home

Gates' Statement On The Beer Summit

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 10:59:53 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I thought it quite good. I especially liked this part:

Sergeant Crowley and I, through an accident of time and place, have been cast together, inextricably, as characters – as metaphors, really – in a thousand narratives about race over which he and I have absolutely no control. Narratives about race are as old as the founding of this great Republic itself, but these new ones have unfolded precisely when Americans signaled to the world our country’s great progress by overcoming centuries of habit and fear, and electing an African American as President. It is incumbent upon Sergeant Crowley and me to utilize the great opportunity that fate has given us to foster greater sympathy among the American public for the daily perils of policing on the one hand, and for the genuine fears of racial profiling on the other hand.

Speaking for me only

< Don't Worry. Be Happy | Friday Morning Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Gates' Statement On The Beer Summit | 208 comments (208 topical)
    Perhaps you would prefer a post (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:03:17 AM EST
    on the birthers? Sarah Palin?

    I think this the much more interesting story.

    Sarah who? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Fabian on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:12:59 AM EST
    Don't think I know her.

    Anyone know how the Surgeon General nomination is coming along?  Can we expect another stellar performance from the Republicans?  I need to know if I should stock up on beer and popcorn!

    Parent

    The Surgeon General nomination (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:15:55 AM EST
    does not interest me.

    Perhaps I'll put up an Open Thread so you can discuss it.

    Dawn Johnsen I wonder more about.

    Parent

    Didn't I just see majority of GOP (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:15:01 AM EST
    voters believe Obama wasn't born in U.S.?  

    Parent
    No (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:16:49 AM EST
    You saw that in the South, less than half the people are sure that Obama was born in the US.

    They do not "speculate."

    Parent

    Many are unsure that Hawaii is in the US (none / 0) (#189)
    by esmense on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:17:48 PM EST


    Parent
    I saw one poll (none / 0) (#6)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:16:16 AM EST
    that said 28% of Repubs

    Parent
    And a Dem, Max Baucus (none / 0) (#8)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:16:44 AM EST
    who thinks the fix is for Congress to declare Obama was born at our embassy in Kenya, so I read here.  Huh?

    Parent
    You did not read that here (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:17:10 AM EST


    Parent
    In a comment (none / 0) (#17)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:19:03 AM EST
    not in a post.

    Parent
    It was a joke (5.00 / 0) (#28)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:22:45 AM EST
    A comment referencing a snark diary at dkos I believe.

    I did not think it was particularly funny.

    But that's all subjective.

    Parent

    Uh, CC, you realize that was a joke, right? (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by andgarden on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:18:03 AM EST


    Parent
    Frankly, no, I didn't (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:19:44 AM EST
    see it reported as a joke -- and nothing amazes me anymore from Congress.  Whew, thanks!

    Parent
    Saved from the stalker! (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:32:10 AM EST


    Parent
    Sorry CC (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:47:24 AM EST
    I was the one who linked to that diary.  It was satire making fun of Baucus' bipartisanship fetish.  Didn't mean to mislead anyone.

    Parent
    I'm not whining (none / 0) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:17:09 AM EST
    I'm fine with this paltry fare.

    Parent
    Will you be posting on the "read" (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:26:54 AM EST
    of the AA Sgt. who was at the scene?

    Parent
    Got a link? (none / 0) (#79)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:59:51 AM EST


    Parent
    I do not (none / 0) (#90)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:09:12 PM EST
    but I have another link worthy of comment.

    Parent
    heh, a friend sent me that this morning (none / 0) (#92)
    by andgarden on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:10:36 PM EST


    Parent
    Ha! (none / 0) (#93)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:11:11 PM EST


    Parent
    The other link is funnier (none / 0) (#96)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:15:52 PM EST


    Parent
    Here's (none / 0) (#91)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:10:14 PM EST
    one.

    Parent
    Um (5.00 / 0) (#95)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:15:34 PM EST
    This guy is a little over the top:

    "One of the major problems stemming from the events of July 16 is that I, now known as 'The Black Sergeant,' have had my image plastered all over the Internet, television, and news papers. Subsequently, I have also become known, at least to some, as an 'Uncle Tom.'"

    "Please convey my concerns to the president that Mr. Gates' actions may have caused grave and potentially irreparable harm to the struggle for racial harmony in this country and perhaps throughout the world."

    (Emphasis mine.) I think the Sergeant has proven himself to be a problematic observer on this. I think I can answer oculus' question now - no , I won't be writing about his reaction.


    Parent

    "This guy is a little over the top:" (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:20:15 PM EST
    He's certainly not the only one.

    Parent
    He went (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:21:39 PM EST
    over Mount Everest.

    Parent
    No one does Everest w/o plenty of assistance. (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:26:37 PM EST


    Parent
    I had not thought of the guy at all (5.00 / 0) (#112)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:34:56 PM EST
    until oculus mentioned him.

    So sorry, the "Black Sergeant," as CNN dubbed him (bringing race into it?), climbed over that mountain pretty much on his own.

    Parent

    He had to do Everest, (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:49:48 PM EST
    he wasn't invited to summit Beer.

    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#116)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:51:29 PM EST


    Parent
    Perhaps Prof. Gates (none / 0) (#105)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:26:50 PM EST
    should invite this gentleman to become a co-blogger at his website.

    Parent
    Yes. (I haven't vetted yet!) (none / 0) (#98)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:20:15 PM EST
    CNN

    Parent
    I just did (none / 0) (#101)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:23:03 PM EST
    I answer your question below.

    Parent
    Haven't located your response to (none / 0) (#120)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:57:24 PM EST
    my link.  IMO, and with plenty of speculation, this Sgt., who has much more law enforcement experience than Sgt. Crowley, would not have arrested Prof. Gates for disorderly conduct unless "it went further."  

