Police arrived at Gates's Ware Street home near Harvard Square at 12:44 p.m. to question him. Gates, director of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research at Harvard, had locked himself out of his house and was trying to get inside.I bet he did exhibit "loud and tumultuous behavior." I likely would too. Actually, I wouldn't. But I don't work for Harvard. And my mother taught me how black men are to address the police.He was booked for disorderly conduct after "exhibiting loud and tumultuous behavior," according to the Cambridge police log.
He was booked for disorderly conduct after "exhibiting loud and tumultuous behavior," according to the Cambridge police log.
Friends of Gates said he was already in his home when police arrived. He showed his driver's license and Harvard identification card, but was handcuffed and taken into police custody for several hours last Thursday, they said.
Dig the word from his boy:
Of course not. That would be racism! Committed by racists!! Real-live racists!! In Cambridge![S. Allen] Counter has faced a similar situation himself. The well-known neuroscience professor, who is also black, was stopped by two Harvard police officers in 2004 after being mistaken for a robbery suspect as he crossed Harvard Yard. They threatened to arrest him when he could not produce identification.
"This is very disturbing that this could happen to anyone, and not just to a person of such distinction," Counter said. "He was just shocked that this had happened, at 12:44 in the afternoon, in broad daylight. It brings up the question of whether black males are being targeted by Cambridge police for harassment."
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
"And my mother taught me how black men are to address the police."
He knows this too. He's talked before about how when he first started spending summers on Martha's Vineyard, he made a point to go introduce himself to the local police, so they would be familiar with he he is and less likely to give him crap.
I'm glad I saw this report you posted, because teh ones I've been able to fidn so far make it seem like all this happened while he was on his porch, still trying to get into his house. Given what this report says, the cops sound wronger than a mofo. I'm firmly Team Skip unless and until some damning info comes out about what actually happened that suggests he was wrong.
"I'm glad I saw this report you posted, because teh ones I've been able to fidn so far make it seem like all this happened while he was on his porch, still trying to get into his house."
Seconded
He probably introduced himself to the local 'small-town police' force -- Harvard's -- as well.
There's a reason University police tend to encourage students not to go to the city force with problems.
We should all be respectful to police officers. Sounds like Gates wants to be given respect but is a bit stingy when it come to doling it out... unless your skin is the right color.
Racist cop? I'm not so sure. Gates is cranky because of the weight of that giant chip on his shoulder. He even hates himself because he is 50% white. (Check it out, confirmed by a recent DNA test.)
I'm not racist or anything, but they did find little bits of crack sprinkled all over him, right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7F50Cd8LME
Thanks for that. I'm really missing Dave about right now. We need his comical insight about what we are facing as a nation and with a AA President. I can only imagine the ratings gold Comedy Central would be getting with The Dave Chappell show.
I dunno what to say to the fact that Dave Chapelle is the unicorn chaser to this story.
I needed that too... dunno what to say to the fact that Dave Chapelle is the unicorn chaser to this story.
first thing I thought of too. what kind of person breaks in to a house and puts up pictures of themselves all over the place
That's stand-up comedy at its best, especially given the circumstances.
-sertleşme
"It brings up the question of whether black males are being targeted by Cambridge police for harassment."
Some might suggest it answers the question.
Boy HOWDY. This is so horrific.
So much for "post-racial America," indeed.
All I've got to say is that it's worth reading the arrest report before drawing conclusions.
I want to know in what sane universe is "being loud and tumultuous" on your front lawn an arresting offense. Arresting someone for yelling at you -- whether other people can see/hear it or not -- is unconscionable. So much of police conduct and procedure is predicated around obtaining compliance and not actual safety, it's insane.
I've trained people in professional crisis and physical attack responses for seven years now. This sort of conduct pisses me off, ethically and professionally.
At least in DC, the charge of disorderly conduct requires that someone do something that could provoke others to violence. I suspect that's why the officer took pains to write that there were seven people outside the home when Gates was yelling. Again in DC, cops are held to a higher standard for provocation, such that yelling and swearing at them alone doesn't count as disorderly conduct. They're supposed to be able to resist this provocation, and thus not create the cause of the charge. That group of onlookers being around, however, likely sustains enough for a prima facie case of disorderly.
This Sergeant wrote one hell of a report. Note, police reports are adversarial and rhetorical documents. They are designed to convince readers, such as prosecutors and supervisors, that the police officer did his job correctly and that the suspect was justifiably arrested. Everything in that report could be literally true, but the officer left out a lot of stuff that you and I might find to be pertinent. For instance, what actual words did the officer use to "ask[] if [Gates] would step out onto the porch and speak with me?" How much time passed during this conversation? We get a few select quotations from Gates, but I'm sure there was a lot more said between them, likely things leading up to Gates making his pronouncements about black men in America. The Sergeant wrote it to make it sound like Gates just broke that shit out of nowhere, but in fact he left out everything that he himself said. In reality, human beings have conversations and don't speak is periphrases like "I assured Gates that I was responding to a citizen's call to the Cambridge Police Department." Periphrasis like that is what makes a good police report: it makes it sound like the officer used rational, official, and measured words, while the suspect by contrast used heated, out-of-the-blue, and irrational language.
I'll reiterate: this Sergeant may not be lying. In fact, he'd be foolish to do so, given Gates's stature. Rather, while he's probably truthfully reports this incident, he's also framing the story. Police reports are not objective documents. They are the first step in our adversarial court system. Reporting one side of the story--the officer's--is precisely what police reports do. In that, at least, this Sergeant did a good job.
I second Erik and Motion here. ("Second Motion." Heh.)
First, the charge, as Erik says is incredibly weak. Second, as Motion says, the arrest report is the strongest case for the arrest that will ever get made. So taking the arresting officer's side of the story without any evidence or any response from Gates, the charge is still weaker than the tea in Boston Harbor.
I'm a police brat. I love cops. I also grew up around them. Looking at this as sympathetically as I can I have to say this was an optional arrest. It's really a reflection of the police officer's judgment, and here I would have to say he judged very poorly.
The police report suggests that the cop faced a significant exercise in 'conflict resolution.' She failed miserably.
Mercifully nobody got shot -- but it's worth keeping her off the streets before something really goes awry.
Hmm. Mistook Lucia Whalen and Carlos Figueroa for each other. The cop was a 'he.' I am surprised that the 'informant's' name wasn't redacted, by the way.
Post racial America . . . ummm hmmm.
Deal with it, Cate Blanchett!
I had forgotten about that Tracy Morgan thing until you posted this. LOL!
It's a classic moment in post-racial American television... :P
wait what are you guys talking about?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/12/tracy-morgans-golden-glob_n_157057.html
It is not just how "how black men are to address the police." My father taught me that the police are men with badges, guns, and limmited education and if one wishes to survive an encounter with them there are a few rules that one should obey
1. No sudden moves. Keep your hands where they can see them and well away from your body unless instructed to do otherwise. You do not want to make an armed man angry or even worse scared.
2. Always adress the oficer with the utmost of respect. If you know the proper form of adress use it (oficer, sargent, ranger, sherif, and c.). If not sir is acceptable.
3. Comply with all instructions and begin the encounter with a greeting that indicates your co-operative attitude. "How can I help you officer?", works.
4. Do not try to get justice from the cop. Try to not get killed. The lawyers and the judges can sort out who is right and who is wrong later.
I cannot tell you how many of my friends an aquaintences have gone to jail because, "He can't talk to me that way." If you have a badge and a gun you may address me in any abusive way you wish. If a cop calls me "dumb ass", my only reply is "Yes sir."
I understand that my interactions with the police are much easier because I am white but I never forget who has the gun.
This is excellent information for every white, black, brown and red parent in America.
Thank you.
The more responsible cops I know went into it after a few years of military service because it was the best use of their skills, and a familiar environment to continue their professional careers (and they very much consider themselves professionals). The violent yahoos usually went into the police academy right out of high school because they were in possession of a D- average and a Hey! I GET A GUN!! power trip.
And that's before you add racism to the mix.
Having an uncle (Dad's brother in law) who was one of the power hungry, ignoramus cops helped me to internalize my father's advice.
Should he ever be stopped by the police, for any reason, our instructions to our adolescent AA son, which we reiterated,over the years, on a regular basis: KISS ASS 'TIL WE GET THERE!
My fathers advice also included a recomendation that if you see a cop smile, wave and act like you are glad to see him. This will help you to avoid situations where you have to invoke the other recomendations.
Of course there's a counterpoint to this from the police side: invading someone's home -- which they did to Gates -- is a recipe for disaster.
::sigh:: As a white mom of a multiracial son in a mostly white town 35 miles from Cambridge I guess I've been keeping my head in the sand about this issue. The police here work hard to have a positive presence in the schools and community. As our town becomes more diverse and my son gets older and travels more outside our community I will keep these rules in mind.
Those seem like pretty good rules. I might add one more:
5. While discoursing with the officer, omit the phrase "You don't know who you're messing with" from your vocabulary.
There's a fair chance the story will make the front 'page' of the bbc website (down on the lower right with the international puff pieces). "You don't know who I am" may have been a stupid and arrogant thing to say, but also fair warning.
It's not, generally, good for a policeman's career to make national news.
My guess is that Gates would not have been arrested had he not tried to establish dominance over the cop. A city police sergeant (of whatever race) may find it difficult to back down and walk away, in front of an audience of his subordinate officers, university cops, and civilians.
But then, maybe Professor Gates got the outcome he wanted. Anyway, Fall semester in his lecture should be pretty interesting.
Larry, I also like your four rules very much. #4 is especially wise - "Do not try to get justice from the cop. Try to not get killed." I have always called this Realpolitik.
Limited education...Cops?! How about you, Larry?
"Limited"... "address"... "officer"... "sergeant"... "acquaintances"... Maybe your dad should have helped you with your homework instead of filling your head with nonsense. The cops are the good guys, dummy.
If a cop called you dumb ass, he may be right!
Never forget that the police are the thin blue line before order and chaos. Make fun of them here but when you hear a window break downstairs at 3:00 am and your family is in jeopardy, are you gonna call the police or the ACLU.
I agree with you completely!
Actually, I'm sure he was being loud. I don't know what "tumultuous" means in this context, sounds like somebody at the PD wanted to say rambunctious but thought that that implied too much hilarity so they picked up a thesaurus. Anyway, what the hell? Cops got a problem with leaving a guy in his house? I don't care if he's in there yelling "Lil? I'm drunk. And you know something?It's beautiful." Its his house. Get out.
I don't care if he's in there yelling "Lil? I'm drunk. And you know something?It's beautiful." Its his house. Get out.
This. Exactly.
"Tumultuous" is a word that comes up a few times in the Mass. criminal code to refer to out-of-control behavior that is properly subject to being controlled by law enforcement. It doesn't have any particular legal significance here that I'm aware of, but there is every reason to think that it is part of the officer's general vocabulary for describing situations that resulted in arrests.
Well, then I guess someone read a legal document and substituted a legal conclusion for a statement of facts. I guess that's Mass Code for "stark raving mad." I was watching Hung last night and the protagonist yells at the police about harassing him for peeing in the lake and not too kindly tells him to get off his property. No he was not arrested...
Anyway, campus police, huh. Yeah, that says everything.
I want to know who the A.P. talked to, because this is what they're running:
"Black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. is accusing a Massachusetts police department of racism after being arrested while trying to get into his locked home near Harvard University.
Police say they were called to the home Thursday afternoon after a woman reported seeing a man try to pry open the front door.
They say that they ordered the man to identify himself and that Gates refused. According to a police report, Gates then called the officer a racist and said, "This is what happens to black men in America."
The fact that there are conflicting accounts here makes me leery of jumping to conclusions. If you're a cop, and you've received a call from some anonymous source about a man breaking into a house, you'd want that person to show you some proof that they do in fact live there. If that person refused, you'd probably take them into custody.
Craig T,
That's assuming that the police account being given in that story is accurate, and not some CYA bullshit. It is not unheard of for policemen to give inaccurate, sometimes even false accounts of what really happenned in circumstances such as these.
Well, I'm not assuming it, I'm just saying that there isn't enough information here to arrive at an informative conclusion. Of course the cops' statement could be bullshit, as could be the assertions of Professor Gates' friends (bullshit isn't really the right word - they could just be backing up the word of someone who they believe is trustworthy).
The point is, if the cops are telling the truth, then Gates really doesn't deserve to be lionized. Over on Freeper or another wingnut site, they probably posted the AP story and the commenters are all calling him just another uppity, privileged you-know-what, I'd just hate to think that I'm one of those people in reverse, seeing stories like this from a political angle before I actually know what happened.
Haha. Yeah. I had a law school professor who called police testimony testilying. And after reading through a bunch of this shit, I'd say it's a pretty accurate term.
The source wasn't anonymous. According to the police report, it was his neighbor, Lucia Whalen, and she was with the cop when Gates first came out of his house.
yeah, but what type of neighbor calls the cops on her own neighbor for breaking into his own house?? she didn't recognize him?? the luggage wasn't a tip-off??
Yes, I don't get the fact that the neighbor called... Prof. Gates is pretty easy to recognize, and they are neighbors ostensibly.
Read some other sources, because the Statement that Gates' lawyer and the police report both concur that he showed his driver's license, and his Harvard ID, both of which had his photo on it and the license had his address in it. Also, the Campus police arrived to and confirmed that he was Henry Louis Gates and it was his house, however, since the local police were called, they could not intervene in not having him arrested.
Wow. Thanks for the link -- as Teknontheou says, the AP story everybody's picking up has far fewer details.
Real-live racists!! In Cambridge
NO, nothing to see here -- racism is the provence of the South and Republicans.
In the North, liberals and academic elites are POST-racial and spontaneously create colorblind communities.
You know, the sarcasm would be funnier if not for the busing mess in the 70s. Nobody who's lived in Boston would call it post-racial.
maybe the DNA testing that he did revealing how european he is has still got him tripping. well we have been beating up on the South a lot these days so for fairness sake perhaps we should revist integration/busing in southie
Let's hope that one of Gates's white colleagues (such as Alan Dershowitz) has to break into his own house sometime soon. Let's see if the Cambridge cops arrest Dershowitz for being loud and tumultuous.
