Racist Cop or Combative Professor?

[yorkshirelad]

If you combine anger and power you get a result based on ego

You're right, Gates was angry at being asked for id by a cop just doing his job and and the power associated with being an esteemed professor and a friend of Obama lead to a major ego trip.

 

[yorkshirelad]

There's no safer person in Compton than a white person. The gangs know you aren't a member...and don't want to shoot their customers. The independents don't want to bring the heat down on them.

Most of the crime victims in the "bad areas" are the residents - the minorities.

Oh Empty, I'll gladly drop you off in urban LA, in an area of my choosing and when I see you again, listen to your happy stories of the friendships you made. Let's do it.....please.

 

[jks9199]

You work with facts and evidence, and large doses of assumption. You call his reaction unreasonable, without knowing anything about his experience with law enforcement. I'm not excusing whatever behavior of his may be inappropriate, but I'm also not pretending we don't have significant issues with race and law enforcement in this country, which evidently has contributed to this situation in one form or another. It doesn't excuse any transgression on Professor Gates behalf, or make officer Crowley guilty of any racist behavior, but it doesn shed light on the reality of the situation whether you want to acknowledge it or just keep the blinders on.

I don't care about his experience.

Of the fights in my career, most of them have involved blacks. All but one of the others involved Hispanics. (Many of the ones involving blacks also involved the same family.)

Should I deal with every black person I deal with through that perspective? Or should I be expected to take each one as an individual, and shape my actions accordingly?

Sorry, everything points to Dr. Gates being way out of line here. I don't know if he was tired from traveling, irritated, or arrested 80 times for invented offenses, and I don't care. He crossed the line, and faced the consequences. Except he didn't face the consequences. Most of us would still have a court date; what happened there would be up to the judge and the prosecutor.

 

[Carol]

And from experience I hope... since nothing goes exactly according to text book.

As for dropping the race card... that is hard to do. Its not easy to understand unless you've had similar experiences. Would it be easy for you to ignorepeople treating you as a second class citizen? Sure, the race card is abused but after being pulled over numerous times for cops to see if your car truly is yours, or if you have been followed in stores because you don't like you belong throughout your life, you start to see things through a racial lens. These lens are hard to discard. As such I would't say drop the race card, I'd rather say minimize the using race card.

One can't ignore something like that.

As a person that used to be very orthodox in my faith, I used to wear a turban or some sort of religious headdress on my head every time I was in public. I know what it is like to - literally overnight - take on the visage of one of the most despised stereotypes in America.

I was in the NYC area over 9/11. My boss and I were doing an installation at a large company. I saw hate in the eyes of some of the travelers that were stranded at the hotel with me because we couldn't go home. I saw it in the eyes of the people on the Amtrak train driving through the still-smoldering NYC to Boston, the departure point of the two planes that bombed the twin towers. I got home to the condo I was in the process of losing in my divorce around midday on the 12th. I was pretty shaken from all the events and just put on the TV and vegged out. That provided no escape. Shortly after I tuned in, I watched a good friend and brother in faith arrested on an Amtrak train in Providence. To add to the stereotype, one of the cable news networks showed the picture of my friend (as seen on the link) alongside a picture of Osama Bin Laden.

Work didn't stop. I got plenty of ugly looks flying to NYC, I got just as many flying to Montreal, which required flying out of the international wing at Logan Airport. I instantly became the person "randomly selected" to have my luggage dug through or whatever. Flying down south was arguably worse. The TSA and airline people in BOS, NYC, and MTL at least tried to act professionally. In Norfolk or Raleigh it was usually an unwavering stare accompanied by "Alllllllllright, now you jes' step over here so we can (fill in the blank)"

In December of 2001, someone in Norfolk even sent a female TSA agent to the boarding area to give me a second pat down and wanding before I got on the plane. She kept testing her metal detector wand with her keys to ensure it worked, she seemed convinced that I was up to no good. A few minutes before we were supposed to close up and take off, the Norfolk Police boarded the plane, looking for me. I was to come off the plane, with my bags. I can only imagine the people on board were frightened by what they saw. (I wasn't in trouble. The officers had come to get me because my father had just died.)