    Query:  where is this Sgt.'s report.  And where is the report of the officer he states was interviewing the 911 caller?

    Slop job by Cambridge PD report writing wise. That is the job of the fellow who signed off on the initial reports.

    Parent

    I liked this bit.... (5.00 / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:15:48 AM EST
    Thank God we live in a country where speech is protected, a country which guarantees and defends my right to speak out when I believe my rights have been violated; a country that protects us from arrest when we do express our views, no matter how unpopular.

    But do we live in such a country?  What is the country doing to protect us from arrest?  Not enough, not enough.

    You missed this part (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:18:14 AM EST
    Let me say that I thank God that I live in a country in which police officers put their lives at risk to protect us every day, and, more than ever, I've come to understand and appreciate their daily sacrifices on our behalf.

    :)

    Parent

    I saw that bit... (5.00 / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:21:02 AM EST
    just didn't like it as much as the other bit:)...I just can't bring myself to thank the gods for the police...but a nice olive branch from Gates nonetheless.

    Parent
    Gates is very well-spoken in this (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:16:24 AM EST
    piece.  I am still wondering why he so immed. lost it when Sgt. Crowley initially contacted him.  

    All I know... (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:23:13 AM EST
    ...is that you put me through the hassles of airports, security checkpoints and long/multiple flights and I'm pretty worn-out and short tempered.

    Parent
    He was returning.... (none / 0) (#33)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:25:08 AM EST
    it had been hours since he went through a checkpoint.

    Parent
    So what. (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:28:53 AM EST
    It's a tiring, frustrating experience and you just want to get home and relax.  Add to it the frustration of not being able to get in your own front door.  

    It is a cumulative effect.

    Parent

    For all the times I traveled 24 hours (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:41:28 AM EST
    with two toddlers to manage at the same time, it is still possible to be civil. No need to be polite, just civil.


    Parent
    Bully for you. (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:45:50 AM EST
    It's a personal experience and you're not Prof. Gates, are you?  

    You have no idea what his trip involved or what it entailed.  I'm just guessing you didn't get hassled by the cops when you got home either.

    Parent

    Nor do you (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:52:35 AM EST
    know what Gates experience was. Though you do seem to know how impossible it is to be civil.


    Parent
    Never said I did... (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:52:24 PM EST
    ...if you'll read my original comment.  Phrased in first person for a reason.

    And, I've learned everything I know about being "civil" from your comments.  Truly teachable moments.

    Bless your heart.

    Parent

    Inquiring minds want to know: did (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:52:57 AM EST
    Professor Gates fly first/business/or coach class?

    Parent
    Having a police iofficer ask you (4.25 / 4) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:48:59 AM EST
    for ID because he has been dispatched to protect your property is not being "hassled."

    Parent
    In your opinion... (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:57:35 AM EST
    in my opinion, the hassle starts as soon as you see the squad car stop in front of your house.

    We've all got our own definition of hassle Jim.

    Parent

    Now it is all becoming quite clear. (5.00 / 0) (#128)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:09:33 PM EST
    Perhaps, I speculate, Prof. Gates had a stash in side his house or suitcases?  

    Parent
    I don't think so... (5.00 / 0) (#130)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:19:43 PM EST
    I speculate, if that were the case, he woulda done my "yes sir, no sir, can I go sir" routine.

    Standing up for yourself with cops is a much riskier proposition when you're holding...like Ayn Rand was on about (paraphrase)...it is difficult for the state to control the innocent, much easier when they make us criminals.

    Parent

    I really think he must have been (none / 0) (#134)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:24:28 PM EST
    on PCP, but, of course, I can't say that here.

    Parent
    No way... (none / 0) (#139)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:30:39 PM EST
    I've tried PCP (not fun, not fun at all btw)...my guess is all the good Prof was high on was adrenaline.

    Parent
    Some people on PCP have really (5.00 / 0) (#143)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:35:42 PM EST
    strong, inappropriate responses, sometimes violent, really unexplainable,to police contacts.  

    Parent
    I've heard... (5.00 / 0) (#148)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:48:20 PM EST
    the stories about violent people on PCP with super-strength...it had a zombie-fying effect on me, I could barely walk much less go on a violent rampage, but every drug effects everybody differently.

    Parent
    Allow me to suggest (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:26:44 PM EST
    that this incident never would have played out if either or both of the parties had been a little more mellow.

    Parent
    Obviously (5.00 / 0) (#193)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:19:02 PM EST
    But only one of them arrested somebody.

    Parent
    Be that as it may (none / 0) (#196)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:21:06 PM EST
    I don't think he'd be allowed to toke on duty.  This was Cambridge, not Ann Arbor.

    Parent
    Being arrested for (5.00 / 5) (#78)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:59:28 AM EST
    contempt of cop is a bit of a hassle though.

    Parent
    I read the Daily Howler on this (none / 0) (#149)
    by hairspray on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:49:52 PM EST
    and agree with him.  Both men are men of authority in different ways. Both are used to deference.  There was no deference given to either for various reasons. Gates was tired and outraged.  His house had been broken into recently.  One would think he could have been more sanguine.  Crowley was doing his job as he saw it and then became angry because Gates was not being deferential.  So as far as I am concerned, it is mostly about  two men with an ego thing.

    Parent
    Bob Somerby has (1.00 / 1) (#191)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:18:14 PM EST
    disgraced himself on this story imo.

    I will find it hard to read him the same way again.

    I did not realize he that much Stuart Taylor in him.

    I knew he had a fair amount, from his Sotomayor nonsense.

    But I see now he is a "white grievance" guy. Not my type of "progessive" frankly.

    I doubt I'll be reading him much after these revelations about him.

