrest from Crowley have been dismissed .
My bet is many.
July 24, 2009 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ogletree told MSNBC that he had many other victims of Crowley's antics ready to come forward along with witnesses from the street the day Gates was arrested. Ogletree and the PD came to an agreement and the charges were dropped. Im guessing some part of it involved not suing the DA and city along with the PD and Crowley. But Ogletree was pissed that Crowley and the PD keep acting as if Gates was a rabid dog and threatened to have a press conference with the witnesses/victims and file suit if the negative talk didnt stop. Now that seems to be all off the table with Obama's beer invitation to Crowley and Gates.
I kinda hope this does become some kumbaya crap and cops are held to a higher standard along with people asked to show them more appreciation.
July 24, 2009 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmm, is there any chance that arrest records are public like that? Certainly case #'s can be corroborated against court records to get a dismissal (and arrest) rate.
July 24, 2009 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe you can find it with Lexus Nexus and the officer's name. You could see how many arrests he has. I think you'd have to dig into every person arrested to see how the case turned out. Probably not much work for someone experienced with the search engine.
July 24, 2009 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of the particular I cannot speak. However, in my 62 years on this planet, one thing I have learned: most cops do act as though "dissing" an officer of the law is an arrestable offense.
Bonus observation: Unless you have a lot of free time you'd like to kill, never, never tell them, "you can't arrest me for..."
July 25, 2009 2:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
hehe.
smart comments here.
but sadly i can tell you how right you are.
it was my experiance that the police officer could write a report any way he desired to show his actions.
rare were the times he would be questioned about it and never would a jugde not take the police side.
in fact i know for certain police simply lie to
A. convict
B. to support the lies of other police.
Thats the way it is.
July 25, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
A couple of thoughts -
First, I believe, in Mass you do not have to show your id to anyone unless they have probable cause already.
Second, if you are in your own home you do not need to explain anything to anyone at anytime - nor are the police allowed to enter unless they have reason to believe a crime is being committed - if the homeowner establishes that it was he himself who was breaking into the house then guess what: they have no reason to believe a crime was being committed and, more importantly, no reason and no authority under the law to remain on the premises.
Was the officer doing his job, at first yes. Did Gates inflame the situation, perhaps. Could cooler heads have prevailed, almost certainly. That said, how about putting yourself in his shoes - you just got home from a trip, your tired and grumpy and probably hate your airline for any number of reasons real or perceived. You lost your house key and it now takes you X amount of time to figure out how to get into your own home and then up comes a police officer who accuses you of being a burgler and of breaking into your own home and then, after you've indentified yourself, the officer continues to press the issue.
I'm figuring I wouldn't react much better than Gates did.
July 24, 2009 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
The more carefully you look at it, the more complicated the situation becomes. The 911 caller initially reported 2 black men breaking in. The copy finds one who identifies himself as the rightful resident, and heaps what the cop believes is verbal abuse upon him. But what if the 2nd suspect is hiding? What is Gates has been kidnapped, or is being extorted--what if the other guy has threatened--get rid of the cops or you are a Dead Man--under the circumstances, what interpretation should the cop make about all the information available to him? Given that information, he should have conducted an investigation to determine whether, in fact, the resident was indeed alone, or whether someone else was hiding in the house. But he should not have done that without backup. Under those circumstances, Gates expressing annoyance and outrage could be perceived as interfering with a lawful investigation. But the minute that the cop decided to leave the premises, and Gates followed him out the door, it would appear that the cop had concluded his investigation and was preparing to depart the scene. At this point, turning to Gates and saying, "Thank you for complying with our request", and handcuffing him behind his back, seems gratuitous. One thing seems clear--Gates complaining that he was a victim of racial profiling indicates a certain paradigm bound perspective of his own--and given that this particular officer had taught a class at the police academy on racial profiling must have been particularly meaningful to him. Gates may have accidentally pushed this guys button-- guaranteeing his arrest. This is the fog of urban warfare.
July 24, 2009 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is the fog of urban warfare.
Uh, no. It's a cop abusing his office.
July 24, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I live in Florida. Here most cops are dumb as dirt.
C
July 24, 2009 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
MADEIRA BEACH STILL HAVE THE WORST?
July 24, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
But knowing Gates as I've described him, I don't have trouble imagining him becoming rather more offensive than necessary or tactically smart when dealing with an officer who was basically doing his job.