I didn't have any serious run-ins with law enforcement. I know many other Sikhs that did, including my ex who had a terrible run-in with the U.S. Secret Service at a large, public U.S. Department of Homeland Security event. (My ex was a DHS employee, with a security clearance, with DHS ID around his neck, working the event). Another friend went to do some routine immigration paperwork, and met up with a overzealous DHS officer that commented on my friend's turban and dug deeply in to his records. The officer discovered a technicality in my friend's visa processing. My friend was thrown in to federal prison. He was there for while lawyers traced the liability to a mistake by an immigration attorney in Chicago. It took 3 or 4 months for the charges to be dropped and my friend freed.

I don't think I can turn a blind eye to misunderstandings or even overly aggressive actions because of ethnic appearance. But my own thoughts echo that of SALDEF and other organizations that have come to the aid of American Sikhs in crisis - the answers can be found in education, documentation, and follow up through the proper channels....not in fighting (literally or figuratively) with law enforcement.

 

[MJS]

I agree. I think that people are getting the impression I'm bashing the cops or defending Gates and I'm really doing neither. I just think Crowley made a decision to stay. I think it was a deliberate action on his part. When the fork in the road between leaving and ending the situation or saying, "Screw that. No way I'm going to let this uppity Harvard prof call me names" he chose to stay (note: That was probably not exactly what Crowley's internal voice said, but is intended to be a lighthearted characterization).

Honestly, as long as they're just words and didn't cross over into direct, credible threats against anyone, I don't think it matters. Exactly. You and I see it exactly the same. Only difference is that I believe that opting to stay was a poor decision that exacerbated the situation and caused more harm than good.Rare, but not unheard of. I've been in similar situations and might have handled it a little different, although I'm not suggesting you did anything wrong.

I don't know...I still think that if we knew what was said, it may shine a brighter light on this. I mean, lets say Gates made threats of violence towards Crowley. I mean, we can 'what if' this all day, but assuming there was, I'd think that if given the choice between walking and acting, if threats were made, acting would and should prevail. I guess the next question is...was Crowley obligated to walk away?

The biggest difference here, and an option not available to you, would have been to remove yourself from the situation. If you had the option to leave, it would have been a good one for you. Crowley had this option, but chose not to use it.

Moral of the story....for the small amount I was making an hour and for the short time I was there, I did not need the abuse, and neither did the other customers, who're being subjected to this. I offered up an apology and explaination, to which went ignored, so I escalated to asking and then telling him to leave. Had he stayed, I can assure you I would have called the police and I would not have served him. I can also say that when they arrived, I'd be willing to bet that after they heard my side of the story, that he would have been asked to leave and if he didn't, he'd have been arrested. Had this guy just been calm and listened, the incident would've probably ended sooner than later. Instead he choose, just like Gates, to create a public disturbance.

I think there are a million ways to handle the situation that wouldn't have allowed it to get this far. The thing is, if you had the amount of training Crowley did, you might have handled it differently and should have.[/quote]

Thats correct, I couldn't leave, even if I wanted to. Seeing that this guy I dealt with was a regular to the store, I was hoping that things would have ended after my grandfather spoke to him. Apparently he felt the need to address it again with me, which is fine of course, however, his choice of words and actions that he picked, in a nutshell, sucked. Had he calmed down, stepped aside, kept his cakehole shut for a few and let the other customers leave, I'd have been happy to explain in more detail. Then again, perhaps it was a good thing that there were others there. In the event the police were called, I had quite a few witnesses.

 

[MJS]

Sgt. Crowley made the call after several minutes that Dr. Gates had crossed that line. Whether we like it or not, that is the officer's call. Easy way to avoid it? Don't act like a jack ***. LOL

:deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse
The primary difference is Sgt. Crowley was legally justified in his actions and Dr. Gates was not.

Alright guys. While I don't think my position is far removed from anyone else's, nor do I believe it's extreme, I understand that you guys want to vindicate the cop. I get it. He's a paragon of human virtue and beyond reproach. I understand. I'll let it go.

Not at all!

Is it possible he crossed the line? Perhaps, but where's the evidence?

All the evidence I've seen points to Dr. Gates acting like a 3 year old throwing a tantrum.

From everything that's been reported it shows that Dr. Gates actions fit the bill when it came to what is considered "disorderly conduct."

Cops don't have to write you a ticket for speeding, but they can once they pull you over or they can let you off with a warning.

Sgt. Crowley didn't necessarily have to arrest Dr. Gates either, but Dr. Gates was "speeding" and he got a "ticket."