    Parent

    Just not comfy making (5.00 / 0) (#84)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:01:53 PM EST
    such sweeping statements about what constitutes allowable law enforcement behaviors and demands - as if just because someone wears a uniform that implies they are worthy of immediate trust in any situation.  People in uniform can often be held to standards that others at a scene cannot be held to because they are being employed in a specific role or capacity, but just wearing the uniform or being employed in any specific job does not imply that someone should ever be "obeyed" without question.

    Parent
    Nobody is perfect (none / 0) (#66)
    by CST on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:53:24 AM EST
    Especially under stress.  Sometimes people just have bad days.

    Parent
    Ultimately it doesn't matter ... (5.00 / 0) (#131)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:20:10 PM EST
    what he did was deemed legal.

    And being pleasant to cops isn't a guarantee that they will be pleasant in return.

    Most times it's probably wise to be cordial and cooperative.  But sometimes, especially if they're asking you to do something they aren't allowed to ask, you may have to become a bit verbally aggressive.

    I'm not certain that Gates was under any legal obligation to prove to Crowley that he was the lawful resident of the house.

    Parent

    Uh...? (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:31:47 PM EST
    I'm not certain that Gates was under any legal obligation to prove to Crowley that he was the lawful resident of the house.

    So how else would a police officer know, when he was called on a potential breaking and entering (which is a crime), if Gates was supposed to be there or not?  Take his word for it?

    Parent

    Are you a lawyer? (none / 0) (#145)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:42:38 PM EST
    It just seems like that's not a request that someone would be obligated to comply with in their own home.

    Lawyers?  What do you think?

    Parent

    I am (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:45:26 PM EST
    While he may not have a "legal obligation" to produce his ID, Gates would then have been treated as a suspect in a B&E, and hauled off even faster.

    Seems like that would be pretty stupid, to me.

    Parent

    WHat's the probable cause? (none / 0) (#184)
    by Rojas on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:15:14 PM EST
    Potential felony?
    There was no felony!


    Parent
    Anybody know for sure? (none / 0) (#147)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:46:06 PM EST
    I was always under the impression we weren't a "papers please, give me your papers" country...though I always assume we have more rights than we actually have.

    Anybody know the law in Mass for sure?  Is it written you must carry papers at all times? Is it written that you must show papers to the police when asked even, even if you have broken no law?  I must not be googling the right words cuz I can't find sh*t.

    Parent

    I'm not a criminal attorney (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:51:28 PM EST
    But here's how this would play out...

    Crowely called on potential B&E.  Approaches house, sees man inside. Identifies himself as a police officer, and asks with whom he is speaking and does that person have a right to be in the house.  Gates refuses.  Crowely can then arrest him on suspicion of B&E.  Gates can still refuse all he wants.  

    Then Gates goes before a judge on arraignment.  Judge asks if Gates is the proper resident of the house.  Gates says he is.  Judge asks for proof.  Gates a)refuses to show ID and ends up in jail on contempt of court, or b) shows ID and establishes that he is proper resident of house.  Judge dimisses the case.

    How much time, effort and money would be wasted in this scenario?

    Parent

    Time, money, effort... (none / 0) (#154)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:57:49 PM EST
    are all secondary to me...Liberty comes first.  

    I'm just curious as to what the law is...I leave the house without ID all the time, if a cop decides to ask me for papers I don't have for any reason, can I be arrested for that alone?

    Parent

    Are you (none / 0) (#158)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:58:56 PM EST
    suspected of potentially committing a felony when they ask you?

    Parent
    Curious to both actually.. (none / 0) (#161)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:03:39 PM EST
    as a felony suspect...or say maybe I witness something and a cop is questioning me and wants ID, not suspected of commiting a crime.

    Parent
    Some jurisdictions (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:09:32 PM EST
    If they think you witnessed a crime and you refuse to cooperate, they can hold you as a "material witness" until you comply.

    Parent
    Really?... (none / 0) (#181)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:13:57 PM EST
    What if you deny witnessing anything and try to walk away?  Can they legally chain you as a "material witness"?

    Parent
    Sure (none / 0) (#186)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:15:56 PM EST
    it's federal law:

    18 U.S.C. § 3144, commonly referred to as the "material witness statute," provides as follows:

    If it appears from an affidavit filed by a party that the testimony of a person is material in a criminal proceeding, and if it is shown that it may become impracticable to secure the presence of the person by subpoena, a judicial officer may order the arrest of the person and treat the person in accordance with the provisions of section 3142 of this title. No material witness may be detained because of inability to comply with any condition of release if the testimony of such witness can adequately be secured by deposition, and if further detention is not necessary to prevent a failure of justice. Release of a material witness may be delayed for a reasonable period of time until the deposition of the witness can be taken pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.



    Parent
    Plain language (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:19:07 PM EST
    You'd need to have an actual criminal proceeding where the witness' testimony is material, according to that language.  Doesn't seem like it would apply at a preliminary stage of an investigation.

    Parent
    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:22:29 PM EST
    But it was a general answer to a general question.

    Parent
    And it would need to be ... (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:23:27 PM EST
    a federal case too, right?

    Parent
    Yes, unless (5.00 / 1) (#203)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:27:58 PM EST
    some state has a state law  that addresses it.

    Parent
    I think we're talking murder here, not (none / 0) (#187)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:16:15 PM EST
    suspected breaking and entering.

    Parent
    Kdog (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:18:25 PM EST
    just asked if they could hold you for refusing to show id after witnessing a crime - we weren't being specific about the crime.

    Parent
    What if Gates never opened the ... (none / 0) (#159)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:00:27 PM EST
    door?  He conveyed all the information through the closed door?

    The eyewitness testimony was flimsy.  The door had no visible damage.

    Would he have probably cause to break the door down?

    Parent

    Actually (2.00 / 0) (#166)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:07:43 PM EST
    The door did have damage from the previous break-in weeks earlier.