If "loud and tumultuous" were a crime in Cambridge, Dershowitz would have been in the can long ago.
What I was kind of hoping for is that Gates is paranoid enough to have video survalence installed in his home.
No comments. Sad. Very sad.
The ability of little people in positions of big authority to abuse their positions never ceases to amaze me.
assuming that the version of events presented in the article Coates links is closest to the truth, i would imagine that Prof. Gates, especially since he teaches African American Studies, is thinking something along the lines of, "no one would even look twice at this situation if I wasn't a famous Harvard professor." Even though it's just as f-d up. Old man gets arrested trying to get into his own house. Something analogous probably happens a thousand times a day easily. At least they didn't rough him up.
It may happen a thousand times a day, but that doesn't make it right.
There's definately a race dynamic here, but there's also a power dynamic here as well. Unfortunately when a certain species of insecure person gets placed in a position of power they demand defference as a right, rather than expecting professionalism.
The difference being that professionalism may include deference but a professional recognizes that there is a certain fairness inherent in any position of power. One must give as well as take. An admission of error when necessary in accordance with fairness is a sign of leadership that wears its power loosely and well. Refusing to admit error, or defensiveness when confronted with error is a sign of insecurity and unfitness for power.
Just my two cents.
Agreed. What I meant to say was that this is only even garnering attention because of the man's fame and very high position and esteem; otherwise, I suspect, it would be just another routine occurrence, and I don't doubt that Prof. Gates is aware of this. Another thing to make him mad, or sad.
"Tumultuous"? Have you seen Skip Gates? The man is over 60, of smallish/medium build, walks with a slight limp, and no one in any account of this story says he was armed. Therefore the officers could not possibly have felt threatened. If a man wants to raise hell for being treated like a criminal in his own home who can blame him?
Hell, here in NYC a man got SHOT AND KILLED for asking an undercover cop to leave his (the man's) porch, where he (the cop) had been sitting uninvited. That's a considerable step past being treated like a criminal in one's home.
http://www.neb.rr.com/news/news/article/rr/9001/8327205/Man_shot_dead_in_scuffle_with_NYC_cop_on_his_stoop/full/
Looks like a black man still has to take what's given him and not talk back. It's simply sickening.
We covered this story here previously on this very blog. It was a terrible tragedy and looks to be a good example of some really bad policing.
One thing we should insist on, and that is sticking to the facts, which you are NOT doing. The man, Walker, attacked the undercover cop when the cop didn't respond to his demand that he (the cop) leave. The way you have stated the situation is completely dishonest. Stick to the facts, which are damning enough to the NYPD and the officer that escalated his getting his ass kicked into his taking another man's life.
I do not think you can claim ignorance of the facts of the case, since they've been laid out both here
http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/07/another_police_killing.php
and elsewhere in the news.
Exactly right. I know Dr. Gates. He's about 5'6" inches tall and the last time I saw him he weighed no more than 140lbs. He is at least 60 years old, bespeckled and even when casually dressed, looks like he stepped out of a Cheever short story. Obviously a thug.
Is he actually bespeckled? Or did you mean to say he wears glasses?
He was bespeckled the last tome anna spotted him.
So sad and upsetting. My brother almost got arrested for breaking into our house (this was when me and him were both in high school) he forgot his key and of course was locked out, and someone in the neighborhood called the police on him. I guess they thought he was a cholo? I never understood that whole thing. Now he's in the seminary to be a priest!
Same thing happened to me in college... I was trying to get into my dorm room through the window, as the place was locked for spring break (I had come back a few days early). I actually didn't blame the cops for stopping and searching me, since what I was doing probably did look pretty suspicious, although I did have a gun pulled on me, which wasn't fun. When they found out it was a misunderstanding, the veteran copy laughed it off, while the rookie cop tried to be all moralistic.
In any case, I think some heads are going to roll over this Skip Gates incident.
Maybe, maybe not. Unfortunately this is not the first time something like this has happened to black Harvard students and professors.
I don't think it's possible to understand crazypants things like this. I was with a friend once who forgot his house key and set off the alarm at his parents' house in white bread CT; the cops were totally ready for something when they rolled up and saw him (black dude). They were shouting from the road, and one of them was itching for his gun. I srsly remember thinking, "Oh, this is how it's going to go down." The second they saw me (white girl), they immediately went into "Miss, are you okay? Are you okay, miss?" thinking I'd been abducted or something. It was INSANE. It never even crossed my mind that they cops would freak; hell, I've been locked out my house loads of times and gone in through the window with no issue. I will never forget how awful that experience was, and what my friend had to deal with. My thoughts are with the Professor; srsly, that's his HOME. That's a man's HOME. UGH. Awful.
Cops have the obligation to investigate this stuff.
"Almost getting arrested" is like "almost getting pregnant".
In an era of home invasions, police are more likely to check out the house not just take your word for it. Imagine that there are actual criminals in the house that send the homeowner out to talk to the cops with the instructions, get ready of the cops or will kill your daughter/wife.
The cops were well within their rights asking follow up questions after it was determined that Gates was the homeowner.
When all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. Gates has a big old "race hammer".
"Tumultuous"? Have you seen Skip Gates? The man is over 60, of smallish/medium build, walks with a slight limp, and no one in any account of this story says he was armed.
Not just a limp, but a frigging cane.
You know how some people get excited when they see celebrities on the street. One day a couple years ago, when I was temping in downtown Boston, I spied Skip Gates and his wife walking down the street near Copley Square. It was like spotting Madonna on the street. [/academic fanboy geek]
Have you had his burger at Mr. Bartley's? Fantastic!
I had guns drawn on me and arrested on my own back porch in college. They said I matched the description of a drug dealer they were looking for. I proved that I lived at the house, but was arrested for yelling at the cops. I was very loud, and very tumultuous.
Would it be so hard to say that anyone who can't pick Professor Gates out of a six-pack can't be on the Harvard police at all?
I've been LMAO ever since I read the first blurb about this over at JJP.
As Percy Sutton once said,
" If you wake up and forget that you are Black, by the time 5 pm rolls around, someone would have reminded you."
I'm sure this happens to White people all the time.
The shot in the back resisting arrest.
The shot on your own stoop at your own house.
The whole ' everybody else in his life says what a great guy he was, but with these cops, he turned into a rabid animal and thus had to die in police custody, with no apparent record'.
The whole ' arrested in YOUR OWN DAMN HOUSE'.
The thing is, everytime Black folks like me ask for examples of this, where they're White victims, we're left hanging.
I've said it before.
Black folk have no problems with the Po-lice arresting Pookie, Tiny and Ray-Ray.
It's the harrassment of the law abiding Black folk with no hesitation that erodes 'confidence' in law enforcement and why police get no slack from Black folks.
Benefit of the doubt and law enforcement don't join together in my vocabulary.
It happened to me, and no, no cop will ever get the benefit of the doubt with me.
"Benefit of the doubt and law enforcement don't join together in my vocabulary."
They don't join together in mine either, rikyrah, both as a Latino and as a fellow Chicagoan.
I have no doubt that being black compecates you interactions with the police. I am ever so glad that I do not have to do it myself. That said I think that speaking as if your behavior has no bearing on the outcome of these situations leads to a fatalism that is harmfull inand of itself. When confronted be obsequious. It increases your chances of not becoming the star of a cautionary tale on the nightly news.
'My own behavior'?
You mean, outside of BEING BLACK?
Make no mistake, I know the drill when confronted by the Po-Lice. I intend to make it out alive to fight my day in court.
I should have said 'ones behavior' instead of 'your behavior'. I was not suggesting that you do not know the drill. I was sugesting that making statements that ignore the value of the drill are counter productive. People of color or who are obviously non-comformist (or heave forbid both) need to rember the drill and its importance.
There's a reason police dread -- and mess up -- domestic abuse cases: generally it involves entering someones home.
Seems that trying to confront a "robber" in a house (that might be his own) is just dumb -- too easy for somebody to wind up dead at close quarters.
The thing is, everytime Black folks like me ask for examples of this, where they're White victims, we're left hanging.
Who are you asking for examples? Muffy and Binky at the country club grill? Because I got a couple of choice stories -- one involving rape of a white woman in her own home by white cops.
Yeah, there's no shortage of cops-on-white-folks action up here in Canada, either. (The one where they tasered a 70-something man with Alzheimers, in his hospital bed, because he waved a butter knife at them, was choice.) The point is that it seems to happen to black people exponentially more often - and they seem to have an even harder time getting justice after the fact...
I saw an upper-middle class white kid get tasered and his face bounced off a cruiser a few times at a party in college. Six months later the cops who did it were suspended - and I suspect, though I'm no expert, that's part of the difference.
I think tasers have brought something entirely new to law enforcement...with regards to White folks. Billyclubs, chokeholds---those were black and brown specials, but the taser? They've lose what little of their damn minds they had. Cops don't seem to think twice about tasering anyone, including White folks.
@rikyrah Ha. Tasers, the great equalizer. Police brutality for all!
Seriously, though, good point. The tasering is out of control, it is a new element - and in a weird way one upside might be that it's brought awareness of the issue to a wider segment of the population. The police tasering deaths up here in Canada (20-odd in the last couple years) were certainly what opened my eyes, and the joke of an inquiry that's followed means that I'll never see the system as optimistically as I once (naively) did. I guess that's a good thing?
To make myself clear: I'm not saying that arbitrarily shooting black folks is not a sad, horrific part of standard police procedure ... it's just that, damn, almost every white person I know has a scary (not just annoying, but SCARY) rogue white cop story.
Profiling where a white girl can see it happen: When I was fourteen, I came in the side door of my house as two strangers who were black and male ran out the front door. I described them to three white police officers as both over 5'10", broad-shouldered, probably students at the high school on the next block, one in a brown jacket and one in a mustard yellow jacket, and also that I had not had even a glimpse of their faces. The next thing I knew, I was peeking through the blinds at a handcuffed skinny 5'6 black man in a black coat with gray in his hair and saying over and over and over that the guy had no resemblance at all to anything I had seen.
Here's the coverage from the Harvard Crimson, which quotes a Cambridge PD report.
The arguing on the front porch seems to have happened after the cops and the police seargeant had already been inside with Professor Gates. So it's not like they thought they were grabbing some dude in the act of breaking and entering.
Key paragraphs:
Wow. The first few comments on that Boston Globe story are... discouraging. Happily the crowd seems to rally a bit to my way of seeing things further down.
There's a reason I generally avoid even reading the comments on Globe stories. It seems like legions of Howie Carr's take over.
Yeah, I should probably quit reading the web comments on most mainstream news stories everywhere, full stop. They usually hurt my soul. It's so hard to look away, though...
Harvard Crimson seems to have the most extensive story on this...
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=528584
It doesn't matter even if Gates demonstrated an attitude in response to the cop's queries. No responsible officer of the law would let a situation evolve like this or recognize that when you are questioning people on what would presumably be their own premises you don't let shit go this route. No way was this anything other than dumbass police work...aside from the mistreatment of Gates, cops shoot themselves in the foot when they pull this crap. If, worst case, Gates actually was "loud and tumultuous", dialing these kinds of confrontations down rather than stoking them should be baseline police professionalism. More often than not it isn't.
"dialing these kinds of confrontations down rather than stoking them should be baseline police professionalism."
What about groing up in the U.S. has led you to the conclusion that "baseline police professionalism" exists here? We do not have professional police in the U.S. We have a gang with badges that tases little old ladies on the side of the road and arrests men from their own home. If you are not afraid of being wrongfully arrested as a best case scenario and killed as the worst you just are not paying attention.
It doesn't - trust me. Experience as a long-haired lefty kid in Chicago in the '60s - even before '68 sent the cops spinning into pure vindictiveness against anyone they suspected as "radical" - I know more than a bit about getting jacked by assholes in blue and have the arrest record to prove it. I was stating what "should" be, not what is.
I am a tatooed PWT looking white guy. Not quite as bad as being a a hippie but it depends on the predudices of the particular cop.
You know what depresses me more than the incident itself? The legions of commenters on the story that TNC links to griping about how tired they are of "the race card." (Sample: we have a black president, folks, so STFU!).
Yes and your comment goes back to what I said on a previous thread about the commenters here. If you are looking for intelligent discourse do NOT look for it in the comment sections of most print media sites. I've been horrified almost everytime.
Alas, those comments are NOTHING compared to what is often posted on my hometown paper site in Charleston, SC whenever a black person commits (or is the victim of) any crime. Painful.
Actually, it's just as bad in San Francisco, supposedly the bastion of white liberalism.
Boy, no kidding on print media commenters! I've been considerably taken aback by the comments on stories about Walter Cronkite. Apparently he was a pinko commie liberal traitor who single-handledly caused us to lose the Viet Nam war.
I had not known that.
Hey, c'mon. White people STUFed when we had those white presidents. For example, Pat Buchanan never sounded a sour note on much of anything until this past January. Ditto Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh. Now it's black people's turn to demonstrate some of the same grace and humility.
sorry - that's "STFUed".
Though Lou Dobbs, bless his withered little heart, remained an anti-immigrant racist throughout Bush's term. Yay for consistency?
I think this anomaly is explained by the fact that he's married to a Latina...it was a personal issue.
"Benefit of the doubt and law enforcement don't join together in my vocabulary."
Hmm, yes. I was having a discussion with a large groupd of some friends about the police and they couldn't quite understand why a couple of us (Latinas) didn't trust the police really. And yes these friends of mine were not people of color, I don't think they quite got it. I think it was a tiny bit like what TNC was saying in another blog about not witnessing a lot of catcalling of women, so he has a hard time sort of wrapping his brain around the subject. I think these questioning friends just couldn't quite imagine it, they listened to us sure, but still it didn't quite connect with them in a deep personal way...