Well, maybe you can imagine it, Jim, but do you have any evidence this actually happened?
July 24, 2009 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Although only the individuals present witnessed what happened, and neither is a reliable witness, it now seems pretty clear that both acted irresponsibly. That doesn't justify the arrest, but it also doesn't justify attempts to assign responsibility exclusively to one party or the other.
There's a larger point, however. The Senate has made clear that it won't have a healthcare reform package ready by the August recess, while at the same time, President Obama is stumping the nation attempting to reinforce support for reform, realizing that excessive delay will weaken momentum for eventual passage. His goal is to ensure that public attention remains focused on healthcare, which is why, after his unfortunate use of the term "stupidly" to characterize how Officer Crowley behaved, he quickly backed away from that description and praised Crowley for his fine record of performance as a police officer.
There is a decent chance that Obama will be able to refocus our attention on the issues he deems urgent, but his opponents are hoping to continue the public distraction by baiting partisans into debating the Gates controversy instead.
Unfortunately, many may have fallen into the trap in that they continue to argue back and forth about who said what to whom. Meanwhile, both the House and Senate are trying to devise cost control measures that would make their respective healthcare reform packages politically viable. In some cases, however, these deliberations are also being sabotaged by reform opponents who hope to strip reform of its most potent tools, such as a public option. This effort is receiving less public attention than it deserves, given its importance to the future of health care.
I believe attention should now turn to a renewed emphasis on issues such as this - the ones the President considers most urgent - rather than remaining fixed on distractions.
July 24, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
(Obama's 'stupidly' showed me that scratch Obama and you find a very human being - scratch a GBush or a DCheney and I don't know what you'd get but I doubt it would be human.)
Following Obama's election to the presidency, I found that my perception of black people changed markedly. It surprised the hell out of me because I had never suspected that I had any preconceived ideas around black people.
I think we all carry a lot of subconscious, never looked at baggage around all sorts of people/issues...and admitting them would be a viable first step in getting clear of them.
July 24, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Jim spare us your 'both he and Gates are decent men' or 'cops who become sergeants have learned to take a lot of real crap from the citizenry'. Your opinions on these points are hearsay/irrelevant.
Crowley is acting like a whiner. He believes he has the right to be 'disappointed' when the POTUS says he acted 'stupidly', yet doesn't believe Gates has the right to be upset at being accosted in his own home without being arrested by yours truly, Sgt. Crowley. He thinks the world revolves around him.
Why the City of Cambridge, the Mayor or the PD, is allowing Crowley to spout off his cry baby story about why he had to arrest Gates on every radio/TV show from A to Z is beyond me.
It tells me the guy is a self-promoting conceited loose cannon around Cambridge, who must have better things to do, like his job as a cop. He can write a book about it all when he retires.
July 24, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, the arrogant assumptions underlying this author's post made it totally irrelevant in my eyes.
July 24, 2009 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
BOOK DEAL????
July 24, 2009 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
...a book or talk radio, I seem him in between Ollie North and that other Nixon guy who went to jail. He is a right wing hero now for showing the n***r his place, reminds one of Mark Twain on educated Blacks and white racism:
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
The wingnuts love it when one of those p' fessor Blacks gets put down, loved it then love it now.
July 24, 2009 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
One key problem among this country's "first responders" is the pervailing police doctrine of "zero tolerance" for human nature: Any adverse reaction from "civilians" brings arrest - or worse - regardless of the situation. On the other hand, Gates overreacted, and did so because he knew, as a reasonably important Harvard poo-bah, he could berate a lesser social mortal, and camouflage his boorishness with the stale narrative of an African American standing up to The Man.
In a country plummeting economically, in a state reliving the 1930s all over again, this story, this "issue" has all the heft of dryer lint.
July 24, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
The comment by Obama in an admittedly complicated issue was beyond stupid. For such a politically savvy politician, it is really incomprehensible.
I can certainly agree that Gates' ending up arrested in his own home is ridiculous and upsetting; but Gates' overreaction to the police inquiry certainly aggravated the situation for no clear or good reason except for him to play the High Harvard Professor. Crowley could have allowed him to vent ...or as happened, not.
July 24, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You may be a little harsh on Obama, VLaszlo, in calling his comment "incomprehensible". It was certainly careless, but the gist of his remarks was reasonable except for the word "stupidly", which is a relatively minor insult, particularly since it was stated in defense of a friend. A rare moment of carelessness is allowable for even someone as gifted as Obama.