    And the answer to your question, would be, "it depends".  If someone refused to open the door, my guess is that a cop would also have a legitimate suspicion that someone else was in the house and could be preventing the person at the door from opening it (or the person at the door had a weapon, or the person really was a robber and was trying to get rid of the cops).  If that was the case, then yes, a cop could break down the door without a warrant under "exigent circumstances".

    Parent

    It wasn't evident to Crowley ... (none / 0) (#183)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:14:25 PM EST
    he doesn't mention in his police report.  In fact, Gates had to explain it to Crowley while he was being hauled off in handcuffs.

    Parent
    The point is, kdog (none / 0) (#155)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:58:23 PM EST
    your scenario is off - Gates wasn't stopped walking on the street and "asked for his papers" - until the cops could verify who he was and if he had a right to be there - he was a potential suspect in a felony in progress.

    Not giving him his ID has turned into a much larger hassle than being asked questions by the cops upon his return home from a trip to China.

    Parent

    Except (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:08:55 PM EST
    there was no felony in progress.

    At the point where Crowley is talking to Gates, does he still have probable cause to believe there is a felony in progress?  Does he have a reasonable suspicion?  I don't have all the answers, but I think the law requires a cop to use his own two eyes rather than just deputizing him to run around arresting everyone as soon as there's a citizen complaint.

    My impression from the police report is that Crowley figured out pretty early on what was really happening.  He may not have been 100% sure, he may have still wanted to dot his i's, but he pretty much knew.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#179)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:12:41 PM EST
    At the time Crowley approached the door, identified himself as a police officer and that he was there on a suspicion of B&E, and asked Gates who he was - did he know that there was no B&E in progress?

    I don't know.

    Parent

    I wasn't clear... (none / 0) (#168)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:08:45 PM EST
    I'm curious what the rule is in general regarding showing papers, not just specific to this case.  

    I don't think you have to, and can't be arrested for that alone.  

    If you're a felony suspect, you're getting arrested whether you show ID or not if the cop thinks your the guy who committed the felony...but you have the right to remain silent at the time of arrest, which I would think includes not giving the cops your name.

    Parent

    I know nada about MA law, (none / 0) (#163)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:07:17 PM EST
    but, at least in CA, if Sgt. Crowley had a reasonable suspicion Gates was a suspect as to the reported possible breaking and entry of the house, Sgt. Crowley, could ask the person he saw inside the house, i.e., Prof. Gates, to produce id.  Gates didn't have to comply.  But he ran the risk of being arrested for suspected trespass and/or breaking and entering.  

    Parent
    No Probable Cause (5.00 / 0) (#202)
    by squeaky on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:26:35 PM EST
    According to FOX news:

    Fox News Legal Analyst and former New Jersey state Judge Andrew Napolitano told to the conservative network's audience that police broke the law when they arrested Professor Henry Louis Gates for disorderly conduct.

    The law says, unless [a police officer] witnesses a felony...or unless he has a piece of paper from a judge--a search warrant or an arrest warrant--saying "you can go in that house," he can't go in the house. So when Professor Gates said "no you can't come in," and the police went in anyway [the police] violated the federal Constitution.

    think progress


    Parent

    Thanks Oc... (none / 0) (#173)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:10:12 PM EST
    in Cali, do you know what the rule is regarding showing ID if you are not a suspect?

    Parent
    Local police here do what that call (none / 0) (#195)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:19:10 PM EST
    "field" reports.  Ask people on the street who look "suspeicious" for id.  Write report.  That's it.  I've always wondered if that is legal.  The person is in the computer.

    Parent
    Sounds illegal to me... (none / 0) (#201)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:25:37 PM EST
    but I take a most liberal view of the Bill of Rights.

    Parent
    I read that the Gates home had (none / 0) (#152)
    by hairspray on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:52:37 PM EST
    been broken into just a few weeks before and the reason the front door was jammed was because of the previous breaking and entering.

    Parent
    And nobody else has the same problem?? (none / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:30:54 AM EST


    Parent
    most people (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by CST on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:35:59 AM EST
    do not have the cops show up at our house after.  We can sleep/drink it off.  But our housemates sometimes get the raw end of the deal.

    Parent
    Gates did have a night's sleep (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:44:14 AM EST
    having arrived in the U.S. the day before.

    But I well know that jet lag can linger.

    Parent

    Yea (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by CST on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:48:13 AM EST
    plus, spending a night or two in the states is not the same time as spending a night or two at home.

    I had 2 nights in NY after coming back from Africa.  If anything I was more irritable because I just wanted to be home already.

    Parent

    It looks like the excuse (1.00 / 0) (#75)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:57:10 AM EST
    brigade has arrived.

    Parent
    Gates... (5.00 / 0) (#80)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:00:18 PM EST
    doesn't need an "excuse", he didn't break the law.  The other guy did.

    Parent
    You need to read the Daily Howler on (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by hairspray on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:58:50 PM EST
    this.  He describes those who cannot hold two different thoughts at the same time and also describes the tribe mentality.  It goes like this: Him bad, really bad, me good, really good.  If you agree with me you are the member of my tribe.  This site is often quite tribal.  Sommerby goes on to say that this ludicrous liberal behavior which was the cause of the Whalen attacks are what turn the average Joe off. He is on to something.  

    Parent
    Been here a while (5.00 / 2) (#83)
    by CST on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:01:06 PM EST
    There is a difference between an excuse and a reason.  One has to be justified, the other, just understood.

    Parent
    Oh, my. (none / 0) (#94)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:15:13 PM EST
    You really haven't been following my comments on this.

    Parent
    Nope (none / 0) (#107)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:27:06 PM EST
    but that's Jim :)

    Parent
    Known as trickle down stress (5.00 / 3) (#99)
    by CoralGables on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:21:11 PM EST
    take it out of the spouse, who yells at the son, who snaps at his sister, who kicks the dog, who bites the cat, who eats the bird.