That's my point. I don't deny yours that he could have let it go. I doubt that it would have done anything to quell the national attention it got though, simply because Dr. Gates is friends with Obama.

I have to agree with CC here. I was listening to a radio station the other day and this topic came up. Funny how the hosts were saying the same thing some are saying here...be polite and STFU. Its really that simple. I don't think, despite what some are thinking, that we ( the ones siding with Crowley) are putting in some 'untouchable' category. While walking away may have been an option, it was his call. No different than a cop pulling someone over for running a light. He could simply give them a verbal, he could give a written warning, or a ticket. I've seen cops pull cars over with expired plates, and let them go with a verbal. I'm sitting there thinking, "WTF!" and he lets them go??? Again, his call, not mine.

 

[MJS]

No, they don't. Not typically. In fact, they aren't usually allowed to call the police or even mall security until they've directed to do so by their LP rep. Of course, each company has their own policies.

Edit: Just in case this goes without saying, I'm not talking about situations in which there is any threat of bodily harm. I'm talking about situations like Gates': yelling, belligerance and regular, run of the mill crazy talk.

Every business i'm familiar with will call the police for this type of disturbance immediately........perhaps your town's businesses are more tolerant of adult temper tantrums......results may vary.

I have to go with Sgt on this one. I doubt that every business around has an official manager working at every waking moment. That being said, where I work, if a business calls to report someone who is no longer wanted there, for whatever reason, ie: loitering, yelling, etc., the police are called and they are sent. What the cop does, again, is his call, depending on what happens when he arrives.

 

[CoryKS]

Iowahawk nails it:

Cambridge Police Profiling Still a Grim Reality for Harvard Faculty *******s.

 

[kaizasosei]

I don't know the exact details, but seeing all the police madness, i think the professor would have been smarter had he remained calm and found a way of identifying himself. - gotta say, tho, some people especially, innocent people all indignant do not like to get cuffed or face to the pavement, lawn whatever....

i think that police should come up with further instructions that other potential innocent might follow more readily whilst minimizing the threat levels. Like for example, answering simple questions, for one. Also, i think it would be good for officers to take more care to explain things to people a bit earlier than one second before reaching to cuff them. Give them a frickin chance to even agree and comply. People talk about human rights abuse in other countries and people from other countries say that america is wrong in this or that way, great in so and so a way....but maybe, everyone is somewhat wrong. Maybe human rights are even more complicated than the socalled advanced countries. Personally, being not east or west but consider myself an simple observer, i think the socalled more advanced countries have caused much upheaval in other lands, socially and culturally. I mean, i am a great fan of freedom. That is one of the things that makes me like america. The concept of freedom. At the other exteme you might say are morals, justice or equality. Even more extreme, one could say is a totalitarian government. So what do you have in a totalitarian government? A bunch of people living under the stick, under the gun. Do you think they are good people just because they are wary careful citizens in a place of many dungeons and executioners??
Now give these people freedom. It is like giving an seriously abused child another child to take care of. Optimistically, could work out, but more than often, they will use that freedom to cause trouble for others and despise the 'freedom' of others.
Sorry, this may all sound a little psycho, but it is meant mostly in a spiritual way. In worldly sense, i suppose one could say that growth requires health, experience and time


About the police system, it may seem like i am shooting to make things really complicated and silly, but i firmly believe that to eliminate such attitudes and infringements of the basic rights of others is to make police work much smoother and more pleasant(that is to the sane cop-as the violent beaters will be really disappointed in losing all their precious victims). ****, if i want to brutalize people, the police is clearly the best career, right?....sad to say, but probably true.

 

[Steve]

Steve..without getting all silly with you. In the end, what do you think being an *** with the cop "just because you can" is going to really accomplish on the street?

I'm not suggesting anyone be an *** with the cop just becuase one can. I thought you said you weren't going to get silly. In response to your tangent regarding challenging authority, I said that there are times when challenging authority is the right thing to do.

With regards to this thread, I'm suggesting that the cop not be given a free pass. My participation in this thread stems from the exonoration of Crowley. He's being painted as a victim in this, and I believe that's a mistake. As much as Gates contributed to this situation, Crowley did, too. At any point, Sgt Crowley could have ended things, but chose not to.

Dont be ridiculous of course Im not saying that "questioning the cop on the scene is tantamount to suicide"...

