What the Gates story says about race and culture
One thing that has struck me in the endless discussion over Henry Louis Gates’ arrest is the difference in cultural attitudes between those who are defending Gates versus those siding with the Cambridge police.
Specifically, I’m startled by the notion put forth by some that Gates was in the wrong by not showing extreme deference toward the police. If you put race aside for a moment (but only for a moment), I think that, more than anything, accounts for the split. We’re talking about a clash of worldviews that we’re not going to resolve here.
I’ve been sitting on the fence but leaning toward Gates. I now think we know enough that I can come out firmly on Gates’ side. We may never know exactly what happened. But the only important difference between the police report and Gates’ own account is the question of whether Gates pulled a nutty. I don’t care if he did or not.
I’m going link-free; I’ve linked to everything relevant over the past few days, so just click here.
Here are some facts that we know beyond any doubt:
- A woman who works but does not live in the neighborhood called police to report that two black men appeared to be breaking into a home. Perhaps she would have called even if Gates and his driver had been white. I don’t know what she was thinking. But if their race played a role in her decision to dial “911,” that would hardly be the first time police have been summoned because black people had been seen in a place they weren’t supposed to be.
- The police responded and questioned Gates, as they should have, given the woman’s call and her report that the two men were trying to force their way in.
- A short time later, Sgt. James Crowley and his fellow officers knew for a fact that Gates, in fact, lived in the home to which they had responded. Gates — 58 years old and disabled — may or may not have been ranting and raving at them. But surely the officers knew that, through no fault of their own, they had stumbled into a racially explosive situation.
- Rather than find a way to extricate themselves and let everyone cool off, the police decided to arrest Gates at his own home and charge him with disturbing the peace. Even if you rely solely on the police report, it’s clear that Gates’ offense was mouthing off to the officers, who were on his property and who no longer had any reason to be there.
- The arrest took place last Thursday. No one knew about it until Monday, when the police report leaked out. (It appears that the Boston Globe broke the story.) Even though the report was a public record that the police were withholding on flimsy grounds (The investigation was continuing? Really?), a police spokesman said as recently as yesterday that the department was trying to ferret out the leaker.
- As soon as Middlesex District Attorney Gerard Leone got involved, the charges were dropped and the Cambridge Police Department issued a conciliatory statement. It is telling, I think, that it took an outsider to see the arrest for the fiasco it was.
Am I missing anything? I don’t think so. I also don’t think anyone can dispute the facts as I’ve laid them out. Given that, we come back to our competing mindsets.
Could Gates have handled this differently? Well, sure. He could — as many have suggested — have thanked the officers for keeping such a close eye on his house and sent them on their way with a smile and a handshake. Maybe that would have even been a better response.
And you know what? It’s definitely how I would have responded. But I’m white, and that fact predisposes me to have a very different attitude toward police officers. At a minimum, I would never suspect I was being hassled because I didn’t look like I belonged in my own home or in a particular neighborhood.
Gates responded as someone whose dignity had been assaulted because of his race. And whether that was literally true or not, the officers should have understood immediately that that was a perfectly understandable, reasonable response on Gates’ part.
Either the police didn’t recognize the situation for what it was, or they did and made a macho decision to show Gates who was in charge. Either way, it was a mistake, and one we’ll be hearing about for some time to come.
And if Gates had put up his fists in a fight or flight mode, what that have been "perfectly understandable, reasonable response on Gates' part"? Isn't this what your piece boils down to: what you deem "reasonable"? How "objective" are you? You're saying that as a white man looking on a black man, and imagining and feigning some knowledge and insight about black men (throwing some police officers into the mix) you are able to empathize with this black man (and black men in general) qua accused in the face of law enforcement? How else do you posit "that that was a perfectly understandable, reasonable response"? Your rant is as coherent as Gates.
Dan, amen. Same for the Globe editorial.
If Officer Crowley has good counsel, he'll realize that he should offer whatever apology is necessary in order to get this behind him — although he probably would want to have a guarantee from Gates that he wouldn't be subject to a civil suit and/or a complaint to the police (or DOJ Civil Right Division) over his behavior (regardless of whether or not he believes such a suit or complaint would have merit).
So, how do you think the media have handled this story?
Since classof93 poses a bunch of "what ifs" that no one is saying took place, I suppose we should thank her for her comments and send her on her merry way.
I think one thing is missing from your chain of events. After step 3, from what I have heard, Gates demanded (requested?) the officer's identity and badge number. I don't know in what manner that demand was made, but that is what led to the arrest.
(Again, this is what I've gleaned from all the reports, which have been numerous, confused and at times not even factual, so I may be mistaken.)