    And as the bird sits in the cats mouth all it can think is...what the hell did I do to deserve this?

    Parent

    The only trickle down that comes through (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:04:35 PM EST
    everytime :)

    Parent
    Okay, now start the series (none / 0) (#103)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:25:15 PM EST
    with the bird being the one stressed. Where do all the critters before him fall this time?

    Parent
    You speak of course (5.00 / 3) (#156)
    by CoralGables on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:58:36 PM EST
    of the fairly common but rarely spoken of "trickle up stress". Parents of teenagers are oftentimes diagnosed with this affliction, taking on the role of the bird, often to be found wandering aimlessly and muttering under their breath..."what the hell did I ever do to deserve this".

    Parent
    Didn't he stay in Newark (none / 0) (#55)
    by nycstray on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:44:20 AM EST
    the night before?

    Parent
    Oh, that explains everything. I hate (5.00 / 4) (#58)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:46:32 AM EST
    staying in Newark.

    Parent
    The other day (5.00 / 5) (#63)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:50:25 AM EST
    my daughter was at the dentist, getting a tooth pulled (yes, she's only 2!).  Mentioned that we had originally been referred to some dentist in Newark to do the extraction.  Dentist responded: "What were they going to do, shoot the tooth out?"

    Parent
    Only if it covered under your dental plan (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:53:32 AM EST


    Parent
    Years ago I stayed at a Holiday Inn in (none / 0) (#82)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:00:38 PM EST
    Newark that had a security guard on every floor..

    Made me have flash backs of staying in Moscow..

    "Let me see your papers...."

    Parent

    I was thinking of the Howard Johnson's. (none / 0) (#108)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:28:16 PM EST


    Parent
    I was thinking of the Howard Johnson's. (none / 0) (#109)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:28:16 PM EST


    Parent
    OK Now let's discuss whether your dentist (5.00 / 5) (#77)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:57:43 AM EST
    is a racist.

    Parent
    Ha! (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:00:18 PM EST


    Parent
    Fair question (5.00 / 3) (#88)
    by Steve M on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:04:32 PM EST
    He did seem to be inordinately fond of my blond-haired, blue-eyed daughter.  Could just be that she's incredibly cute, but presuming the best of intentions is such a boring mode of analysis.

    Parent
    Well his statrement just goes (1.00 / 0) (#48)
    by ChiTownMike on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:37:15 AM EST
    to show how disingenuous hes has been through this entire thing:

    "Sergeant Crowley and I, through an accident of time and place,..."

    An accident? It was not accident that he payed the race card on someone who was there doing his job responding to a call to protect the property of the man who would call him a racist for doing so. He played the race card purposely.

    "...in a thousand narratives about race over which he and I have absolutely no control."

    No control? How about your website The Root Skippy where you rant a thousand narratives every day with your staff? How about your on the record threat that you were going to make a documentary about your arrest? How about your treats about a law suit? Those things were out of your control? You have voices in your MAKING  you do all those things?

    Professor Gates is becoming a parody of himself with such statements that don't align with reality at all.

    An Accident! Yeah the White Devil made him say it.

    No Control! Sure. Your life long dedication to being a Black man instead of just a man is out of your control. On the other hand I agree with Skippy because he has no control which is evidenced by his actions and words that are clearly our of control.

    Parent

    For some reason I'm thoroughly (5.00 / 4) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:40:53 AM EST
    tired of the phrase "played the race card".  I'm sick to death of it.

    Parent
    Simply "played" is more like it. (5.00 / 4) (#62)
    by Fabian on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:49:12 AM EST
    I see the baser aspects of human nature on display in this.  The most sympathetic people in the drama are the two ladies, Whalen and the elderly neighbor.  Everyone else is either trying to exploit the situation for personal or political gain, or trying to cover their @ss.  Even Obama.

    Parent
    Don't blame me (1.00 / 0) (#70)
    by ChiTownMike on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:54:05 AM EST
    I didn't play it. Blame Gates.

    Although if you have another term for a supposedly educated mature man who lives in his Blackness who started calling a White police officer a racist then please fell free to use it.

    "Play the xxx card" is a common and frequently used phrase for many things - race being one of them.

    Parent

    Did you read (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:43:16 AM EST
    the transcript (at the Root, his and Washington Post's web site) when his DAUGHTER interviewed him?  That's another amusing one.  Many of the stern questions start with "Daddy,..."  Talk about hard-hitting journalism.

    I hope if nothing else, he uses his experience to help people less fortunate than himself....Sean Bells of the world.  But what do I bet that the Sean Bell's of the world won't be the least bit affected, good or bad, by this whole affair.

    Parent

    Gladly (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by ChiTownMike on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:04:18 PM EST
    I missed that interview. His Daughter huh? Another example of him having NO CONTROL over the narrative? Gezz!

    Parent
    Dr. Gates is smart, so I don't see (2.00 / 0) (#167)
    by hairspray on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:08:38 PM EST
    him as a victim at all.  So you are not wrong in seeing his ability to "milk" this.  Officer Crowley for all of his training allowed his ego to bring him into this and fell into a trap by not being smart about this.  

    Parent
    Sheesh (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:13:01 PM EST


    Parent
    Let's not start speculating now :) (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:18:03 AM EST


    Parent
    Or snarking. (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:19:17 AM EST


    Parent
    Maybe if Gates (none / 0) (#37)
    by Fabian on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:26:04 AM EST
    knew what he was saying was going to covered by the national media he might have been more temperate.

    That's the problem with ye olde fifteen minutes of fame - you don't always get to choose which fifteen minutes are featured in the headlines.

    Christians should know that this concept - it's one of the New Testament parables.