Part of this distrust of police in my life could laregly be about the notorious reputation of the LAPD. Although, it's really mostly about plain personal experience. When you see people, black and brown, getting harrassed right in front of your face, yay it doesn't make for an especially friendly attitude.
I am black, middle-aged, slender, and a professor (specializing in racial politics no less). I need more information. But my first take, given both scenarios that are floating out there, is that Gates forgot that he was black.
I am no longer frightened of being a victim of brutality when I deal with police, and I am no longer reluctant to question police when I think what they're doing is wrong. However, I make damn sure that I'm calm and rational. This could be (COULD be) one of the few places where the realities of racism may actually save lives. If I'm reasonable--because I know police have problems with black men--then perhaps it makes police more reasonable.
If you're middle-aged, black, and slender, that is....
Now, I'm just blowing off some steam here, so don't take this at face value but...If were cuffed and dragged out of my own house for no other reason than forgetting my keys, I reckon my version of "loud and tumultuous" behavior might result in me invoking the "make my day" defense in court.
That kind of behavior will cause you to make the news.
I read the police report. It appears the the office was asking him for information and Gates began having something akin to a temper tantrum. Citizens are expected to cooperate with law enforcement officers. He did not appear to be doing so, he felt, instead as if he were entitled and shouted things like " do you know who I am" and making insults about the officer's mother. I would expect more dignified behavior from a man of Gates' status, and the rush to yelling and screaming at the officer and being loud and boisterous and invoking the race card did not help the situation. All of us are required to be cooperative with police officers, and he sets a bad example. Of course he will take this all the way, to extract a drama out of it about race relations in America, but in the end, after reading the officer's report, it appears that Gates was not able to control himself. I'm not sure if he should have been arrested, but from reading the report, it seems as if Professor Gates indeed lost it on his front porch and he is not above the law
Because, as we all know, the police never lie or exaggerate on police reports. Especially when they've just arrested a Harvard professor on his own front door.
Last I checked, shouting "Do you know who I am?" was not a crime. And there have been enough of these cases in recent years (months, weeks) that I've become very skeptical of what the arresting officers include in their police reports. Funny how when the inquiry rolls around (if they've crossed someone with enough money/clout to get an inquiry), the officers wind up admitting they're not so sure of what they wrote in the report?
When the Mounties tasered an unarmed Polish immigrant to death at Vancouver Airport a couple years back, they insisted they'd only stunned him twice... until video surfaced showing them blasting him five times.
The recent spate of dashboard camera recorded incidents of police tasing little old ladies should have an efect on peoples high estimation of police conduct, but I am still waiting.
I don't know -- I got stopped by a (black) cop as I was *pulling into my own driveway* for driving without a seat belt. I took the ticket, then went off on the guy, loudly, for about 5 minutes ("This is bullshit. You have the stupidest fucking job on the planet." Etc.) I supposed he could have come into the house and busted me for...whatever, disturbing the peace. But he didn't. I suspect it's far more likely that he would have if I were black, and even more likely that he would have if I were black and he'd been white.
And, just by the way, no, we're not all required to be 'cooperative with the cops'. It depends on what they're asking you for: even if you're right about the circumstances, last time I checked, being 'undignified' and shouting insults weren't a crime. Unfortunately, it seems to be less of a requirement for, say, me, than it is for one of the most distinguished scholars in America. And why? Melanin.
I have a similar story. As part of a community organization, I was the chair for a summer festival we were holding. The day of the event, I was running around like crazy picking up food and party supplies that various stores were donating. The temperature was in the high 90s, and I was extremely frustrated because traffic was bad as usual and none of the individuals who were supposed to help me had shown up.
A mom and pop store across from the park where the festival would be held had given us permission to store the food in their refrigerator and freezer until time for the event. I arrived at the store, and found no place to park anywhere on the street (this was when I lived in Boston. Lack of parking is typical). I had heavy loads to carry in, which needed refrigeration quickly (among the items was ice cream) so I did what many people in Boston do when facing lack of parking: I put on my hazards and double parked. I went into the store to ask the owner if it was OK, and he said of course, their vendors double park all the time.
I came out to find a (black) cop writing me a ticket. He saw me and started yelling, "What, you're think you're better than everyone else, and don't have to obey traffic laws!"
I was hot and frustrated and just snapped. I yelled back about the fact that I was in charge of the festival that evening and had no place else to park to drop off supplies. I didn't do any name-calling, but I was screaming at him.
Amazingly, the cop looked at me and tore up the ticket. Only afterward, when my heart stopped racing, did I realize that I had put myself at risk of arrest. I also realized that I'm a light-skinned black woman. If I'd been a dark-skinned black man, the outcome could have been very different.
This boilerplate is always trotted out no matter how ridiculous the arrest no mater how non-threatening the person.
When officers are out tasing grannies and arresting professors in their own homes.. clearly the problem is the yelling.
....do we not expect things of our "public servants" as well?
Officers deserve precisely as much respect as they have earned.
Co-sign. That is all.
Tell it.
What Alesis said.
In other words, cops should be presumed guilty until proven innocent?
I would submit that everyone deserves respect until they demonstrate otherwise. Just because you may have a previous negative experience with the police doesn't necessarily say anything about this particular cop. That would be another form of stereotyping, wouldn't it?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
No. The standard of guilt vs. innocence is much higher than the standard of competence vs. incompetence.
Policemen should be fired before their behavior defames the force... union be damned. Give 'em a severance and unemployment benefits, but get them off the street.
Officers deserve precisely as much respect as they have earned.
I disagree. If one cannot respect the officer personally, one still must respect the OFFICE he holds. That doesn't mean not holding an individual officer accountable, nor an entire PD. It means paying a certain deference to the authority vested in him or her, just as you would a judge in a courtroom.
I think that approach is a common mistake we make with public servants.
An office is both a (carefully defined) responsibility and a (carefully limited) privilege.
An officeholder deserves respect inasmuch as they perform the service they are paid for.
Once the officeholder exceeds the authority of office, they forfeit the respect a public servant commands.
At that point they may assume the "respect" a venomous serpent commands, but that's quite a different thing.
Well, now you are talking about after the fact of an officer exceeding his or her authority. Before you were saying that an officer shouldn't be accorded any respect unless they had earned it, all other things being equal. Are you changing your argument?
Please note that I said that officers should be held accountable for their actions, which I think covers your third point. If a police officer abuses the power of her office in her interactions with the public, she should be moved to an administrative post where she will not be interacting with the public, if not outright removed from her office if the abuse is particularly bad.
A officer has earned (through fulfilling the requirement of his or her appointment) the respect necessary to allow them to perform their duties in addition to the basic respect any nondescript human being comes packaged with, no more and no less.
An officer can further add to or detract from that respect by subsequent action.
I think the discrepancy is in the implicit acknowledgment that an office must be earned as well.
If the office were unearned then I'd assert the respect due it was as well.
Well, sounds like we don't really have a difference of opinion so much as different ways of framing that opinion.
Yes I think so :)
I just think that in light of such circumstances as we are discussing currently the idea that an officer deserves a baseline of respect that can't be depleted is a problematic concept.
It leads to the boilerplate I object to in my first post.
I read the report. Even if it was relatively accurate, it was still as idiotic for the cops to arrest Gates as it was if Gates got on a high horse. If the report is accurate, Gates is an asshole with an oversized ego. But I doubt that Alan Dershowitz - who suffers from that malady - would have been hauled off to jail in similiar circumstances.
The cop writes that she was "confused" as to why Gates was so belligerent.... Even if we discount the need for empathy amongst judges, it would seem valuable for cops to be able to guess at the behavior of their subjects.
Taking the officers' reports at face-value, the arrest is still unwarranted and inexcusable. Understand, there is no excuse for using force -- including handcuffing -- on someone for something like non-compliance. Even if it went exactly as the police say it did, Gates should not have been arrested.
If the police were simply smart enough to see what is in their own selfish best interest they would have walked away from this one. Before this is over the lawyers will make him wish he had.
No, buddy. We are not all required to be cooperative with police offices.
We are required to cooperate with police officers when public safety is at stake. Move away from the accident scene. Pull over for police cars with their flashers on. Get out of the damned street where the fire truck needs to pull up.
We are not required to be nice to cops. We are not required to be sweet and kind when asked to show ID inside our own damned homes.
Calling a cop an asshole does not jeopardize public safety.
From the Harvard Crimson:
They were shocked! Shocked!
Would you not be surprised and alarmed to see your neighbor in an verbal altercation with police officers?
Perhaps they were alarmed by what was happening to their neighbor?
Bad attempt at sarcasm. I used to live in Cambridge, and I was imagining the neighbors being shocked that there was a cop/black man altercation in their little enclave of ultra-liberal tolerance. (I say that as an ultra-liberal myself.) Because, you know, it's post racial America, especially in Cambridge.
::Shrug::
This happens in Oakland. I think Rikryah said it best that by the end of the day that you will be reminded that you are black and this is precisely what seems to have happened.
Also: Harvard po po and black folks just doesn't seem to go too well together
Prof. Ogletree was on Al Sharpton's radio show today talking about the incident (can't find a link that works). According to Prof. Ogletree, Prof. Gates produced identification and mail to show it was his house. Harvard police on the scene identified him. Still, the Cambridge cop(s?) weren't swayed. The supposed racism exhibited by Prof. Gates - remember, he's in his own house! - was (to paraphrase) to suggest his Black skin vs. the officer's white skin was the problem.
One thing that stood out for me was his reminder that Prof. Gates uses a cane because of problems with his hips and leg. He asked a Black cop on the scene to get the handcuffs put on in front. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been able to walk.
Now, ask yourself - how much of a threat did he pose?
Damn, wish I had known Ogletree was on the case, and on Rev. Al's show. if you find a link, please share.
Harvard police on the scene identified him. Still, the Cambridge cop(s?) weren't swayed.
See now, I imagine that this right here was part of what caused the ruckus. There is nothing, NOTHING that will set cops off more than to be proven WRONG. Once the Harvard cops basically said to the Cambridge police -- "Guys, it's Doctor Gates; you've made a mistake" -- the die was cast.
I hope that neighbor or passerby lady who called the police is having a seriously introspective moment now. And is eating crow.
That was my thought too. I have a pretty good idea of what most of my neighbors look like. If I saw one of them trying to break into their own home, I'd offer to help, not call the cops. If I honestly thought it was someone that shouldn't be breaking in, I would probably call the cops too. But I've visited that neighborhood, back when I lived there, and there can be some pretty good trees and shrubs between houses. Only a pretty close neighbor would see someone breaking in. And a pretty close neighbor should make an effor to know who lives around them. IMHO.
.
So what was motivating the neighbor who called the cops in the first place? Concern that her neighbor's house was being broken into or a grudge against the prof?
From what I read in the arrest report both Gates and the arresting officer could have used better judgment. I don't what's true and what may be BS from either Professor Gates or the cops.
That being said after the cops ascertained Gates identity and the fact that it was his house they should have just walked away whether he was being a PITA(pain in the ass) or not.
They get a call about a possible break in at a house and they have to respond. Until they get there they don't know what's happening.
I do find it kind of amusing that Charles Ogletree went to the stations with Gates.
That's some impressive council for such a silly arrest.
You don't happen to have a link to the report, do you?
Never mind, I found it. It seems to me that, at the very least, Gates acted like a grade-A asshole. Maybe he didn't deserve to be arrested for it, but if he was loud enough and being enough of an asshole, then maybe he kind of did. My sympathy for him is pretty low.
Do Harvard ID's include a person's address? I know that my school ID doesn't include mine - in order to prove that I wasn't breaking into my own home, I'd need to show my driver's license. And sure it sucks to be confronted by a cop when it's your own place, but what's the alternative? If this was a genuine burglar, and the cop didn't do his due diligence, he'd be excoriated and rightfully so.
A genuine burglar with a Harvard ID?
What does it matter if the address isn't on it?
I mean it's certainly possible that a Harvard professor might be out for a little B&E but I kinda doubt it.
What more this argument assumes quite unreservedly that the report is accurate.
Moreover if being an asshole is a statutory offense this country's going to need a lot more prisons.
You know being an asshole is not against the law. I am fully aware that it is best to be as polite as possible to the police. I would be afraid of getting arrested if I was not acting on my best behavior, even if I knew I was in the right, such as being accused of breaking into my own home.
I don't think it should matter if one has manners,or if someone has acted like an ass in terms of interacting with police. It is one thing to say that Gates shouldn't have been loud or discruptive, it is quite another to think that that it wasn't a big deal that he got arrested. Either way, i think the police probabbly mis-used their authority, considering the power differential was weighted far in their favor.
@Alesis
Yes, I am assuming the report is accurate. My common-sense tells me that it probably is, because I can absolutely imagine this scenario taking place, but if people want to be skeptical I understand. For me, my current working assumption is that the report is accurate. Based on that reading, Gates created a completely unnecessary confrontation. On being told about a break-in at his residence, he should have immediately recognized the misunderstanding, produced an ID, and let everyone walk away with their dignity intact.
The report could be inaccurate. It is, however, at least partially corroborated by the other officer's report. I think there are better reasons to believe that it is true than to think it's false.
I could imagine a lot of things, there could have been space aliens orchestrating the whole shebang.
Common sense however has nothing to do with what one can imagine.
It takes no imagination to think that someone could yell at an officer sauntering into a man's own kitchen and demanding ID.
It also takes no imagination to think that an officer could make up a story to save himself the trouble that the truth would entail.
Assuming either isn't common sense... it's motivated reasoning.
One could assess likelihood yes... but who are we going to believe the Harvard professor with a stellar twenty-year career and unstained professional record who's been on television and film enough that "Do you know who I am?" becomes an eminently reasonable question?
Or some cop who's job may well be on the line if Gates comes off as anything less than a raving lunatic?
Assuming the report is accurate, (which I do not, but for the sake of argument...)the crucial question is, is it professional to arrest someone for being a 59-year old asshole, inside their own house. That really is it. Even assuming the report is correct, was that the professional course of action?