The greater problem is that the controversy is being exploited by healthcare reform opponents to distract from that far more urgent priority. By continuing to provoke arguments about Gates and Crowley, they avoid the needed debate about healthcare reform principles, costs, and the central role of a public insurance option, which is now under threat.
July 24, 2009 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Fred Moolten, I mostly agree. However, do not forget that Obama has repeatedly addressed the general black community on its responsibilities and living up to these responsibilities. Many people felt this was unfair addressed as they were to the lower classes. Why do these stated concerns end when his "friend" is involved. Agreed that the situation was at best extremely complicated, his remarks show he already had formed conclusions based on ???. I do not know. Finally, given that he is involved in the cornerstone issue of his administration (by his choice), perhaps he can keep more to this issue (he has shown remarkable ability to stay on issue in the past). (BTW...when people here at TPM address other people notably Biden and others with loose lips usually the remarks abound with "STFU's". Maybe we shouldn't always use a different measuring stick for Obama).
July 24, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
He said that Black people in the "lower class" have to take shit from cops?
Obama's conclusion that the arrest was stupid was formed from the facts of the case.
July 24, 2009 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not so sure putting words in my mouth that are entirely different from what I said is the best way to make your point.
You ask in a second post "What's complicated about it being stupid to arrest someone for NOT committing a crime? "
Perhaps you should take this up with Obama who is backtracking away from his comments and particularly YOUR description of the situation as quickly as his nimble feet will let him.
July 24, 2009 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gates may have been 'playing' the just got back from 2 days in airports flying from China, my leg is aching, my door is stuck and some white cop is trying to harass me in my own home ploy.
July 24, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's complicated about it being stupid to arrest someone for NOT committing a crime?
July 24, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can certainly agree that Gates' ending up arrested in his own home is ridiculous and upsetting
But not stupid? How are you drawing the distinction, because from here it appears exceedingly, if not meaninglessly, fine.
July 24, 2009 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
EH, it is a ridiculous and upsetting situation to be arrested in your own house by police investigating a possible break-in. However if you abuse the police (I do not know exactly what happened...but this seems to be a part of it)it can happen (and usually does happen) that if you do not cool it they will arrest you. I think I learned as a youth (maybe 50 years ago) attending a baseball game at Ebbetts Field when I thought I was clever yelling out within earshot of a policeman "what is a dirty penny made out of?" and then answering my query with "DIRTY COPPER". I thought it was very humorous but the policeman did not think it was as funny as I did and possibly exceeding his authority he had me leave the stadium. I wasn't happy about it; I think the policeman did not use all of his skills in the most productive way. I do not say this is what happened here...but if Gates acted in a sufficiently obnoxious manner then it is not a great surprise (nor a great outrage) that he was arrested. Obama getting involved in a case he only apparently knew one side was, well, stupid. It has derailed discussion of the health care reform; it looks like he exercised very little judgment; he seems to be intervening for a friend; and he seems to be backtracking as fast as he can. That is not so smart.
July 24, 2009 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words, if you say things the police do not like, then the police will break the law. And you should just get used to it, Because They Can. Got it.
July 27, 2009 2:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Nor a great outrage"?
I see. Being obnoxious to a police officer is now a crime. I hope you can find the relevant Massachusetts statute to back you up on that one.
And don't even try "disorderly conduct." That red herring has been thoroughly disposed of here, as well as in the comments section of the post Jim linked to.
If a man is arrested for not committing a crime, I suggest the appropriate term for that event is, indeed, "outrage."
July 27, 2009 2:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, in contrast, I have to say Obama was 100% right originally. Arresting someone when you know perfectly well they've committed no crime is wrong. When that person is a Harvard Professor and a personal friend of the President, it is also objectively stupid.
July 24, 2009 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I took it the other way. I wondered what the Sergeant had done to make Gates flip out.
Every seasoned officer knows how to needle someone, as well as how to be conciliatory. Every cop who's been around the block knows how to goad someone in the hope that they'll say something that can be used against them.
July 24, 2009 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently he asked Gates for ID. Gates may have been certain that the knuckle dragging racist white cop (sorry for the redundancies) would not have done the same for a white PHD. Could a professor of black studies believe any different?
July 24, 2009 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually the story I've read is that Gates got mad because the OFFICER refused to show ID. The fact is that this is a law in Massachussetts that the officer flouted.