    Parent

    It's a nice piece (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by andgarden on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:17:34 AM EST
    He's being asked to swallow a significant amount of pride, and I'd say he's handling it pretty well.

    I respect his acknowledgement (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:18:53 AM EST
    of law enforcement's responsibilities.  

    Parent
    And the pride that officer Crowley has (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:19:09 AM EST
    swallowed?  I just can't shut up about it

    Parent
    We all know Sgt. Crowley can't write (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:20:05 AM EST
    worth a d*mn.

    Parent
    He is. . .creative however (5.00 / 0) (#23)
    by andgarden on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:20:57 AM EST


    Parent
    I represented a law enforcement officer (5.00 / 5) (#31)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:24:08 AM EST
    in the civil case following an "officer-involved shooting," which means the officer fired his service weapon into a human being.  The officer majored in creative writing.  I was always a bit worried about that coming out at trial.

    Parent
    How many such cases?? (none / 0) (#68)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:53:40 AM EST


    Parent
    How many cases where my client (none / 0) (#110)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:32:13 PM EST
    majored in creative writing?  Just this one.  Officer-involved shooting?  One civil, one prosecuting the person who was shot (through and through the stomach).  He was acquitted and the law enforcement sgt. was later disciplined the lost his rank. Messed up case.  Big time.

    Parent
    And you? (none / 0) (#111)
    by ChiTownMike on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:32:55 PM EST
    malicious creativity? Based on no evidence? Based on hearsay from those with no evidence? Just following the heard?

    And you want to be an attorney? lol

    FWIW just what do you base your accusations on - if anything?

    Parent

    I just love you (none / 0) (#26)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:21:28 AM EST


    Parent
    I've said my bit on him (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by andgarden on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:20:32 AM EST


    Parent
    You know, Sgt. Crowley, I'm (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:22:11 AM EST
    speculating, has been cut off at the knees by his own department, which publicized its recommendation to the prosecutor's office the latter not issue a complaint against Prof. Gates.  

    Parent
    Heh (5.00 / 0) (#30)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:23:31 AM EST
    No snark please.

    Parent
    Which blog do you recommend I (none / 0) (#34)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:25:16 AM EST
    transfer my allegiance too?

    Parent
    The Onion (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:25:50 AM EST


    Parent
    To late, (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by andgarden on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:27:00 AM EST
    sold to the Chinese.

    Parent
    My new favorite.... (none / 0) (#49)
    by oldpro on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:38:20 AM EST
    "...other assorted chinkery dinkery"...

    Parent
    Race-tinged humor. (none / 0) (#171)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:09:44 PM EST


    Parent
    He has his meal ticket IMO (none / 0) (#32)
    by andgarden on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:24:25 AM EST


    Parent
    His job is secure. I meant his pride. (none / 0) (#36)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:26:01 AM EST


    Parent
    I think andgarden (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:26:49 AM EST
    is referencing other meal tickets.

    But there I go again, speculating . . .

    Parent

    Free donuts? Fast track promotion? (none / 0) (#43)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:29:16 AM EST
    A run for public office?

    Parent
    A slot on Fox of course (none / 0) (#113)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:36:27 PM EST


    Parent
    With Ricci? I hope Sgt. Crowley (none / 0) (#174)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:10:22 PM EST
    si the more articulate.

    Parent
    and Joe the Plumber (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:12:17 PM EST


    Parent
    You suppose Crowley got a cold one (none / 0) (#114)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:41:08 PM EST
    to go for him?

    Parent
    Oh, I thought (none / 0) (#153)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:56:14 PM EST
    andgarden meant Gates got his meal ticket - another documentary, and maybe a Presidential Blue Ribbon Commission?

    Parent
    I think (5.00 / 0) (#160)
    by CST on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:01:00 PM EST
    Gates was doing just fine for himself before this whole episode.  It's not like he wasn't already famous.

    Parent
    Famous-ish. (none / 0) (#175)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:10:50 PM EST
    Now he's famouser.

    Parent
    He's hardly (5.00 / 0) (#185)
    by CST on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:15:55 PM EST
    in need of a "meal ticket".  And I don't think this is the kind of fame he's really looking for.  But that's just speculation on my part.

    Parent
    I never heard of him (none / 0) (#188)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:17:01 PM EST
    But that's just me.

    Parent
    no kidding (3.50 / 2) (#200)
    by CST on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:24:33 PM EST
    you sure do make plenty of assumptions about him though.

    Parent
    I don't see it (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:21:03 AM EST
    It's a nice piece, but I don't see where he swallowed any pride.  He said, in a lengthier way, exactly what Crowley said - we agree to disagree, but we will move forward and focus on the future.

    Parent
    I liked it too (5.00 / 2) (#162)
    by Jjc2008 on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:05:25 PM EST
    I believe Gates is the right person at the right time to put the right spin on this.
    Policing can be perilous and in fact, I remember my father telling me how he tried to tell the young cops, that domestic calls were often the most perilous.  Sometimes getting a call for a break in ended up being about a spouse breaking into their own home to get at the spouse residing there and ended violently for many.  Sometimes, a simple call from a mother (as in Pittsburg) ends up in danger and violence for the police.  

    I believe also he put the right spin on this.  Racial profiling is still frightening and dangerous particularly for men of color.  

    I believe as I said before that two decent men were caught in a situation.  And despite the fact that mistakes were made, both are capable of learning from the situation and letting us learn along with them.

    The best quote (5.00 / 3) (#205)
    by lentinel on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 06:15:28 PM EST
    is from Gates himself.

    According to Sargeant Lashley, Gates said that he was being arrested, "because a white woman called the police".

    Charming.

    There is on thing that sticks in my craw! (2.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Gerald USN Ret on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:00:34 PM EST
    Gates is supposed to be a professor who is an expert on the Black Experience and he doesn't know what "racial profiling" is.