Actually, that's exactly what you wrote. Maybe that's not what you meant, but where I'm from, if you

what Im saying is that you sure CAN if you want to but if that cop has a legal reason to to what he is doing you are certainly going to wind up on the short end of the stick. Even if you have a "rouge cop" on your hands, is acting like Gates going to really change the outcome to your advantage? Go ahead and "question autrhority" all ya want...its the American way...just do it smartly.

I wonder if you'd say the same thing were you in his position. I'm not sure how the discussion turned to challenging authority. While I believe that this is an important discussion, what Gates did wasn't "challenging authority." I would say that what he did was more along the lines of losing his cool.

I think it's a given that losing one's cool with a cop is a mistake, but it's an emotional one. As I've said a million times now, I in no way condone Gates' behavior. Returning to my point in this thread, given that Crowley has the experience, the training, and the authority, it is my believe that he should have handled the situation professionally and without allowing his ego to get involved. From everything I've read, it sounds like Gates got under his skin and instead of leaving, he chose to put the uppity college professor in his place.

 

[Steve]

What we're talking about is whether an officer of the law should take responsibility for contributing to a situation in which he lost control and ultimately arrested someone who had otherwise broken no laws. quote]

Losing control would be tazing the guy or punching him in the face or bashing him on the head with his truncheon. Crowley JUSTIFIABLY arrested this idiot. As far as I'm concerned Gates lost control and Crowley controlled the situation.

I guess we'll have to agree that the definition of "losing control of a situation" is subjective. I have a lower threshold, because the arrest in this situation is right in the wheelhouse of my definition.

 

[jks9199]

i think that police should come up with further instructions that other potential innocent might follow more readily whilst minimizing the threat levels. Like for example, answering simple questions, for one.

You mean like this and this?

Also, i think it would be good for officers to take more care to explain things to people a bit earlier than one second before reaching to cuff them. Give them a frickin chance to even agree and comply.

Sgt. Crowley, according to his report, did warn him. Twice. How many chances does he have to give the guy?

About the police system, it may seem like i am shooting to make things really complicated and silly, but i firmly believe that to eliminate such attitudes and infringements of the basic rights of others is to make police work much smoother and more pleasant(that is to the sane cop-as the violent beaters will be really disappointed in losing all their precious victims). ****, if i want to brutalize people, the police is clearly the best career, right?....sad to say, but probably true.

In the US -- police work is the wrong career if you want to brutalize people. Cops are held to standards, and the few who do brutalize people are fired and often face charges. Note that there is a distinction between legitimate use of force, no matter how ugly or extreme, and brutality.

 

[kaizasosei]

I can imagine that being a leo is a stressfull job. So it may be easier coming up with ideas than it would be carrying them out.
I have to say though, i checked out the link that you posted. It appears to me to be all information directed towards the common citizen informing them of things like turning on the lights in the car or how to pull over.
It mentions that one may feel anxious or upset that when being pulled over....great, but most of the information is common sense to me, and i think i have learned enough in life to sit still long enough to manage well.

I think i didn't express that clearly enough. What i meant was tips and training for the officer. I don't know exactly how it would go...i suppose the authorities and instructors would need to think stuff up but something along the lines of....when stopping someone, you may feel very very upset and feel the need to use the mace or taser.... you may want to experiment with a few seconds of silence or deescalation of the shouting rather than the good ol' traditional game of escalation....etc-ask them their name, use it-see if it connects-.

And granted police work is dangerous. That is why they have tools, weapons and the right to instruct others. Sure criminals can be sneaky and dangerous, but that is why there are procedures. So with all these advantages, i would think that most of the time, an officer need not break a sweat or even worry much as long as procedure is being followed.

Do you know how long it takes to tame a bird or to call on a deer, or how grand one must be to be able to comfort a child? So when i see people, shouting and hating actually purposely escalating and provoking the resisting of arrest so they can go to, it does sicken me a bit. I think to myself, they are not great people. One should be able to deal with people nicely even if you have to be loud or forceful, not to take things personally. I mean, if a suspect is a good distance away, it would do better to clarify the situation than to rush into things with the suspect out of controll and hateful of the police.

i know, it's complicated. Just people that's all, just people. I have seen cases of officers in tough situations that acted very sanely. But for some ******* quack, being in such a position of power must be absolutely invigorating.

j

 

[jks9199]

LEOs generally receive extensive training in dealing with people, and couple that with direct experience.