July 24, 2009 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well that certainly explains why Gates called the officer a racist and commentesd on the officer's mother.
July 24, 2009 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look, you've already effectively admitted that you didn't know what you were talking about in your last comment, are you really willing to just drag the thread wherever your fact-free mind wants to take it? Try to provide more than bald assertions.
July 24, 2009 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is my question:
Would there be any among us who would argue that Gates would be within his rights to shoot the officer?
The officer is in Gates house, uninvited, and is arguing with him and perhaps threatening to arrest him.
In some parts of the country, and on some radio shows, the homeowner sould get off free if he pulled a gun and shot the officer.
July 24, 2009 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm of the impression that in most parts of the country, shooting an on-duty police officer in the course of performing his duties will get you into serious hot water. And if you kill the officer, it can get you executed.
July 24, 2009 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
But you are being rational. If it was a white guy and a black officer, what would Rush say?
July 24, 2009 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like the analysis above -- and I like how both men are treated like human beings who both have had a lifetime of experiences that add up to how they each acted that night. It's a nice change from treating everyone like a cartoon character.
July 24, 2009 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that is an assumption that Gates is the only one who handled the situation wrong, which nobody really knows but these two people. The truth is, Gates was not the paid official in the incident, the officer was expected to control the situation and not overreact. If the arrest had any real cause, the city would not have dropped it so fast. No doubt the police department will have to settle out of court with Gates or be dragged through a trial with a Harvard attorney bringing in testimony on the city's record of racist profiling.
July 24, 2009 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to agree with you. The officer is trained to defuse angry situations. The fact that he didn't shows he had a big chip on his shoulder just like Gates.
They were both wrong, but Crowley should have known better. He is trained and experianced in controling these kinds of situations, instead his ego got in the way because the other officers showed up.
July 24, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Sleeper, I'm afraid you're dead wrong here. The simple fact of the matter is that, based on the facts the police have put forward, they not only acted wrongfully, but acted unconstitutionally.
Individual citizens have no legal obligation to be nice to police officers, or to not call them names, or to react in a positive manner when accused of burglarizing their own homes. Once Gates had dispelled probable cause that a burglary had or was occurring, by demonstrating that he was in his own home lawfully, there was no reason for law enforcement to remain. To go on to arrest him for "Disorderly Conduct," which specifically excludes the behavior he is alleged to have engaged in (see, for instance, http://volokh.com/posts/1248465451.shtml ), demonstrates that the officer was not acting with good faith.
It doesn't matter if Gates was mean to the poor put-upon officer one whit. One of them broke the law, and it wasn't the guy who was taken away in cuffs and placed in prison for four hours.
July 24, 2009 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Anonymous Coward:
I may be dead wrong, but before you say so, why don't you read the column I wrote, starting with the title, and then tell us what you think that title means and how you think the column contradicts that meaning.
July 27, 2009 9:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like Joe the Plumber has been replaced by Jim the Cop.
July 24, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's what I'm waiting for.
July 24, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
The woman who called the police was not his neighbor. It's a peculiar mistake that pundits continue to perpetuate, even well-meaning ones.
For a story as nuanced and complicated as this, it's important to get the facts straight.
July 24, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama was right, the arrest was stupid. Once Gates proved he was the occupant of the property, being cooperative with this police investigation became unnecessary; stepping out of the house was not necessary. Any heated verbal exchanges of the type that has been reported are not cause for arrest and, in fact, the charges were dropped.
The police officer says Gates could have avoided arrest by simply shutting-up or going back in his residence but that fails to acknowledge that freedom of speech cannot be arbitrarily abridged by the police merely because it included a "your mama" remark. Furthermore, once Gates had been properly identified, the burden of being deferential shifted to the officer and he should have just walked away. Case closed.
Yes, both could have prevented the escalation but in the end the officer seems to have exceeded his lawful power. Instead, he gave in to his need to show Gates what happens when you don't listen to a police officer, regardless of the circumstances.
July 24, 2009 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's great to have ideals and try to participate in democracy and all that. The reason I believe that so many of us have dug in to this discussion is that it points out a rift between our ideals and that elusive realm: "reality".
I love all the outraged people exclaiming how we have every right to be rude to cops. Sure, let's discuss this ideal of yours. Ever acted on it? The police in "reality" pack a lot of force, as a rule, and have multiple avenues to discharge that force. Ever met a roided out sir yes sir cop with red rising up his neck and face wearing oakleys? It's all well and good to decry the chokehold this "fictional" cop unlawfully applied on his interlocutor, but unless you can pull rank on him, or defer to his satisfaction, you will be dealing with violence or humiliation.