    I noticed that the Black Police Chief of Atlanta, GA, who works for a Black Mayor as well, said that "racial profiling" was not involved, that Sgt Crowley was sent to the Gates residence in answer to a 911 call.

    As for the charges being dismissed indicating that Sgt Crowley was wrong, I put that to political interference and preference.  Gates was defended verbally by the Black Mayor of Cambridge, the Black Governor of Mass, and the Black President of the USA.

    He does know (5.00 / 0) (#124)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    You just disagree with his preliminary assessment that he was a victim of it.

    I do too.

    I imagine he did not know all the facts when he said that. Then again, he might not have been thinking clearly at the time, having been arrested for contempt of cop.

    But he does know what racial profiling is.

    Parent

    Except (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:13:05 PM EST
    He made the comments before he was arrested.

    Parent
    Good for you. I don't have the energy any more... (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:33:53 PM EST


    Parent
    Energy for what? (none / 0) (#165)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:07:43 PM EST


    Parent
    Actually (none / 0) (#164)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:07:28 PM EST
    that strengthens my argument.

    Not sure what you think that is supposed to mean.

    Parent

    Phew (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by CST on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:23:38 PM EST
    You have proven that you know how to spell black.

    I'm not sure what your point is about this:

    "the Black Police Chief of Atlanta, GA, who works for a Black Mayor as well, said that "racial profiling" was not involved"

    emphasis mine.

    Imagine that, not all black people think alike.

    The charges were dropped because they were stupid charges to begin with.

    Parent

    Nope, not true (1.00 / 0) (#41)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:28:33 AM EST
    Sergeant Crowley and I, through an accident of time and place,

    Gates instigated the whole affair. All he had to do was produce some ID and not raise heck at the person dispatched to protect his property and none of what has happened would have happened.

    Oh I think we can walk it back even (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:30:17 AM EST
    further than that.  If whoever jammed the door and left a footprint hadn't done so, none of this would have happened.  

    Parent
    No we can't (none / 0) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:55:10 AM EST
    And I think down deep you know we can't.

    Parent
    I thnk that was snark (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:03:24 PM EST


    Parent
    Or a teachable moment (none / 0) (#102)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:25:14 PM EST


    Parent
    This is a kumbaya moment. (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Fabian on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:41:06 AM EST
    Standard narrative:
    "Mistakes were made, lessons were learned and now we are already to move forward and put this behind us."

    Pinning the blame on anyone doesn't fit the narrative.

    Parent

    Was it the beer talking? (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:45:20 AM EST
    My preference is always to have people acknowledge the mistakes they personally made. It makes it more difficult to repeat them without looking foolish.

    Sincerity has to include "I" somewhere in the message.

    Parent

    When was the last time (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Fabian on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:53:43 AM EST
    you heard any public apology without weaselly wording or carefully couched phrases or precisely parsed wording?

    The other problem is that legally it's never a good idea to say "I'm guilty!  I admit it!  It was all my fault!".  Better to sound sincerely contrite while admitting as little responsibility as possible.

    Parent

    "I'm sorry you were offended" (5.00 / 5) (#71)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:55:09 AM EST


    Parent
    Absolutely. (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by Fabian on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:56:24 AM EST
    If you want to teach your children how to be responsible citizens, never use politicians as a role model.  Instant fail.

    Parent
    Well....the next time I get stopped (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by oldpro on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:05:51 PM EST
    for speeding, I'm NOT gonna use "I'm sorry you were offended, officer" as a conversational opening.  I'm sticking with my usual Doonesbury defense..."guilty, guilty, guilty!"  plus, "Oh, geez.  How fast was I going, officer?"

    Parent
    and the answer is (5.00 / 3) (#106)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:27:04 PM EST
    As fast as I said you were

    Parent
    Yes, I know, but it sure would be nice (5.00 / 3) (#86)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:03:41 PM EST
    to see a really honest admission to what part these people played in their own troubles. Now, that would be a teaching moment!

    I can dream :)

    Parent

    You are hopelessly old fashioned. (5.00 / 3) (#74)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:56:53 AM EST
    Did you hear the latest musings of the two players whose 2003 positive steroid tests were revealed recently?  Along the lines of you know me, I'm always straight with my fans.  I will check to see what that test showed was in my body and get back to you.

    Parent
    now that i've seen his statement (none / 0) (#118)
    by The Last Whimzy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:53:41 PM EST
    i feel so much better about saying i totally understand why gates responded the way he did.

    not saying it was right.  but i understand it.


    Parent

    that's a great statement (none / 0) (#117)
    by The Last Whimzy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:51:55 PM EST
    spot on .
    But about the narratives (none / 0) (#119)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 12:57:10 PM EST
    over which they and others had control and bully pulpits, let's hope the teaching moment turned into learning moments.

    What would you have them learn? (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:07:19 PM EST
    I was no fan of this "teachable moment" nonsense but I also think it is clear that there is great disagreement about this incident.

    Parent
    hopefully crowley learned (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by The Last Whimzy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:25:00 PM EST
    that walking away from a situation is sometimes the wisest thing to do.  and he will be a better cop going forward.

    hopefully gates learned that accusing a cop of being racist just because he is rude, white and a cop is unhelpful with respect to the larger issue of race. that is always with us.

    Parent

    Supposing this is true (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:11:07 PM EST
    I still am amazed at the idea that the person to worry about here was not the one with the gun and the handcuffs.

    Weird to me.

    Parent

    Bottom rail on top (none / 0) (#190)
    by Rojas on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:18:06 PM EST


    Parent
    well it's wierd to me (none / 0) (#204)
    by The Last Whimzy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:31:58 PM EST
    to not worry about a scholar on race accusing a cop of being racist.  i'm ready to move on because i think gates has stopped calling the incident racially motivated (chance encounter now), but i'm still not inclined to agree gates had no authority or power in the situation.

    no guns or handcuffs on gates, but guns and handcuffs are not the only weapons that exist in this world.