We don't pay our taxes to Prof. Gates. We pay them to the cops. Asking them not to arrest 59-year old men, under this scenario, I don't think that should be too onerous.
People who I interview turn out to be assholes all the time. That doesn't justify me writing a hit-piece on them.
Was it right to arrest him, or not? What I'm hearing is "This guy really acted like an asshole, so he deserved what he got."
@silentbeep
Disturbing the peace is a crime. It's a problematic one, since it involves the judgment of the arresting officer. If people don't like those laws they can change them, but if Gates was causing a scene like that indicated in the report, then the officer certainly had cause to take him into custody. Maybe he shouldn't have, maybe he should have exercised restraint and walked away, but I certainly can't fault him for doing it. No way will Gates win a lawsuit here (again, assuming the report is accurate.)
If people don't like those laws they can change them, but if Gates was causing a scene like that indicated in the report, then the officer certainly had cause to take him into custody.
He was in a private area and not a public one. If the noise wasn't audible from outside is private home then they had no cause to arrest him inside his own home. You have every right to be pissed off at anybody who decides to walk into your house. So you're saying that a cop can just arrest anybody, anywhere with any justification and you're fine with that?
The police officer should be the one who backs off, as it's his job to do so. A "sorry, but your neighbor's said somebody was breaking into your house so we're here to investigate" would probably have gone a long way in this situation. Maybe explain that to CYA I have to confirm your ID because I'd lose my job otherwise.
@TNC
"is it professional to arrest someone for being a 59-year old asshole, inside their own house."
According to the report, the arrest took place outside, and was a consequence of Gates continuing to yell at the cop in view of the public. Inside his house, Gates is just an asshole, but out on the street he becomes a public nuisance.
I want to say that I do maintain some degree of skepticism over the report, because it is written from the point of view of one of the people here, and Gates' perspective is probably different. But it's hard for me to imagine a scenario where Gates doesn't, at the very least, share the blame for escalating a situation which didn't need to be escalated. If cops are checking out a burglary at your home, you should be at least somewhat understanding that, you know, that's their job.
I'm with IrishPirate here: Once the police determined that Gates was in his own house, and thus the odds of the home owner filing a b and e charge against him were nil, any hissy fit on Gates's part does not justify an arrest on their part. You can meet "Do you know who I am" with "Nope, but if you're the homeowner I'm done here." There are all sorts of appropriately respectful/sarcastic responses that stop short of escorting Gates and Ogletree to jail. And if you're sure your behavior is in the clear, you can provide your badge number without arresting the guy loudly demanding it. "Sure: 999999732" or whatever it is.
@Deborah
I think that's a completely reasonable conclusion. I'm just trying to put myself in the shoes of the cop here. I'm not a cop, but if I was, was just doing my job, and this guy was yelling at me like this, followed me out the door, keep saying shit to me, well you know what, fuck him. Screaming at someone on the street is a crime, and I'd put the cuffs on him, let him think about it for a few hours.
The thing that really kills my sympathy for Gates is the fact that he was the one who broke in to the house. If it was someone else, or just a case of mistaken identity, then yeah, I'd be pissed too, some cop bothering me about God knows what. But if I break into my own house, and then later a cop asks me about a break-in, isn't it reasonable to immediately just try to clear up the confusion? Gates knew damn well that someone broke into his house, it just happened to have been him. This isn't a cop trying to pick a fight, this is a cop following up a lead which was 100% accurate.
This is what I wanted. I just wanted to know if you thought he should have been arrested. You clearly do.
Moreover, as you've said, you are assuming the cop's account is true--not Gates. And from their, you're putting yourself in the shoes of the cop--not Gates'. Your conclusions from there--that cops have free reign to look up people, who throw a hissy-fit--are obvious.
@TNC
"Should have" seems like a bit of a leap, doesn't it? If the cops hadn't arrested him, great, they would have been men of restraint and Lord knows we need more of them in the police force. Everyone goes home, no one writes about this thing and we can talk about Will Wright instead. But they did arrest him, and all I'm saying is that I understand why. I don't know Skip Gates from Adam - for all I know he's an awesome guy. But if you treat a cop like shit, and then you give him a reason to arrest you, you shouldn't act surprised when he does just that.
Ah, like clockwork. A "misstep" on the part of black civilians is always used to justify questionable police behavior.
When Shem Walker was shot on his step last week, the commenters on the NYT story were saying that it was fault for not "behaving like a decent human being" when he was trying to physically remove an undercover cop from his stoop. Conservatives justified Oscar Grant's shooting by saying he had priors. And remember, Rodney King was allegedly so high on PCP that he needed to be struck a few dozen times while laying prone on the roadside --- don't you he was being unruly.
You're entitled to take this stance, of coure. But this is a less-discussed consequence of police brutality: the erosion of people's desires to extend to police officers any benefit of the doubt.
Come on man, no one shot him or beat the shit out of him. They took him into custody for a few hours for being unruly outside of his house. These things are not equivalent. Maybe he deserved it and maybe he didn't but let's not start going all Godwin on this thing. Even if Gates was a completely innocent victim, if he had to spend a couple of hours in some holding cell because of some asshole cop well, I think our republic will survive.
i wasn't suggesting that they were equivalent, but that those cases inform the reading of this one, and that the argument you're using is employed regardless of the circumstance.
if he had to spend a couple of hours in some holding cell because of some asshole cop well, I think our republic will survive.
Our republic has and will survive lots of injustice. It would have survived if the officer had decided it was appropriate to shoot Gates as well. But most importantly, and this is the entire point of people who find this arrest outrageous, our Republic would also have survived just fine if the officer had simply walked away, whatever unkind words Gates allegedly used towards him. Given the facts that are not in dispute in this case, the notion that anyone's public safety was threatened in this circumstance, warranting limiting an individual's liberty, is laugh out loud ridiculous. But I think we have established in this thread that you see things differently.
he did show his drivers license and the Harvard ID. And if he was being an asshole, a big if, that isn't illegal AND the cop was the BIGGER asshole for arresting him in his house once he knew it was Gates' house. If you are in your house that you own and pay a big mortgage on you can be as much of an asshole as you want to be. Shoot.
I sincerely hope you are not a cop. It sounds like you might enjoy it too much.
I said I wasn't. One thing that's nice about the internet is that complete strangers can see right into your soul and give you an accurate picture of your motives. Saves me a lot on therapy, that's for sure.
From Craig T
"I'm not a cop, but if I was, was just doing my job, and this guy was yelling at me like this, followed me out the door, keep saying shit to me, well you know what, fuck him. Screaming at someone on the street is a crime, and I'd put the cuffs on him, let him think about it for a few hours."
See, I wouldn't if I were a cop. That is not the way I--a white woman living in a mostly white suburb of Boston--expect my local police to act. If someone is drunk and disorderly and refusing to leave the bar, fine, arrest him. I'll applaud. But having a badge doesn't get you the right to say "fuck him"--to quote you--to every guy who's pissed that you're questioning him. Rude people who don't think you ought to be questioning them are par for the course for any cop. You don't get to arrest people who piss you off or "keep saying shit" just because you have handcuffs. The public peace was not served by dragging Gates in.
But having a badge doesn't get you the right to say "fuck him"--to quote you--to every guy who's pissed that you're questioning him. Rude people who don't think you ought to be questioning them are par for the course for any cop. You don't get to arrest people who piss you off or "keep saying shit" just because you have handcuffs.
This. This exactly. We hire cops to enforce the law, not define it.
I guess where we disagree is how we interpret "fuck him:. If it was me, I'd have said, "Fuck him, I'm out of here," not "Fuck him, he thinks he's having a bad day, I'll show him what a bad day looks like from inside a jail cell."
I'm one who believes that even an asshole officer deserves a modicum of respect because of the office her or she holds. But the cop here abused his or her discretionary power of arrest merely because the arrestee was hopping mad.
I think TNC has it right. Let's grant for the sake of argument that the police report is 100% accurate. If that is the case, the officer still showed poor judgement and was not justified in making the arrest. The officer showed none of the skills we want to see in our police officers. We want officers with good judgement and people skills. We expect them to be the adults in situations where the only "crime" is someone is having a bad day and is upset. Being able to calm them down is crime prevention.
The oddest part of this story is that, in the police report, it lists the person who called in the complaint as Lucia Whelan, who works for Harvard Magazine, and so should be familiar with Gates.
Now really. Didn't you know that all black people look like? How was she supposed to know??
I'm sure it couldn't have been the cane that gave it away or anything...
She also seems to be his neighbor, as I'm guessing her "7 Ware St." address is in the vicinity of where ever Gates's "Ware St." addresses is, which would make this even odder. One of the most prominent humanities scholars in the world feuding with his neighbors?
Ah, let's cut her some slack until we know better. She may very well have simply caught a glimpse of something; she may not have seen anything at all, just heard the door being forced; she may have thought she was doing Gates a favor -- or more generally -- just being neighborly. I'm just saying this because in situations like this, the poison can spread very widely, very quickly, and hurt more people than is really necessary.
The only way they could have messed up worse would be to arrest Duval Patrick in the Governor's Mansion.
Incidents as blatant as this can often cause an outcry that leads to some good. I hope that's the case. Will there be less profiling, or less profiling of black men in suits?
It's too bad, though, that people need something like this to be reminded that racism operates every day.
Was Duval Patrick breaking into the Governor's mansion?
OK IP, this is the second time this week you've made me laugh 'til I cried. Please post date and time of your HBO special.
IP is just being IP.
Ladies and gents I'm here often.
Please tip your waitstaff well and come back soon.
I just noticed it but the "topic headline" is misleading.
Gates wasn't arrested for breaking into his own home.
He was arrested for BAWB. (BEING AN ASSHOLE WHILE BLACK)
IP, You're really into acronyms today. Better than the links to really gross things from a few days back!
I am acquainted with Professor Gates. He is a brilliant man who has made immeasurable contributions to the field of African American Studies. He is also an arrogant asshole who often treats people around him in a pretty shoddy manner. But this is actually besides the point...
After reading several press accounts and carefully parsing the police report, it seems fairly obvious to me that Professor Gates acted badly AND the officer overreacted. An unfortunate combination of circumstances that will undoubtedly create a big brouhaha for nothing.
There are much more worthy events that we could all get upset about, like, I dunno, the Jena Six? Current events in Iran? Passing health care? Moving on...
" it seems fairly obvious to me that Professor Gates acted badly AND the officer overreacted"
exactly.
Dude, sorry, but assuming the police report was accurate is more than a little naive.
And given Gates' PAST interaction with police, where he was arrested as a burglary suspect on the Harvard campus, I can understand his being a bit of an ass.
Gates was never arrested as a burglary suspect on the campus. It was Dr. S. Allen Counter back in 2004, as the article makes clear.
I read the police report, and will have to do some more research on what exactly the legal definition of "disturbing the peace" is, because really, it sounds a lot like what someone pointed our earlier which is this:
"So much of police conduct and procedure is predicated around obtaining compliance and not actual safety, it's insane."
How is a slight, middle aged man with a cane, in his own home, disturbing the peace and threatening the safety of others?
I agree he should have produced I.D. and been polite. When my brother was almost going to be arrested for breaking into our home due to forgetting his key, my family was nothing but polite and cooperative, as was my brother.
Where is the responsiblity in the cops in all this? As if Gates "forced" them to arrest him because he was being loud.
Ya know, this just sounds ridiculous. If "disturbing the peace" just means being loud and screaming in one's own home, that is incredibly frightening. It sounds like a big reason for him being arrested was because he was "disrespectful."
I mean really, so a few people were shocked and looked surprised so the police had to protect the delicate sensibilites of the neightbors by arresting this man.
"disrespectful."
Don't you mean "uppity"?
U-P-P-I-T-Y
yep
that too.
I am channeling Dr Freud here, which is difficult because Freud said the Irish were the only people who would not benefit from psychoanalysis, and I've figured out the subtext to Gates supposed asshole conduct.
Gates did that PBS Special on DNA where he found out a good hunk of his own personal DNA was of pasty European origin.
In order to prove he is truly black he had to get himself arrested. Hence the asshole attitude.
Hence, Gates is now truly black.
You are an evil, evil man.
Marcos,
I do try to be evil. Unfortunately, in non cyber life I'm generally polite and decent to people. Poor upbringing.
I do sorta picture Professor Gates up on a soapbox in Harvard Square channeling the high octave pitch of Dave Chappelle and yelling "See fuck my DNA, I'm black bitch".
Poor man is just not going to get any street cred unless he accompanies James Lipton to a JayZ show.
(Did you happen to see the 200th episode of Inside Actors' Studio where Dave interviews Lipton? Must watch if you are a fan on either of those gentlemen.)
Ta-Nehisi writes:
"Assuming the report is accurate, (which I do not..."
Uh, why? You may be correct, but where's your evidence? Police officers are sworn and trained to describe accurately what happens at any call. Is your assumption that enough of them don't, that we can slap a "whatever" on the report?
The People's Republic of Cambridge (where I lived for years, which I love and miss, and where I was the lowest form of Harvard faculty) is not the deep south (where I currently live).
Prof. Gates may dispute the report. If he does, we should assess his disputation on its merits.
Should we automatically (again, I only say this because you gave no evidence) question police reports?
That would be a shitty country to live in...
Should we automatically (again, I only say this because you gave no evidence) question police reports?
That would be a shitty country to live in...
I think crossdot has just discovered institutional racism. Welcome to my world.
I don't see a whole lot of value at all in assuming that police reports are true. We might be interested, in many cases, to give an officer the benefit of the doubt. But especially when there is a dispute and especially when the officer has some direct interest in how his/her actions are perceived, skepticism is entirely warranted. Indeed, it seems to me that assuming, as some sort of general rule, that officers are telling the truth strikes me as a practice that would be significantly more dangerous. That is precisely why police cruisers and interrogation rooms all over the country are fitted with cameras. Its why we have Internal Affairs Departments to investigate officer's claims in circumstances where they might have some interest in lying. I suspect that this report will also be investigated for those same reasons.