Steve: I'll grant you that, but it's a fact in dispute. Crowley says Gates kept demanding his name and badge number even though he'd already told him several times. Gates says he kept demanding it because Crowley wouldn't give it to him. I tried to restrict my analysis to what we know for sure.
This is more about class as race. No one has mentioned this fact.
I agree with Dan until the second to last paragraph. Why should the cops assume Gates' dignity had been insulted because of his race? They're cops — average people — not Harvard scholars.
Dan: Do you really think you need to be a Harvard scholar to put yourself in the other guy's shoes for a moment? Police officers are professionals. Very few are not well-educated these days.
Ha! I was going to say something erudite and insightful here. But then I noticed the word verification for this post is "dinglesac" – just had to share that instead.
Ok, while I'm here – I agree that, while race is an important factor, this also goes beyond race. I'm gratified that Prof. Gates is pointing out that if this can happen to him, it can happen to anyone. I'm a white Irish guy, but that hasn't protected me from being hassled and treated disrespectfully by overzealous cops in a couple of instances.
Motivation, intent – those are the hardest things to prove. We will perhaps never know what motivated Crowley. But regardless of his intent, he acted wrongly.
Which brings me to my major quibble with your statement, Dan – it was more than a mistake. He acted wrongly and should be disciplined.
A comment I read on another blog sums it up perfectly I think: When assholes collide. My impression is that, although the cops were out of line, Gates behaved like a prick too. Nobody behaved like an adult.
Widmerpool – I'm not agreeing with you at all that Gates was acting like a prick. But, so what if he was? He was inside his own house and had complied with the officer's request for ID. He has a right to be a prick in his own house if he wants to be.
It's setting a pretty low bar to say cops can arrest anyone – as in, slap handcuffs on them and take them down for booking – for being a prick in their own home. Don't you think?
One interesting point that you make is that it took three or four days for this story to make it to the press. The Cambridge Police didn't release the police report; Gates retired to Martha's Vineyard, anger possibly giving way to embarrassment. Both initially probably felt it was in their interest to let everything get swept under the rug.
Neither the Cambridge Police nor Gates look good in this. Two accounts have Gates pushing buttons: "You don't know who you are messing with." One (easily verifiable) account has Gates trying to place a phone call to the chief (of police?), another button pushed. Of course an arrest was uncalled for, but it's not difficult to see how the sequence of events unfolded.
I am, however, trying to figure out where racism or profiling fits in the story. Was it the orginal 911 call? Was it the officer asking for the ID? Was it an attitude that the officer carried? Was it the arrest after there very clearly was a scene of some sort?
I am still on the fence.
I'm not agreeing with you at all that Gates was acting like a prick. But, so what if he was? He was inside his own house and had complied with the officer's request for ID. He has a right to be a prick in his own house if he wants to be.
Treg, that really says it all. That's what defenders of the police don't want to acknowledge or don't understand.
Karl: It's possible that the only racial aspect to all of this was Gates' perception and response. Doesn't matter. He was in his own house, minding his own business
It is possible that this was a class, rather than strictly a race based incident. But it's just as possible that the class issue went the other way: Gates, well educated, Ph.D., widely known with an international audience, teaching at the peak of his career, wasn't about to take any lip from a local police officer. That is at least plausible.
Another point you should add, Dan. When the police realized who Gates was (and that the property was his) they called for back-up from the Harvard Police department. Which is strange behavior once you discover there is no burglary and therefore no crime. Why escalated the episode by calling for back-up?
Shame on you Dan, throughout your list of "facts" you editorialized your partisan conclusions.
The mistake that was made was Gates' and that was to not be reasonable and responsible to legal authority.
Sugar coat all you want, but that IS, in essence the case.
I find it interesting that the liberal wing finds is very disconcerting when one of theirs falls into a trap of their own making.
Rep, Rangel is next. Are the allegations of HIS corruption solely because he is black?
Gates blew it. Get over it.
Ikcape: Rangel would appear to be a corrupt old hack. And argument by analogy is the next-to-last refuse of a scoundrel. It is a sign of the weakness of your argument that you would reach for Charlie Rangel (!) as some sort of — well, what?
Why not bring in Scientology, the price of Microsoft shares and the hazards of pesticides while you're at it? Equally relevant to the matter at hand.
It's a clash of rights vs. the reasonable way to act around police.
Police responding to any call are going to be jacked up, to some extent: It's a survival response that doesn't automatically get dialed down the second one realizes he's not in danger. That's the way it is.