    Parent

    What evidence have you Sgt. Crowley (1.00 / 0) (#177)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:12:04 PM EST
    was rude to Prof. Gates?  (Yes, it was pretty rude to arrest him, but I mean before that.)

    Parent
    just for the sake of argument (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by The Last Whimzy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:23:48 PM EST
    i'm changing my tone on this now that, well, it appears to me that gates has dropped the racist charge, and people, in general have stopped calling crowely (or whalen) a racist.

    but anyway, in my dealings with cops, here's the problem.

    cops investigate crime and make arrests every day.  it's what happens to them everyday, and they forget that when they deal with a citizen that that citizen does not deal with cops every day, and that when dealing with the cops it is very easy to assume the worst about what will happen to you.

    it's almost (not exactly, just almost) like a doctor patient thing.  and if you remember that william hurt movie "the doctor" where the doctor gets cancer and then has to be a patient and see what it's like, it is then he learns something about bedside manner.

    Parent

    According to the tapes (none / 0) (#182)
    by jbindc on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:14:07 PM EST
    Crowely was calm and cool throughout (not my opinon - but the opinions of those who heard it).

    Parent
    To get the facts (none / 0) (#138)
    by Cream City on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:29:19 PM EST
    and pick their fights.

    Parent
    Hmm (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 02:10:01 PM EST
    Not sure that there is much learning in that.

    Indeed, it seems to depend on your viewpoint as to whom you think needs to learn those lessons it seems to me.

    Parent

    Question (none / 0) (#121)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:00:26 PM EST
    Will this incident get one-fifteenth the coverage as Gates/Crowley?

    Of course, it should get much more.  But it won't in large part because no one involved has a business relationship with the Washington Post.

    Without even clicking it (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:06:26 PM EST
    My answer is a question - will the President comment on it?

    Parent
    But his comments on healthcare are (none / 0) (#127)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:09:17 PM EST
    capable of garnering little attention :)

    Parent
    I doubt it (none / 0) (#132)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:23:32 PM EST
    But the Gates/Crowley story was a national story prior to Obama commenting on it.  The Washington Post ran at least one article on the front page prior to that press conference.  And it's not like Cambridge is a suburb of DC.  They also ran an oped on the same subject the day of the press conference.

    Parent
    News flash: NYT front page above (none / 0) (#137)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:28:53 PM EST
    the fold:  photo of beer drinking meet up.  Article is on A10.  This is encouraging.

    CD, what was the date on the WaPo Gates story (none / 0) (#142)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:35:01 PM EST
    Without googling it, I'd guess July 20th.

    July 21st (none / 0) (#144)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 01:39:06 PM EST
    And my bad, it was on page A4.

    Parent
    Crowley can't apologize if pending litigation (none / 0) (#206)
    by diogenes on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 06:58:41 PM EST
    Gates has made various strong hints about filing lawsuits about this case; Crowley has to be very careful about what he says in light of this.

    Amazing Suspension of Disbelief at TL (none / 0) (#207)
    by squeaky on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 08:15:20 PM EST
    Some commenters here believe that whatever the police say must be true, no matter what. Even go so far as to quote a police but characterize it as from Gates himself, and his best quote:

    The best quote (3.50 / 2) (#205)
    by lentinel on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 06:15:28 PM EST
    is from Gates himself.
    According to Sargeant Lashley, Gates said that he was being arrested, "because a white woman called the police".

    Charming.

    While you fantasize about what Gates has said as told by the Police here is what Gates actually has actually done aka reality:

    Wendy Murphy, attorney and spokeswoman for Lucia Whalen, said today that Gates had sent her client a bouquet of flowers as an "expression of gratitude.'' Murphy, who is not a gardener, said she believed it was a bouquet of tulips. The flowers came with a note from Gates, the contents of which Murphy would not disclose.

    "[Whalen] said that she really appreciated it,'' Murphy said. "She's been getting a lot of apologies and people have been saying nice things."
    Equipment: guns, cuffs, baton, spray, taser, Wits! (none / 0) (#208)
    by Gerald USN Ret on Sat Aug 01, 2009 at 12:11:55 AM EST
    We ask our police to engage a spectrum of people, and they never are sure who their next encounter will be.

    Sgt Crowley didn't know who was in the house when he approached it.  According to the police dispatch from him, he was assuming that there were two black males.   He wasn't sure for a while if Gates was who he said he was.  He wasn't even sure if this might be that worst dilemma of all for policemen, a domestic problem which most police agree is probably one of the most dangerous of all.

    Gates, made matters much worse by appearing agitated, and angry, and refusing to be accommodating to Sgt Crowley's questions.  Sgt Crowley didn't know if this anger would lead to an attack.  Sure some say, the Prof was old, and lame, but a gun or a knife make up for that deficiency very quickly.

    Sgt Crowley arrested him for refusing to calm down, for making a disturbance, and also I am pretty sure to make sure that Prof Gates was "under control"  so that the situation could be secured.  These kinds of arrest are made all over the country every day.

    Yes, Gates was released without charges, but was this because the arrest was wrong, or was it because the black mayor of Cambridge, the black Governor of Mass, and the black President of the USA, were friends with Gates and wanted him to be released?

    Many times a white person is released under very similar circumstances, with similar kinds of powerful white political friends, and the black community is all outraged at the politics, and the favoritism.

    And I must also point out that the brave competent Sgt never drew his gun.  

    I don't think Prof Gates will sue.  That is just an idle threat for effect.  If he sued he would be open to a pretty unflattering examination by the lawyers, and the public.

    Gates' Statement On The Beer Summit | 208 comments (208 topical)