Exactly. The credulous attitude towards police reports on this thread has come as something of surprise to me.
Justice is better served when all parties proceed from the assumption that police reports need to be investigated as much as the crime in question itself.
I'm with you on the questioning police reports, and I understand the outrage, but shouldn't we be just as cautious when rejecting them outright? That seems to me to be just as dangerous as accepting them prima facie.
The police report is the only piece of evidence we have at this point. When Skip Gates gives his side of the story, and specifically refutes parts of the report, then that will be counter-evidence. Until he does that, all that anyone has is the report. Of course someone should have a healthy skepticism about anything that a person says, but simply saying that one shouldn't believe the report because a cop wrote it isn't terribly helpful.
When Larry Craig was busted for his toe-tapping routine in the Minneapolis airport, were the same people who refuse to believe this report just as skeptical about that one?
I'm not sure that's a fair comparison, there had been no problematic history (at least that I know of) of police abusing their power in bathroom sting operations. Plus, there was a healthy dose of schadenfreude with the whole Larry Craig thing.
Still, the point remains
but simply saying that one shouldn't believe the report because a cop wrote it isn't terribly helpful.
@CraigT
Its a good thing no one is saying anything like that then.
LOL thank you brent.
@ deathbypapers:
I never, never said anything about rejecting them outright. Police reports are a kind of evidence too, and need to be treated as such. Only sometimes, they can be evidence of more than just what happened, or what was collected/noted at a scene - they can reveal bias or a screw-up on the side of the law. They're NOT an objective, birds-eye view of the situation even if the language used tries to create that feeling. Being able to read between the lines of a police report is an absolute must in many cases.
And CraigT, I don't think I can say anything else that can fruitfully continue a dialogue with you. You keep responding to provocative statements that no one is putting out there.
"You keep responding to provocative statements that no one is putting out there."
Really? I "keep" doing this? That seems a bit much, don't you think?
I'm credulous about police reports because it is reasonable to be so. A policeman is a public servant - when he writes a report it goes in the public record. If he falsified his report, he can be punished. So no, I don't think a police report needs to be investigated as much as the crime itself. Do some cops make false statements? Of course they do. But if your working assumption is that police reports are just as unreliable as the statement of those who have been arrested, then how does anyone ever get anywhere?
I know, I know, people don't trust cops, they do shitty things in black communities, etc. etc. These are true things. But there has to be some recognition that cops at least have a professional duty to the truth. Maybe they don't all take that seriously, but certainly enough do that one should be able to reasonably say, a police report is not just another piece of paper, to be treated the same as all the other evidence. A police report is something different, a higher form of evidence. Because our system is at least theoretically set up to hold cops accountable to the public, and if someone doesn't have at least a modicum of faith in that idea, then what is the point? Why not just ditch the whole thing, set up some sort of anarchist Randian state?
@kekemen, perhaps "rejecting outright" is too strong, maybe "holding up to the same (or close to the same) standard" would have been better. the thread (and not just your comment) seems to have gravitated strongly in one direction, towards credulity towards Prof. Gates' story and not towards the police report. While this is understandable, it is not exactly helpful. my apologies for seeming to single you out.
@ deathbypapers:
No worries. You're probably right in your assessment of the tendency in the overall discussion, but I think considering the ridiculousness of the circumstances it is warranted. Of course, such an approach would be less useful in a genuine crime (murder, robbery, whatever). But this case is farcical, and at the end of the day, no matter what Gates did or didn't say, it makes the law look bad. Really bad. My opinion is they deserve it. Gates could be a flaming egomaniac but he complied, and was still arrested. That's unconscionable. The law's job is to be the bigger person. It wasn't.
But for the point about police reports, I made my statement as a generality, and I strongly believe in it. When a system of justice hinges on the charged being innocent until proven guilty, that burden of proof, and it's a serious one, lies upon the arm of the law. I think that a critical (read, as in critical thinking, not CRITICISM) approach towards reports originating from the police should be a matter of course.
@ Craig T:
More of you putting words in my mouth. I didn't say anything about the unreliability of police reporting. Plus, you're responding to a statement I made which was clearly general and within a general subcommentary, and blowing it out of proportion. But, generally speaking again, I do believe in human fallibility as a matter of logic, so I err on the side of caution when it comes to parsing a case (not that much really needs parsing with this one). And you know what? Historically, in this country, it's those moments where justice was made into a travesty that stick out. You know why? Because we expect it to work, and do it's job. When it doesn't, people get mad. We're not a failed state where everybody knows you can't get justice. So I'm all for giving the police the side-eye. It's the logical, and historically accurate, thing to do.
Frankly it's NOT too much to ask our police officers to resist fit of piques (Craig T, here I am thinking of your "fuck it" moment from earlier in this thread) and emotional responses to any situation. They occupy a singular role in the functioning of a state - it's like come on, your JOB IS TO ENFORCE the law, not use it as a tool to vent your feelings.
Brent, you're so funny. Have you ever served on the jury of a criminal trial? The judge admonishes you to treat police testimony with the same degree of skepticism that you treat all other testimony. And a police report is testimony.
Brent, I guess you've never had a cop write an untrue arrest report or traffic ticket about you. Consider yourself fortunate. Once a cop (in an unmarked car) came up behind me so fast that I swerved to get out of his way because I thought he was going to rear-end me. He ticketed me for changing lanes without signalling. The lying bastard didn't show up in traffic court.
A friend of mine was a cops reporter for the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, and she wrote something that the police didn't like. So they told her editor that she had stolen some files from a detective's desk. That was a lie. She was fired.
And she and I are both white!
As a reporter I've covered trials where it was obvious that the cops were testilying. If you watched the OJ trial, you watched a detective lie his ass off when he described how he took a sock out of evidence and delivered it to the other end of the hallway, when it turned out that he took the sock out to his car, drove to OJ's house, and did god knows what with it before delivering it to the office down the hall. The sock miraculously became spotted with blood (mixed with a preservative that evidence techs use) during this bizarre trip, although the cop testilied that he didn't taint the evidence.
It's not smart to believe that a police report, or any police testimony, is completely truthful.
Yes, crossdotcurve, we should automatically question police reports. Absolutely, in every case. As long as a cop has the right to carry a gun on his hip, handcuff me for mouthing off, lock me up overnight, -- as long as there's such a thing as "resisting arrest", then every police report needs to be scrutinized. And not just because it's been shown again and again that cops -- at least some cops -- will lie, but because, more generally, it's part of due process.
I'm not sure if you know, but the Cambridge police have a long and notoriously spotty race-relations record, including with black Harvard students and faculty. In August 2008, Harvard convened a civilian review of the police force after years and years of complaints about racial profiling from black students and faculty. Assuming that the liberal politics of the campus as a whole translates to the police force is, well...you know what they say about assuming.
So yes, I absolutely question the veracity of the police report, especially since it was written *after* the cop realized who Gates was and needs to seriously cover his ass.
Police officers are sworn and trained to describe accurately what happens at any call. Is your assumption that enough of them don't, that we can slap a "whatever" on the report?
My assumption is that people lie to make themselves look better. It doesn't matter if you're a police officer or not. So when the cop realizes he probably shouldn't have arrested a 59 year old man with a cane, who happens to be a Harvard professor, and has a Harvard law professor down at the station with him that the report somehow needs to justify why he arrested him.
Should we automatically (again, I only say this because you gave no evidence) question police reports?
Yes we should in cases where the officer has good reason to lie.
I will add that Gates has every reason to lie, and likely acted like an asshole. However, cops need to get over this idea that they can just arrest an asshole or anybody who challenges their authority. It's the cops job to have a level head, and if he has just walked away after figuring out that Gates did not commit a crime there would have been no disturbing the peace.
This just seems incredibly naive. Where is the upside of assuming such a thing to be true?
I don't teach at Harvard, nor was I trained there, but some of my profs were and they taught me and I teach my students at my liberal arts college in the midwest to always question what they see, hear, read, assume, and believe. If we are to engage in critical thinking, then, certainly, that involves automatically questioning police reports, newspaper articles, blog posts, and the like.
Are you new to the blog? I ask this respectfully, because "shot and killed by police while being black" has been a recurring theme on this blog, and happened to a friend of TNC's from college.
And I agree with what Faival said about due process. But moreover, if the officer asserted Gates had run down the street waving his cane and threatening to beat up the woman who called the cops, I'd be giving the cop more benefit of the doubt that arrest might have been warranted. "Being rude to police on your porch" is not really a threat to the public that requires leading someone off in handcuffs. I haven't read anything from the police report that didn't seem it couldn't be handled by saying "Sure, Professor, here is my name and badge number and the name of my supervisor; I'll write it down for you."
You're not at all getting the point. Set aside whether or not TNC thinks the police report is accurate.
Let's assume that it IS accurate for the sake of argument. Courts do this all the time in summary judgements. Let's assume that one side has all the facts on their side. The officer STILL showed poor judgement in making an arbitrary arrest.
(I hope my use of caps is hammering this home.)
EVEN if we give the officer the benefit of the doubt, the officer STILL exceeded his authority and abused the authority given to him as an officer.
THAT is the point.
Saying that one does not assume that the officers report is accurate is not the same thing as saying that one assumes it is false. It is a statement that assumes that we do not know. That is all that Ta-Nehisi has asserted.
Cops lie ALL THE TIME.
And what is "loud and tumultuous" behavior? That could mean anything.
I think white people get defensive about racial stuff (myself included) because we don't want to be the bad guy. We consider ourselves to be progressive and humanitarian people, which is a good thing.
We read stuff like this and we don't recognize ourselves. We aren't like those cops or we aren't like the people who kicked the black and latino kids out of the pool.
I think TNC and other posting on this blog are trying to point out that, yes, racism does exist and it is a problem still. Its just hard to get past that defensiveness - and I find that to be true for everyone of all colors.
I'd say white people get defensive because we don't want to be the bad guy, and we don't want the world to be this shitty, and because we find it way too easy to think our opinions/wishes/guesses have more reality than other people's actual experience.
What's mortifying is that it only takes a little listening to start learning what's going on, and yet it's so hard for most white people to get started on even doing that.
Reason Gates was not shot??? There were too many educated witnesses on the street.
Tomi,
in a post with more than a few silly statements you win.
Do you realize, and this is a rhetorical question, that most cops never fire their weapons in their careers? Outside of a training range that is.
If cops were shooting people every time someone acted belligerently or were perceived to be an asshole then the police would be shooting thousands of people a day.
Now even if Gates was acting as the cops allege I still don't think they should have arrested him. Better just to walk away and let the good Professor calm down.
Cops need to have thick skins because they are going to be abused constantly by the public they are supposed to serve. Some cops are also going to abuse the public.
In parts of the UK cops now wear headgear that records audio and visual. I wish cops here wore the same thing.
Then we could better judge this situation and others instead of just bringing our experiences, judgments and biases into a forum where we start making blanket statements about a situation that none of us was party to.
From the report:
I don't know about the rest of the report, but I'm praying this is true. Keep it gully, Skip!
Yeah, a Harvard alumn friend of mine and I were just talking about that line and agreed that it was one statement very likely to have been uttered by the good Professor. Eleggua is laughing over this, somewhere.
1) a neighbor called the police and reported that a man was breaking into the neighbor's house.
2) the police arrived to find a man breaking in, or just walking in, but fitting the description given by the caller.
3) Gates refused to cooperate and became indignant tossing out the race card.
4) Gates was arrested.
so are people saying that if the police are called to a break in and see a black man, or any minority, should they just say, "excuse me" and leave. Seems like a good idea. Or maybe if you see someone breaking into your neighbors house and you don't know the neighbor, don't call, don't get involved.
Nope, sorry, but Gates did cooperate and show his ID to the police. Once that happened, the cop knew that Gates was the homeowner, but arrested him because he became loud and indignant.
Patilee,
I was going to post and say, after reading the police report--which may or may not reflect what actually happened--that I can imagine a scenario in which everyone meant to act in good faith. The neighbor who called the cops probably thought she was doing Gates a favor. The cop responded to the call.
But did Gates get arrested for throwing out the race card? What's the connection?
It's just a strange thing when Skip Gates gets arrested on his own porch.
The cop acted like a teacher who gives a kid a detention for embarassing him. Cop could have walked away.
Race is all over this one. And racism. But I think it's too easy to make a villain out of someone in this.
The Boston Globe report, the first I read, said that he gave his id and driver's license, establishing this was his house. That is, instead of playing the race card he played the faculty id and driver's license cards. So if your point (3) is untrue, how does arrest follow?
Like Sam says, cop could have walked away. People get annoyed at being questioned all the time; usually they don't wind up putting one Harvard prof in cuffs while Charles Ogletree comes along to critique.
Your recounting does not accord with the account of Gates OR the police officer in this case who made it clear in his report that he was made aware that Gates was in fact the legal resident of the house before he arrested him. In fact, the officer explicitly did not arrest Gates on suspicion of breaking and entering which he knew had not occurred. So one wonders from where exactly you have conjured your particular implied justification for this action. It is not one that even the arresting officer claims.
I just came back to make that point: the officer was leaving the house without taking in the anonymous man for breaking and entering, i.e. the cop had been convinced this was the homeowner and no crime had occurred. So there are vital steps missing between 2 and 3 in your summary.
I don't usually post links to other sites, but this Wonkette post on the Gates incident kind of sums it all up in all its tragi-farcical glory. (The post is filed under "The End of Racism".)
http://wonkette.com/409970/famous-harvard-intellectual-arrested-in-connection-with-attempting-to-enter-his-own-home#more-409970
How anyone can read that police report and not see that Gates is psychotic and was definitely disturbing the peace is beyond me. No wonder average hardworking Americans despise liberals. What a miserable lot you are.
Satire? I'm hoping.
Dan, you see things very clearly. My suggestion is that if you want to maintain this level of insight, DO NOT FILL THAT PRESCRIPTION...
DO NOT FILL THAT PRESCRIPTION...
If Dan ever wants to reach Theta Clear, certainly not.