I have no idea how many 'good' cops or how many "bad" cops there are out there. The thing is, enough police get away with unlawful force on such a regular basis, as there is no real recourse for a citizen, that in a 'street' way, it is 'stupid' to ever challenge a cop, ever, no matter what the circumstances.
Gates could pull rank on the cop, because he had lawyer friends such as the president backing him up. Crowley 'stupidly' didn't realize that he was, in fact, out-ranked.
Ideally we should reorient this conversation around the constitution and state law. We are outraged or just exasperated because this is not the realm where all this 'really' happened.
July 24, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
If this was such a righteous arrest, why did they drop it. It seems to me the prosecutor should have prosecuted Mr. Gates to the full extent of the law.
I remember when I was 22 and getting ready to get out of the Air Force, I was driving my brothers BMW in monmouth county new jersey to go look at their community college which had a degree program I was interested in. I was stopped by a cop from the county for driving too slow and ticketed. He was extremely rude and insulting to me for reasons I do not know except for the color of my skin. Anyway, at the end I asked him for directions to the community college and he stated to me he did not know where it was. Go figure.
July 24, 2009 11:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Crowley Police Report-link read it and it is clear the cop is blowing it out his ass, commentary from Lowry Heussler, who has worked on police-misconduct cases in Massachusetts:
link
On the last page of his report Crowley writes: "a Harvard University maintenance person arrived on the scene and appeared familiar with Gates" this relating to securing the door.
Thus the White cop humiliates the old Black man who Crowley has now established lives in the home in which Crowley has accosted him.
These are not the actions of a 'good cop'.
July 25, 2009 12:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Crowley arrested Gates for no reason. All else is bullshit. Gates wasn't under any professional compunction to kiss Crowley's ass, be polite, or anything else. He wasn't working. Crowley was. Badly. Why the hell should Gates have had to play amateur psychologist? He broke no law and should not have been arrested. I hope he sues the CPD's ass off.
Crowley is just a typical cop arresting a citizen for no other reason than that he felt like it. He's an asshole cop, like so many. Hopefully, the lesson from this will be to cops--STOP ARRESTING CITIZENS FOR NO REASON.
July 25, 2009 2:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope that the reasonable comments here so far will encourage others to read the NYPD captain's analysis that I linked in the first paragraph of the post.
Most white TPM readers are aware of what black men have to put up with from white police -- by which I mean not that all white officers abuse black men but that the statistics, based on verifiable or highly credible accounts, are decisive.
So what's the problem with Gates' reaction? Well, as I say in my post, there WASN'T enough of a problem with it to justify an arrest.
But that's not the end of the story, because this post is not a courtroom. Speaking not as a judge or lawyer but as a writer and journalist who has seen and written about more than a few incidents like this -- I was involved in one thirty years ago - I consider it highly likely that Gates' fatigue after his long journey, his irritation over the problem getting into his house, his knowledge of the history I've just mentioned -- and his well-known penchant for dramatizing that history and himself, which those of us who know him have seen many times -- all combined, under the stress of seeing a white cop at his door, in a reaction that Sgt. Crowley actually didn't deserve.
But while Gates' reaction wasn't justified or appropriate to the situation, even though it is understandable, that reaction didn't justify Sgt. Crowley's arresting him. What we know of Crowley -- that he is an honest, by-the-book cop -- suggests that his own reaction (arresting Gates) was understandable, too, but not justified legally. And, of course, he is an officer of the law, as well as a human being operating under his own quotient of stress, fatigue, etc.
I think that that's why Obama has telephoned Crowley, and Obama's call suggests that my assessment is right. We can all over-legalize and over-moralize situations that call for some recognition that the people involved are basically decent human beings who are operating under stress and reacting all too humanly. That -- and not another example of a racist cops abusing a black man -- is what I see in this case.
July 25, 2009 5:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
This information is very useful! Thanks!
Best regards, Katya, CEO of hyper v, iscsitarget rpm
March 28, 2011 4:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of db2 high availability
April 27, 2011 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
auto transport, car shipping, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, auto transport.
April 30, 2011 1:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
auto transport, car shipping, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, auto transport.
April 30, 2011 1:18 AM | Reply | Permalink