But the bottom line is that, at some point, the cop has to make a decision whether this person is enough of a problem that they must be dealt with, or if they'll calm down on their own. Sgt. Crowley attempted to de-escalate in a couple of ways. He asked Dr. Gates to step outside, into a more neutral environment. Many people do behave very differently in their home compared to outside. Sgt. Crowley warned Dr. Gates. He then warned him again, with his handcuffs in hand.

He could perhaps have walked away. I don't know. I don't know the neighborhood, I don't know who was watching, or what else was going on. Those are all things I'd be taking into account. In one setting, I might simply walk away. In another, the moment he raised his voice, he's in cuffs. There's no one magic answer.

One of my academy instructors did an exercise with us. He had us take a piece of paper out, and place a series of dots on it. He then walked us through connecting them. He then told us that was the last time we'd be simply connecting the dots; police work is never simply moving from one thing to the next the same way, every time.

 

[blindsage]

You say this and yet tell me that calling Gates racist shows a lack of understanding on my part. You're just ASSUMING that Gates isn't a racist, or at least a race bater. I'm calling Gates a racist because he was offended at the gaul of a WHITE officer, doing his job. He's a racist and by that token so is Obama.

My assumptions are not at all getting the better of me. YOU are a leftist and it is the MO of leftists to express a sympathy for Blacks and other minorities who express racial bigotry, while calling foul on any LEO who has the audacity to do his job, which in this case he was justified in doing.

I am not ASSUMING anything, I am responding to your crazy ASSUMPTION that Gates cannot be a racist.

I'm not assuming anything. You assume things about me based on labelling me a 'leftist'. You assume I think Gates can't be racist. I never said he couldn't be one (as a matter of fact I said the opposite), I said he isn't one. The difference is pretty big.

 

[blindsage]

Because black people are incapable of racism? Ha. That's a good one.

Umm...no. But please play again.

 

[blindsage]

Well aren't you the regular Hemingway, off on all your little adventures. As you say there are places where it IS dangerous to be white. I suppose those whites who do get their heads kicked in by the poor minorities should just understand that its their own fault, for being white and that instead of being angry they should just accept that the poor minorities are angry.

So you give an example of what I should do to prove your point, I explain that I've have been there and done that and it doesn't prove your point, so you resort to condescension to undermine my stance. Nice. Can you point me to the post where I said a victim of assault shouldn't be angry at being assaulted? Oh, wait, no you can't. Assuming again are we?

 

[blindsage]

I don't care about his experience.

Clearly. Maybe that's part of the problem.

Of the fights in my career, most of them have involved blacks. All but one of the others involved Hispanics. (Many of the ones involving blacks also involved the same family.)

Should I deal with every black person I deal with through that perspective? Or should I be expected to take each one as an individual, and shape my actions accordingly?

Sure, you should be expected to take each one as an individual.

Sorry, everything points to Dr. Gates being way out of line here. I don't know if he was tired from traveling, irritated, or arrested 80 times for invented offenses, and I don't care. He crossed the line, and faced the consequences. Except he didn't face the consequences. Most of us would still have a court date; what happened there would be up to the judge and the prosecutor.

Well since I never said he shouldn't face any consequences of any lines he crossed, this is not only irrelevent to my post, it actually illustrates my point. I never condoned any innappropriate or illegal action on his part. I did argue that what is 'reasonable' to you may not equate to 'reasonable' for a person of a different experience.

 

[Steve]

I have to go with Sgt on this one. I doubt that every business around has an official manager working at every waking moment. That being said, where I work, if a business calls to report someone who is no longer wanted there, for whatever reason, ie: loitering, yelling, etc., the police are called and they are sent. What the cop does, again, is his call, depending on what happens when he arrives.

You're acting like that was my opinion. MJS, go back and read what I actually wrote. It's not open for debate. It's not like I made it up. I am very confident that the corporate policies in most, if not all, of the stores in your local mall, you'd find that what I said is true. Most of what you guys disagree with in my posts are things I never said. It's making me feel like I'm on an episode of Candid Camera (Online Version).

 

[Steve]

LEOs generally receive extensive training in dealing with people, and couple that with direct experience.

But the bottom line is that, at some point, the cop has to make a decision whether this person is enough of a problem that they must be dealt with, or if they'll calm down on their own. Sgt. Crowley attempted to de-escalate in a couple of ways. He asked Dr. Gates to step outside, into a more neutral environment.

LOL... so that he could arrest him. Come on...