We don't all agree about Professor Gates, but perhaps we can all agree that danindc is truly a useless asshole, and deserves to be locked up for being ignorant, forever.
You liberals are so spineless. We should be demanding his death on the basis of one post.
I do think that patilee makes some good points. I am also finding it hard to believe that, given the clientele of the neighborhood, that the Cambridge PD doesn't know who resides in which house. I would think that Prof. Gates' neighborhood is one in which courtesy patrols by the Cambridge PD are conducted regularly.
It also is an indication that we don't know who are neighbors are. My parents, who have resided in their neighborhood since 1971, don't know their neighbors, and their neighbors don't know them.
If Prof. Gates did in fact become rude and disorderly, that, I would think, would become grounds to run him in, as well as anyone else, of color or white.
As a grad. school prof once told me, there are 17 sides to every story. I suspect there will be more to be reported on this one.
As I just noted, Patilee's third point is untrue, or at least skips several vital intermediary points.
I don't think the reason that no one is citing all the times the Cambridge police have arrested white Harvard profs for being rude in their homes is that it's so common it's not newsworthy. I think it's because no one can find a white Harvard prof who's had this happen. Whereas Dr Counter faced a similar problem a few years back.
Would it be grounds to run him in? Really?
Arresting someone for being disorderly is a tool for keeping a situation from getting worse. I fail to see how Skip Gates was going to create mayhem on Ware St. The worst that could have happened if they'd let him keep yelling, even if the arresting officer's side of the story is 100% true, is that he would have created embarrassment (for himself, his neighbors, and for the police officers taking his verbal abuse).
I can't see why that's reason to arrest someone.
If Prof. Gates did in fact become rude and disorderly, that, I would think, would become grounds to run him in, as well as anyone else, of color or white.
This is where I fundamentally disagree. It's not a crime to be rude to a cop, or disorderly in your house, or argue with a police officer on your own front porch. I've seen people be arrested for trying to ask clarification on whether or not it's legally required for them to cooperate. I've personally been pushed aside for the police to illegally search my house in college because somebody yelled F the police and they decided to search the area houses to find him. No crime was committed in that case, and they had no right to search multiple houses anyways. It's gotten ridiculous, if you don't have a thick skin then don't sign up for the job. I've known plenty of police officers and none of them cry about being made fun of by people.
The police officer realized that no crime was being committed and should have just walked away. He made the situation worse be deciding to stay and argue with the guy. It was like the situation in Texas with the football player. The police officer got onto a power trip and decided to abuse his authority.
If Prof. Gates did in fact become rude and disorderly, that, I would think, would become grounds to run him in, as well as anyone else, of color or white.
The key question here, the crux of this dispute in fact, is why? Why would you think that? Why exactly does anyone believe that being rude is deserving of arrest? Setting aside that patilee has his/her facts plainly wrong as I noted above, what exact points of his/hers do you find so compelling?
I'm kind of alarmed by how many people seem to think that being an asshole in general, or specifically to the police, justifies arrest. Anyone who's dealt with university faculty knows perfectly well that if they arrested professors for being assholes, there'd be no tenure-track faculty left.
On the upside, a few people in my college who really should have been arrested would be in jail...oh, wait, they're white, so probably not.
How is it that this woman didn't recognize her own neighbor? I'd recognize Gates instantly and I don't live across the street from him.
And since when is it a crime to exhibit "tumultuous" behavior on your own front porch?
It's not clear that she completely saw him. She only saw someone breaking into the home and called the police. She might have just saw his butt and legs disappearing into the window.
OK, just read that he forced the front door, so my window theory goes out the window.
What we have here is a wide spectrum of people bringing their pre-conceived notions about race relations and attitudes to bear on this situation, and using them to create narratives that bear them out.
So we range all the way from:
A: All cops always lie, and they love to mistreat black people all the time! Police reports are always crap!
to
B: Black people always play the race card! There is obviously no racism at work here! Police reports are holy writ!
Now, obviously, I've caricatured the extreme cases here, and since this is a very high-quality blog with a very high-quality commentariat, most posts are very reasonable and fall somewhere in the middle of this spectrum. But I would ask people to consider the fact that they ARE bringing their pre-conceived notions to bear on this case, and that none of us really know what happened on the scene.
As someone wrote earlier, just imagine the freepers frothing at the mouth about this incident, and bear in mind that it's really hard to free oneself of that kind of thinking.
By the way, I'm not arguing that the true scenario is in the exact middle - I do think the cops overreacted here and that an arrest was not necessary.
I am, however, leery of ascribing hostile intentions to the police, at least for now. I tend to subscribe to the "If you suspect a conspiracy, have you considered incompetence?" newsletter. If the cops screwed up here - and it appears that they have - I tend to see it more charitably as an error in judgment rather than Trying to Keep The Black Man Down.
...of course, I'm a Jewish boy from the suburbs so my experience with the police is limited to speeding tickets. Those commenters who have had horrifying experiences with racist cops will probably tend to be less charitable. And once again, our backgrounds dominate our judgement... which is why I think we should wait for more facts?
Because one extreme scenario, the arresting officer's report (not dishonest but by its nature one-sided) still makes a very weak case for the arrest. The grand crime against the Republic here is shouting on one's porch.
I am, however, leery of ascribing hostile intentions to the police, at least for now.
I'm not. Cambridge cops harrassing people for for BAHWB (Being At Harvard While Black) has been going on for years.
Nothing like town-gown tensions...
Look, I'm inclined to believe the police in general. But as pointed out above, the "we spoke to him and he wouldn't cooperate .... realizing he was the homeowner we started to leave and he followed us to the porch" version would seem to leave out something in the "..." where Gates did cooperate and convince them he was not a home invader. Cambridge cops are no less prone to racial profiling, even of Harvard professors, than cops elsewhere, to my knowledge....and my husband went to Harvard, so I'm familiar with the campus, neighborhood, and personalities.
No one here has tried to claim A or B in its pure form. But if you look at the Boston Globe story you'll find plenty of proponents of pure B.
And as Doc Cleveland points out, the police report makes a weak case for protecting the public from the threat posed by Dr. Gates yelling at someone on his porch.
As I said, it does look like the cop acted inappropriately, and that given the sad history of racial profiling in the United States it is not surprising that allegations of racism immediately appear - especially since Dr. Gates made the accusation explicitly.
Personally, though, I don't see any convincing evidence, at least not yet, that the cop's behavior had any connection with either his or Dr. Gates' race. It's not unlikely that a not particularly competent, possibly poorly-trained cop would have made the same asshole move had Dr. Gates been white. Of course it's POSSIBLE that there was some racist motivation but I don't think we yet know enough to say for sure.
My knowledge of the sociological or cognitive aspects of racial profiling is admittedly very low, so I speak here not even as a dilettante, but it's hard for me to imagine what kind of particularly RACIST thoughts could have through the cop's head when he made the decision to make the arrest. Was he trying to teach an uppity black man a lesson? Was he thinking that loudly yelling black guys endanger their white neighbors? Was he thinking he, himself, was somehow endangered?
If you think this is a clear-cut case of racism, please enlighten me (I am not being sarcastic) what you think the arresting police officer's particularly racist motivation may have been.
Again, if the Cambridge cops were always arresting uppity white Harvard professors (with which Cambridge is strewn, and toss in MIT and the smaller colleges and you can't have a latte without tripping over a professor) then the racism charge wouldn't stick. No one can find these harassed white professors. So when the first time it happens, it's to a black professor and not to the 100 white professors who could have reported similar encounters but don't seem to have had them....one's mind goes to race. I have never argued with a cop and I understand the irritation at people who claim "everything that happens is because of my gender/race/religion," but the knee jerk assumption that any case of racism is really crying racism has swung way too far the other way. I assume a race component because this doesn't seem to happen to white professors, even though there are a lot more of them in Cambridge and you'd think if this stuff was race blind two dozen would have come forward to say how this happened to them just in the past year.
Ilya, I realize you are trying to make a point, but this doesn't help. I actually don't see a single post in this thread, making either of those extreme points.
People work very, very hard when writing their comments here. I think this is true even of people who I don't agree with in this thread. It's not cool to caricature them, after they've put in that work.
It's worth quoting them, and then confronting--in as much specificity as possible--exactly what you disagree with. Arguing with a cartoon isn't accomplishing anything. Even when you acknowledge it.
It undermines your whole point.
I tried to make clear that I wasn't trying to caricature anyone specific. I was just using a rhetorical device to show what I thought was a wide spectrum of interpretation all being applied to the same facts, and reaching widely divergent results.
But you're definitely right - what I was really doing was writing lazily. Which, both in writing and thinking, may lead more people astray than anything else.
Point very much taken.
I refer to your first point about being aware of preconceived notions that we bring to bear in our readings of such situations. We all examine what we see/hear/read through our cultural lens--see Wise Latina Supreme Court Nominee entry in the dictionary--and begin our interpretations there. It is much easier for me, an African American women, to ascribe hostile intentions to police officers since all the important Black men in my life have experienced harassment at the hands of Chicago's finest. I found your description of interactions with police officers issuing traffic tickets to be at odds with my father's/brother's/cousins/uncles/husband's who have been pulled over, forced to lie on the concrete with guns to their backs, then NOT be issued a ticket, and told to have a nice day.
Too often for people of color, these errors in judgment that you describe have catastrophic endings. I get and appreciate that our experiences are divergent but at the end of the day, it is often the case that we are often operating under different sets of facts, different realities. That fact does not negate your experiences, certainly, nor should my facts, my reality be dismissed.
Reason Gates was not shot??? There were too many educated witnesses on the street.
Deleted. Wrong tone. Wrong blog. You have point--make it. Flame-bait doesn't help.
The complete dearth of examples of times this happened to white Harvard professors. I assure you that at least a few of them have managed to be rude in their time, even to the police.
If you're suggesting that the officer overreacted, I think that's indisputably the case. He responded to the call, and clearly the manner of his response provoked an intense reaction. This was a sergeant - a supervisor - who ought to have drawn on his training to de-escalate a tense situation. Instead, it's clear that he took Gates' criticisms personally. That he allowed his anger to cloud his judgment. And that he arrested a man who posed no threat to anything other than his dignity.
But just because the cop got it wrong, doesn't mean that Gates is off the hook. We haven't heard his side of this yet in any detail, and I'm certainly sympathetic to his anger at being confronted by police for entering his own home, in the middle of the day. But if the report is to believed, he resorted to using his position and influence to threaten the responding officers, berated them as racists, and continued to pursue the confrontation even after the officers had left his home. If he felt that the officers had mistreated him, he wasn't without recourse. For goodness sake, he's Skip Gates! Once the officers had left - and according to the report, it became clear to all involved fairly quickly that Gates was not a burglar - he could've called City Councilor (and former Mayor) Kenneth Reeves, a man who has repeatedly introduced resolutions congratulating Gates on his various academic honors. Or Denise Simmons, the current mayor, whom he also knows. (I'll wager good money that at the next council meeting, one or both of those councilors will introduce a resolution demanding an investigation into the entire incident - think you or I would get that kind of defense?) Or, if he didn't want special treatment, he could've filed a complaint with the Department. But no matter what, the appropriate response was to present his identification, politely notify the officers of his grievance, and pursue it more formally after they had departed.
If the report is correct - indeed, unless the report is largely fabricated - it took two people losing their cool to produce this unfortunate incident. To be sure, it's the sergeant who's paid not to lose his cool, and to treat citizens with dignity and respect. And he blew it, even by his own account. But I don't see how his failings wholly excuse the conduct of Prof. Gates, either.
No one here has assumed that Gates was not rude; the assumption seems to be that he likely was rude. The argument is whether losing your temper and yelling at someone in your kitchen (or porch) is grounds for arresting someone.
It's not like Gates could have chosen to de-escalate by not being arrested--the cop is the one with the power and authority, and chooses to use it, not use it, abuse it, etc.
Deborah, there are two separate questions here. The first is whether the arrest was justified, and it seems that we agree it was not. But the second goes beyond the arrest, to the nature of the confrontation that sparked it. Prof. Gates has raised a legitimate question as to whether the overall conduct of this police officer was reprehensible. And when the attitude, words, and acts of one party to a conflict are held up for public scrutiny, it's to be expected that those of the other party will be equally scrutinized.
I think it's wrong to suggest, as you do, that the question is "whether losing your temper and yelling at someone in your kitchen (or porch) is grounds for arrest." Let's rephrase that to comport with the circumstances. I'd say the question is whether losing your temper at a cop and yelling accusations that he's a racist, and threats about who that cop is "messing" with while standing in your kitchen (or porch) constitutes acceptable behavior. I don't think it does. It shouldn't be grounds for arrest; on the other hand, given that the cop apparently gave him two warnings in front of a dozen witnesses before slapping on the cuffs, neither did the arrest come as any surprise to Prof. Gates. So, yes, he certainly could have de-escalated. He didn't have to go out to the porch. He didn't have to ignore the two warnings. (I presume that, given the presence a dozen witnesses, the cop wasn't stupid enough to have fabricated that portion of his report.) And so, if the cop was wrong to arrest him, well, Prof. Gates was wrong to push the confrontation to that point. There were better, and more constructive, ways of handling this mess. Which doesn't mean that culpability is equally shared, but it does make this more complicated than aggressor and victim.
"Which doesn't mean that culpability is equally shared, but it does make this more complicated than aggressor and victim."
See, I don't think I or anyone else is claiming that Gates is a helpless victim, or that he didn't lose his temper. We're claiming that losing your temper in your kitchen--even if you're yelling at a cop--is not normally considered grounds for arrest. I can think of half a dozen white Harvard profs I've met and I could see any of them turning angry at the assumption that they were a common criminal--and they probably don't have Gates history of such things as being pulled over for driving while black. They might yell and toss around "do you know who I am?!" "I demand your name and badge number!" But if they were at home and had not committed a crime and were not trying to beat a neighbor over the head with their cane or laser pointer, I just don't see the cop arresting them.
I really don't get your claim that accusing a cop of being a racist is grounds for the cop to arrest you. I don't think it counts as polite behavior, but it is not behavior that should normally demand the public resources necessary to arrest a pissed off professor who is annoyed to be treated like a criminal for entering his own home. Again, we have waited for the legions of white Harvard profs to talk about the time this happened to them, and all we got was Cooper recalling being arrested for crossing Harvard yard while black.
Blaming this on Gates comes down to "This particular police officer is just unable to deal with anyone, suspect or witness or whatever, who is rude. His only option is to arrest them. So everyone must be polite, or its really their own fault they got arrested." That's not what one pays cops for, and this guy is not helping out his fellow officers' image.
"....I really don't get your claim that accusing a cop of being a racist is grounds for the cop to arrest you..."
And I really don't get why you persist in misconstruing what I've written. Where did I make that claim? On the contrary, I've repeatedly stated that the arrest was unjustified, and the cop was wrong.
What I've also pointed out is that race isn't the sole prism through which this incident ought to be viewed. I think that class fairly evidently played an important role, as well. You assert, without evidence, that a white Harvard professor who grew equally belligerent with a cop, cast aspersions on his motives and behavior, and used his status, position, and connections to threaten that cop with retribution, would never have been arrested. I'd bet that you're wrong. Cambridge cops don't particularly like anything to do with Harvard. They don't like sharing their jurisdiction, they resent its wealth and power, and they really, really don't like it when Harvard affiliates look down their noses at them.
So why isn't there a record of any similar incidents involving white faculty members? Well, for one thing, we don't know that there isn't. In the ordinary course of events, an arrest for disorderly conduct is a minor thing - not to mention, embarrassing. Most people, hauled away in cuffs for disorderly conduct, would do their best to quickly put the whole thing behind them. I'd bet that other faculty members have been arrested after having had too much to drink, for example. But it's not impossible that Gates is the first. And that's because you've got to be stupid, intoxicated, or righteously indignant to push things as far as he did. But Gates isn't stupid, and he wasn't intoxicated. He was righteously indignant, because he had decided that he was a victim. And that's an unlikely reaction in a faculty member not subjected to a similar lifetime of racial slights and indignities. It's also worth noting that Gates' reaction "This is what happens to a black man in America"
Viewed one way, this was a white officer, cloaked in the mantle of his office, relying on racial stereotypes and abusing his authority. Viewed another, this was a working stiff, just doing his job, confronted by an arrogant college professor with an overinflated sense of his own importance. Imagine how much trouble could have been avoided had either of these two taken the time to view the world from the other's perspective. Both had grown to expect a degree of deference, and both themselves behaved arrogantly. What a shame.
Skip can sue. How about you?
My experience with the Cambridge police is that they're not particularly competent. One friend who was returning a textbook at the campus bookstore was suspected of shoplifting (he had a receipt!) and they called 6 cops to deal with him. This guy is about 5'6 and skinny. He's also white, although he was wearing oversized t-shirt, shorts and a baseball cap. I suspect they assumed he was a troublesome teenager but 1) this was MIT's bookstore, most guys from MIT dress poorly and look young 2) did they really need 6 cops to deal with a suspected shoplifter?
I'm not sure what can be done in Gate's case - if Harvard backs him up, it would help. But, any type of lawsuit would cost money for the city, but maybe not for the cops or the cops' union. That's why racism seems to be such a frustrating problem, it's so hard to actually get to the people who are responsible.
Part of the problem, I'd expect, is that the HUPD and various other college and university police forces provide better pay and benefits.
Makes police recruiting somewhat more competitive.... and it's not like Cambridge is a huge city with a deep talent pool.
Color aside - anyone know what the appropriate actions for a police officer dealing with a home owner breaking into their own home should be?
On the one hand, it's your home, you shouldn't have to prove it. On the other hand, the police are trying to make sure someone hasn't broken into your home!?
The only possible way the cop comes out ahead on this is if Gates refused to produce an ID (I've read conflicting reports) - then it comes down to a property rights question, I think. And IF he started screaming when asked to produce ID, then it comes down to two people with major sticks up their rear-ends, one of whom has a gun.
If the yelling happened after the ID-production, then the one with the gun had the bigger stick.
Unfortunately, police officers are just as likely to be full of themselves as Harvard Professors. Even more unfortunately, the officer has more authority to abuse.
Not entering the house yourself. Call for back-up. Talk on the porch. It's stupid to try to make an arrest in close quarters inside a house if it can be avoided.
Skip Gates was not in fact arrested for breaking and entering.
Welcome to Greater Boston. That's all I have to say about this.
(Used to live a few blocks from his place, so I should know)
However, cops need to get over this idea that they can just arrest an asshole or anybody who challenges their authority.
I absolutely agree with this statement. However, cops do this all the time to everyone. My brother, who has looked entirely innocuous his entire life, has been stopped by cops countless times, from the age of 20 to 40, in wealthy and low income neighborhoods alike. Being rude to a cop can lead to your arrest, and you count yourself lucky if it doesn't. What, you were rude to a cop once and didn't get arrested? Funny, I know people who drive 90 mph everywhere and never get a ticket, even after a cop stops them. Go figure. If a cop tells you to shut up and stop making a fuss, you shut up or stop making a fuss. Fume later.
I was reassured (if disappointed) to hear that Gates is, apparently, an arrogant asshole because my first thought upon reading the report was that he was drunk and the cop was trying to cover it up. But if Gates really is a jerk then maybe he really was sober when he called someone to get the cop fired.
He acted like a jerk. The cop was stupid to arrest him, because who the hell wants to listen to Al Sharpton bellow your name for months? But I'd lay money that the interpretation of events most favorable to Gates will show that Gates was loud and disruptive on his front porch after the cop told him to knock it off. And that's all it will take to justify an arrest.
The timing will be easily tracked. If the cop is telling the truth, then phone records will show that a) Gates calls friend in power to demand cop is squashed like a bug before the cop calls Harvard police upon learning that Gates was a Harvard employee. If that's the timing, it indicates that Gates was pulling rank before he could be bothered to show id. Then the only issue will be whether Gates showed both driver's license and Harvard id, or just Harvard id. The report doesn't mention whether Gates ever showed id or not. If he never showed his driver's license even after a request, that's a problem for Gates. It won't be a case of he said he said, as the cop would have touched the license.
Still, I do wonder if Gates was drunk. He has a fairly well-established public persona and this is very much out of keeping with it.
The time of the police report was 12:44 pm on Thursday. If Gates were drunk, it would have been the result of a three martini lunch.
I would tend to forgive people for behaving like arrogant SOBs on their own porch or in their own kitchen -- territory is territory.
But maybe that's a redneck's view -- in urban America it's best to invite Mr. 'officer' in for a spot of tea.
Still, I do wonder if Gates was drunk. He has a fairly well-established public persona and this is very much out of keeping with it.
That's reading a bit too much into it. The man locked himself out of his own house. Clearly he was not having a very good day and having the cops question him over suspected b/e didn't improve it. Furthermore, if he had been drinking (and not just irate), you would think that the cop could have detected it from physical symptoms and included it in his report or even arrested Gates on the basis of Drunk and Disorderly rather than Disturbing the Peace.
Now, if Gates was the chair of the Hibernian Studies Department or on the law school faculty, you might have a point.
Does this sort of thing happen to white guys? Occasionally:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/30/AR2008073003299.html?
Guy was the mayor. He didn't have time to say anything to the cops. They shot and killed his two Labrador retrievers. It turned out he had nothing to do with the package, and in fact the cops knew that they were being sent to random people (apparently the drug dealers were snatching them off porches before anyone came home to find them).
Which doesn't have any particular bearing on the Gates case. But it does provide one more example to bolster the belief that Policemen Are Not Your Friends -- no matter how well-off and established you may be.
Here is a link to Professor Charles Ogletree's Statement posted at www.theroot.com, on the Arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr. I suggest that you all read it to see how much it differs from the police report. http://www.theroot.com/views/lawyers-statement-arrest-henry-louis-gates-jr
My take after reading it is set forth below:
Professor Gates was in his home when the officer arrived. He was obviously annoyed that he was being questioned about allegedly breaking and entering into his own home and let the officer know that he was not pleased. The officer asked him to come outside the home and provide him with id. Gates declined to come outside, but allowed the officer to follow him inside so that he could go get his id from his wallet. Professor Gates gave the officer his drivers licence and university i.d., but the officer continued to question Gates because he did not think that the evidence was sufficient. Gates got upset and opined that the continued questioning by the officer was due to the fact that Professor Gates was a black man in America. Professor Gates began to call the local PD to complain about what he thought was an abuse of authority by the police officers on the scene. During the call to the station, Gates repeatedly asked the officer for his name and badge number and they got into a bit of a detente.
The officer repeatedly asked Professor Gates to follow him outside (supposedly because the officer could not hear his radio over Gates' loud voice). (However, IMHO, the officer may have been trying to lure Gates onto the porch because he was upset that Gates trying to report him to his superiors and because the officer knew that he would not have been able to arrest the professor for disorderly conduct in his home). Gates followed the officer onto the porch and continued to demand that the officer provide him with his name and badge number. Once, Gates stepped onto the porch, the officer used that as an excuse to make to the disorderly conduct arrest.
No mention (in the link) of Gates calling to complain. So either he didn't call and complain, or there is a major omission in his account.
And if he did give the cop his driver's license and the cop didn't mention it, then that's a major omission in his account.
I've run into all sorts of law enforcement in my life, some pretty nice, some pretty abusive of their power, just because they could be.
I can remember one incident when I was a young man in Grand Canyon when I and some friends mooned a helicopter after having been buzzed by planes and helicopters the day before, including once as we were entering a dangerous rapid in which our oarsman was so startled he had lost control of the boat. Turned out the copter pilot was forest service and came right down and landed on the beach where we were. I was so livid with the guy--loud and tumultuous would be an understatement. Foolish, stupid, self destructive behavior, which I can only justify by how terrifying it is to enter a rapid in a spinning boat with no one at the oars, but the man got why I was mad, and while he could have suspended our whole trip, maybe arrested me, he walked away.
That's what the cop should have done; unless Mr. Gates was threatening him or something like--being irate and noisy in the street? Walk away man, walk away. It wouldn't take rocket science to get why Gates was pissed. Surely, most cops know first of all that blacks are profiled, and secondly he knew the guy was a Harvard professor--an old, short, bespectacled black Harvard professor that was being confronted for breaking into his own house, as if no one had ever been locked out of their own house and tried to figure out a way to get in before?
I don't know what happened, though I think it would be a great subject for a short story told from two points of view. I do know that as a white, short, bespectacled old white community college professor, I have crawled into my home through a window and no one ever called the cops on me.
Quick follow up:
I think that the focus on whether or not Professor Gates had an "attitude" when speaking to the police officer is a red herring. How do people think that Dick Cheney, or John McCain would have reacted to those cops if they were still questioning them in their own homes after they had provided valid photo identification?
IMHO, having conceded that the professor did not strike the officer, threaten him with any violence, or appear to be a danger to himself/anyone else, the onus is on the officer to prove that he handled the situation appropriately.
So the police report cites c272 S53 as the basis for his arrest. Here is what section 53 says (btw, very outdated language):
Then Section 54 goes on to say when/where you can arrest someone committing such an offense:
If you'll notice, it says that someone who is allegedly disorderly can be arrested without a warrant "in a public way or other public place." I'm not sure if someone's own porch can be considered a public space here....
Of course it will probably be argued that the allegation that Professor Gates is a 'common railer and brawler/nightwalker, etc.' unduly defames his reputation.
Meanwhile, Ms. Whelan would seem to have a valid complaint against the CPD for damage done to her reputation, given the CPD's failure to redact her name.
And, of course the arrest took place at 12:44 pm on a Thursday. At that time of day, it takes significant effort to be heard disturbing the public peace over the din of a the jackhammer and backhoe down the street.
Dumb waste of time... though it'll give Dr. Gates a nice easy chapter or two.
The big question for me is why the officer didn't end the interview when he'd seen ID. That's a hole even in his own version of events.
You've had a possible break-in reported. Fair enough. You've met the home owner, who is clearly not a threat. (If the police sergeant really considered Gates either a suspect or a threat, he should never have entered the house without backup. That he did suggests that he knew perfectly well that there was no crime here.) You ask the homeowner for ID, which agitates him, but perhaps this can be construed as just-doing-the-job.
(By this point, if the police officer is in his right mind, he should be working to calm the situation down. As in, "I'm sorry, sir, we had a report of a break-in and we wanted to check that you were okay here. I'm sorry to do this, but could I see your ID, so I can make my report?" Asking the homeowner for ID should have been done *damned* politely, if at all.)
Then the police officer gets the ID that establishes, as he admits in his own report, that the homeowner is indeed the homeowner. What on earth is the officer doing after that point?
"I will now generate 200+ passionate comments on my blog."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppJAkN4m9bY
Fascinating to read the divergence of views and biases. One thing's for sure, the host knows what his audience likes to talk about!
I'm getting slammed at my blog for saying that, if the police report is accurate, Gates made a bad situation worse. Again--*if the report is correct.* The police officer showed bad judgment by not researching the situation before going in, and Gates showed bad judgment by continuing to berate the officer and leaving his house.
No, Gates should not have been arrested. But we should all know that making a scene with police--no matter who or where you are--will likely not end well for you. I sincerely hope that Charles Ogletree's account of the events is correct. If it isn't, then both Gates and the police officer contributed to the end result of the incident with bad judgment.
I'm getting slammed at my blog for saying that, if the police report is accurate, Gates made a bad situation worse. Again--*if the report is correct.* The police officer showed bad judgment by not researching the situation before going in, and Gates showed bad judgment by continuing to berate the officer and leaving his house.
No, Gates should not have been arrested. But we should all know that making a scene with police--no matter who or where you are--will likely not end well for you. I sincerely hope that Charles Ogletree's account of the events is correct. If it isn't, then both Gates and the police officer contributed to the end result of the incident with bad judgment.
(sorry for the double post--having issues with the interwebs)
Wow. 244 and counting. I had no idea this was going to drive such a long discussion. Now I feel sort of guilty for my glib Dave Chappelle linking way back at the beginning.
No, that was the perfect time to link Dave.
My problem is this:
If one assumes that the Seargent is not a racist and if one further assumes that his report is more or less accurate, and if one takes into account that there is apparently a law that makes it illegal to display human behaviour, then the Seargent's conduct doesn't seem to be out of all reason. He went to the house because it was his duty and there wasn't any racial profiling on his part. Being there, he needed a statement of Gates in order to report back: false alarm, apparent burgler = houseowner. To this point, the cop was acting by the book and in the interests of the houseowner. Then the trouble started. If one assumes that the report is correct: Is it really impossible to imagine that this cop would have arrested Alan Dershowitz if he would have called him a Nazi and shouting "This is what happens to jews in America"? According to the report, Gates went into a power game (Know who I am? Give me the Chief!) and the Cop played along (however, the part with the handcuffs was just cruel in my opinion). Whether or not he wins in the end remains to be seen.
Sure, the cop could have walked. He probably should have. But maybe this wouldn't have been right.
But again, that's assuming that being an asshole is an arrestable offense.
According to JG's post above, it is. Moreover, "asshole" is defined by medieval standards.
Which, I think, raises significant constitutional questions.
Even though a cop carries a gun and, at times, has the task of arresting people, she's still a 'public servant.'
Gates pays some portion of Officer Figueroa's salary -- the correct answer to "do you know who I am" was not "endowed chair of Harvard's Department of African American Studies" but rather "one of my employers."
No question, police officers have a tough job, and we'd don't pay them enough. But there are some -- as they say -- bad apples on the force who should be finding another line of work.
If the officer asked Gates for his ID, and Gates said "I pay your salary", I would gladly have cheered the officer abusing his authority by marching Gates off in handcuffs.
Yes, an officer is a public servant and they should be expected to treat people with respect - regardless of the person's tax paying status.
But "I pay your salary" is not a factor here. Either you've done something wrong, in which case your tax paying status doesn't matter, or you haven't done anything wrong, and the fact that you haven't done anything wrong is the only fact that matters.
I'm sorry to ask the following personal questions, but they seem pertinent.
Your son/daughter is distraught and on top of Harvard's Littauer Center. Or your son/daughter is in a heated dispute with his her boy/girlfriend/husband/wife.
On the basis of the arrest report, do you want this cop to be the one answering that call?
Would you be on the sidelines cheering as the situation escalated?
Telling a cop, "I pay your salary" is a dumbass thing to say, but is not ever a justification for arrest.
I don't disagree, although I don't think of public officials as the employees of taxpayers. I also think that it's idotic to arrest people because of "loud and tumultuous behavior" but I find the law more outlandish than the enforcement of it.
With respect to the gun, I don't think that the average policeman thinks that he's all powerful because of it. As IP noted, the average policeman never uses his gun. Standing in front of the professors house, the cop was the little guy and - if the report is accurate - Gates let him know. That's why I'm unconfortable with the scenario where the cop just backs down an walks away. I must add, however, that there would have been plenty of possiblities for the cop to save face without arresting Gates (a fine, or just explaining himself and demanding an apology).
PS: I also think this mugshot-business is just cruel and I can't see any justification as to why these photos are released and published.
Heh. My dad lives in Cambridge. He'll end up paying some portion of the CPD's settlement with Dr. Gates.
I tend to think he's right to be annoyed at they way CPD is spending his property taxes -- long CYA police reports, internal inquiries, discussions with HUPD, discussions with Harvard Administration, yada yada yada.
Time far better spent repairing traffic cameras.
"if you are black and on the street you are bound to draw the heat ... that is just the way things go" in Patterson (Hurricane, by Bob Dylan).
Unfairness is not limited to Patterson, NJ obviously ...
Not quite right. It goes:
"In Paterson that's just the way things go. If you're black you might as well not show up on the street, 'less you want to draw the heat."
That's a good song.
As soon as I saw this, I thought of Dave Chappelle.
"He's still here! Open and shut case, Johnson. I saw this once before where they broke in and hung pictures of themselves."
Sorry won't use the n-word so script was adjusted.
Dupe
It's ok. Just sprinkle some crack on him.
Update: According to Carlos Watson on MSNBC, all charges against Professor Gates have now been dropped.
That's great news.
Carlos Watson's take on this is more informed than most. When he was 18 his Harvard dorm was around the corner from Ware St.
TNC - love the blog, read it everyday. You handle this blog very well (comments section especially) and always touch subjects with caution and humility - something few bloggers are capable of doing.
In your post you suggest (using sarcasm, but not coming out and saying it directly - unless you really were making the assertion that there is no racism in Cambridge, which I assume was not your intention) that Mr. Gates' arrest was the result of racism or that racism played a role in it somehow. Many others here have come out and said more directly that this was a race-driven incident. One commenter suggested it is just as likely that this had more to do with incompetence than race. Another still suggested it could have more to do with a power trip than race. None of us yet know what happened exactly, but a lot of us are making conclusions based on what facts are available supplemented heavily with our own past experiences.
I read your post and all the ensuing comments, Toure's post on the Daily Beast, the police report and Mr. Gates' counsel's statement. I am having trouble jumping to the conclusion that this was the result of racism without more to back it up. Was the arresting officer Mark Ferman's son? Closet klansman?
For the sake of the argument the officer acted out of line and abused his power. Because he is white (an assumption we have all made, but no report of the incident states expressly - I could have missed it though) and because Mr. Gates is black we can conclude that it was a result of racism? That's it? It's a heavy charge without more to back it up. This country cannot escape its history (and many contemporary incidents) and it clearly plays a role in shaping our perspective on things, but it is not so useful to paint all we see in such broad strokes instead of judging on the merits of each situation.
I might suggest that dealing with tense racial situations ought to be considered a fairly significant element of a police-officer's core competence.
The problem with discussing 'abuses of power,' (on the part of Prof Gates or Officer Figueroa) or racism is that it distracts from a clear-eyed discussion of the policeman's job and his role in society.
Officer Figueroa might be called on to talk down a potential suicide or resolve an armed domestic dispute. He couldn't manage to tamp down a violent agreement (sic) with a 58+ year old arrogant-but-geeky Harvard Professor. If nothing else, he deserves the CPD's Milton Waddams employee-of-the month award.
Gates and his neighbors have good reason to worry that their tax dollars are being poorly spent on Cambridge's finest.
In the United States there is a cultural overlay that says that black men are, criminal, dangerous, irrational, etc. ALL Americans are familiar with this as a shared understanding and incorporate it into their response patterns. Likewise there is an similiar understanding within the police community regarding impunity for virtually everything (context dependant) up to and including summary execution.
That being said, the arresting officer became annoyed at Dr. Gates because of what he said, how he said it, or any one of a thousand cultural tresspasses; and sought to teach Dr Gates, "a lesson". Any other reading of this incident is simply disingenuous. The idea that the "police report" was not specifically crafted as an "get out of jail free" card for the arresting officer is likewise a pretend belief not truly held by anyone.
For the Record:
The City of Cambridge and the Cambridge Police Department have recommended to the Middlesex County District Attorney that the criminal charge against Professor Gates not proceed. Therefore, in the interests of justice, the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office has agreed to enter a nolle prosequi in this matter.
The City of Cambridge, the Cambridge Police Department, and Professor Gates acknowledge that the incident of July 16, 2009 was regrettable and unfortunate. This incident should not be viewed as one that demeans the character and reputation of Professor Gates or the character of the Cambridge Police Department. All parties agree that this is a just resolution to an unfortunate set of circumstances.
Racism in Cambridge? Say it ain't so!
When I was an undergrad (in Cambridge, though not at Harvard), our campus police stopped an Arab-American friend of mine for carrying a roll of duct tape while walking through campus - they thought it looked "suspicious". Fortunately, after he showed his student ID, they let him go, albeit with some grumbling.
I never was sure what they feared he was going to do with it.
The police report seems to have been pulled from the internets.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/21/AR2009072101771.html?hpid=topnews
Seems like a new PBS special by Professor Gates may be in the offing.
Mysteriously, the police report has reappeared...
http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Original_PDF/2009/07/21/0721docket_redacted_revised__1248200728_6644.pdf
Doh!
The change is that they redacted the name of the neighbor who made the call. Probably got a call from her lawyer, or from their lawyer.
Gates' version in his own words is now up:
http://www.theroot.com/views/skip-gates-speaks?page=0,0
It includes a doctors statement that he has not yet recovered from serious bronchitis, which cast doubt on the "tumultuous" story of the police.
Bear in mind that there is good reason to have serious doubts about police testimony about anyone they arrest, just as there is good reason to have serious doubts about the claim of a used car salesperson that the first price named is the lowest they can go.
One bit of evidence about this is the term "testilying" invented by the NYPD some decades ago to describe giving testimony in court. I'm sure that has been replaced by other terms since. But many police departments have joking terms for this. Like most jokes, the element of truth is what makes it funny.
It is a fairly routine matter for a police officer to lie, and to omit material truths during testimony to help make a case. Again, remember the term is a police invention, a term they used about themselves.
(Many don't see this lying. The attitude is often "juries are deeply stupid. If saying certain things helps a deeply stupid jury to see the truth, that this defendant is a guilty scumbag, then that is valid testimony. ")
So at the very least police testimony should not be given more weight than that of private citizens, and given the routine nature of lies in that testimony, I might even give it less. That is not being anti-police any more than not believing the first offer is the best possible is being anti-used car seller. It is simply recognizing the reality of how a particular trade or profession works.
It appears that some people may be shocked to hear that police officers routinely engage in perjury. But how often do you hear of a police officer charged with perjury even when caught trying to lie someone into jail? I know of one case where four or five officers gave testimony contradicted by videotape. The defendant was acquitted, but the officers were not in even the smallest trouble.
It's a sad day when Americans think that "belligerence" is a crime. Anyone could be very upset with confusing police actions in their own home. Questioning and talking out is normal behavior when we are attempting to right a wrong. However, I was taught to "go silent" and not become a police shooting statistic by my depression era parents. Does it always have to be that way?
Our founding Fathers were belligerent!
I sincerely doubt Gates was physically aggressive. This term (belligerent)is consistently applied when minorities question authority. It has been applied in previous posts as some type of rationalization for the use of police force. The tactics employed by Officer Crowely were arrogant and over the top. Crowely employs the term "tumultuous behavior in a public place" to describe Gates criminal demeanor. I refuse to categorize Crowely as a racist, but overzealous attitudes of supremacy do not reflect the values I need from any police department.
Let's give a special thanks to the good citizen neighbor who called the P.D. But, just maybe she could have invested a minute prior to the incident to meet her neighbor too. The police report is pretty odd, particularly if read from the viewpoint of the second officer, Fiqueroa. Fiqueroa's remedial report has some differences of omission that make Crowely's report look like he is trying really hard to show that Gates somehow had the ability to incite a riot.
Read it for yourself. We all know that C. Y. A. is a police norm. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates1.html
I find it very revealing that officer Crowely refuses to apologize when directed to do so by the Mayor of Cambridge. Should he be punished for his belligerence? Is this a possible sign of how big his ego might be? Are these actions in part what may cause minorities to be more sensitive and have stronger reactions?
Please know and understand that it hurts a lot more and the expression of pain gets louder, when you get injured in the same place repeatedly.
I know that racism still exists in America but things are getting better, even though stupid things still happen every now and then. I'm sure that the police wasn't polite or friendly and Mr. Gates was rude and uncooperative because he thought he was justified. Both party's were wrong in this case and it could have been avoided by both parties. When I was seven, my dad and I were at gas station when the police pulled up with guns drawn and began yelling at my dad to get down on the ground. He refused and began arguing with the police. They took him by force and hurt him really bad. He thought he was in the right because he'd done nothing wrong, but he wasn't. They thought he'd robbed a convenience store because he fit the profile. When it was all over, they said it could have been prevented if he had cooperated (By the way..we are white-weird things happen to everyone!) People need to work together to make America better and it should start with you and me. Don't just demand respect (even if you are in the right)give it too! There are always two sides to every fence we build.
UH OH! The audio of the 911 call has finally been released. Now we all can draw a legitimate comparison between Lucia Whalen's verbal/audio description and the "Golden Honest Text" of officer Crowley's official police report.
Here is the link for the Crowley's report: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates1.html
Please take special note of the third paragraph where Crowley states
" She went on to tell me that she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch of 17 Ware street."
Now here is the all important audio link of Whalen clearly stating that she could not tell the race of the individuals that she observed. When pressed by the dispatcher, she says one of them may have been Hispanic!
Audio link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/audio/2009/07/27/AU2009072701389.html?sid=ST2009072703057
I have listened to this enough times and gone over the report to find contradictions that are striking.
I keep reading statements that the mean ol' professor should have been more polite and gracious. Let's see, impolite and loud in your own home. Tricked into going outside to make the case of "disorderly conduct in a public place."
Go directly to jail...
Abuse the public trust with a highly suspect legal document that justifies the trick or treat arrest. Again, he never documents what Gates has said that was so out of line.
Priceless.
I think the issue of police honesty is where the majority of change needs to be made. I am willing to bet that millions of Americans will never raise their voices if all cops stop would stop the testalying.
Wake up America IT IS a racial issue if the person (Lucia Whalen) reporting the incident says specifically she could not identify the race (hear her say it in her own words) and the policeman substitutes "Two black men" in his report. Or, in his mind. I am not calling him a racist. However, in light of the contradiction of facts he appears to have some hidden issues with race.
Are we to believe that Whalen contradicted herself with officer Crowley while on the phone with Cambridge P.D. dispatch? The taped report would tell us otherwise.
Might we have some doubts as to the validity of Crowely's report? If he is willing to falsify these details what else is he willing to lie about? What else is he willing to do?
People, we pay this man to wear a badge and carry a gun. Honestly.