Certainly, Gates had a right to badger the cops if he believed (correctly, perhaps) had he been a target of racial profiling. But to be anything less than polite to a police officer is foolhardy — even if you have every right to be so.
Say you're stopped at a DWI checkpoint (a relaxation of our civil liberties, unquestionably). When the officer asks you where you're headed, any response that smacks of the (factually correct) insistence that your direction of travel or plans for the night are none of the officer's business is going to get you detained — probably irrespective of skin color.
I don't like answering police's questions or acting deferentially any better than Gates apparently does. But even if your integrity is impugned, when you're talking to a uniformed police officer, in that moment the police officer is in charge. Everybody, of any age, background or skin color should know that if they want to avoid problems with the police.
Now more than ever, Sergeant Crowley needs to find that black attorney (preferably an ex-cop) to bring a federal defamation suit against Gates. I hope Crowley has started seeing a doctor for anxiety, depression, insomnia etc. If he has a wife and kids, they should start going to.
With nine B&Es in that neighborhood this year alone, and a Harvard employed, named, civilian caller in his presence at the scene (and in the court room a year from now) Crowley is a very sympathetic figure. No reports that he used any racial epithets or even raised his voice. Gates, OTOH, with his "Yo Mama" and "You don't know who you're messin' with," not so much. The Herald is now reporting that Crowley is well respected with a clean record, which bolsters his case. No patterns of racism, apparently.
The breathtaking dog and pony show that Gates has engaged in on every willing media outlet in the past 24 hours, with his allegations of racism and false police reports, has been something to behold. He is forever tied those statements, including that he never yelled/couldn't yell. The Herald has already located a witness, sympathetic to Gates, who says Gates is lying on this. This is why good lawyers insist that their clients speak to nobody about their case until it comes to court.
Noticeably, Sergeant Crowley is the one remaining silent. Smart man, tied only to the contents of his police report. Keep in mind, a federal jury pool is picked from the entire region, not just urban Boston, so unlike Suffolk County juries, there aren't likely to be many blacks on this one. I point that out because it's less likely Gates will find sympathy in federal court. Crowley, his career now in tatters, should go for millions, under the "No good deed goes unpunished" philosophy. I don't see how he can lose
io saturnalia! – Whatever. He WASN'T AT A DWI CHECKPOINT! He was inside HIS HOME!!!
Ok, I'll stop shouting. But it's apples and bowling balls. The issue had been resolved. The police had received a call about a possible break-in. Gates showed his driver's license and Harvard ID and explained the door had been stuck. That should have been the end of it.
Both are completely wrong
Professor Gates, especially considering his prominence, was completely wrong with his horribly discourteous behavior.
The police officer was completely wrong in his representation of the city and department to treat any citizen in such a disrespectful manner. And even if the occupant is rude, he is to overlook that and ensure the occupant's safety and that there is not a burglar in the house holding someone hostage.
To that point they are equals, both acting inappropriately regardless of what set it off. Whichever one started the ruckus, the other should not have participated.
Where the police officer obviously is extraordinarily out of line is in his abuse of authority by handcuffing, arresting, mug shooting and detaining in jail a person who has not committed a crime but instead to settle an immature, emotional dispute otherwise unable to resolve with both retaining their dignity.
To use the authority of the city to apply personal punishment for an insult or fear of a complaint being filed with a superior, is a basic violation of civil rights along with other Constitutional protections which failed in Cambridge last week.
Professor Gates didn't have the authority to handcuff and arrest the police officer for being disrespectful, but if he had and did he would have been as horribly wrong as Sgt. Crowley.
NewsHound, how do you know Gates' behavior was "horribly disrespectful"? I'm assuming you didn't witness the incident and that you're relying on the police report for that point of view. Gates says the report is inaccurate.
And at any rate, Gates was in his home. He was a threat to no one and had complied with the request for ID. Let's just say for the sake of argument that he was disrespectful – so what? That's a reason to arrest the man in his own home?
The police officer abused his power.
Dan and Treg,
Of course you can behave like a prick in your own house. But you run the risk of encountering another prick dressed in blue. No one is wearing a white hat in this.
Widmerpool – So you ARE a racist! I suppose a white hat means good and a black hat means bad?
And if Gates wore a white hat I suppose you'd call him, what? A pimp?
Ok, fine. Don't laugh.
At any rate, you're wrong. The prick dressed in blue had no business being there when he arrested Gates. This man did nothing wrong. He reacted negatively to an overzealous and abusive cop. He had provided ID. The situation was resolved and the cops should have left.
What, is this a generational thing? The uniform and badge do not convey absolute authority, you know.
A reminder, Dan, next Scoundrel's Association meeting is Thursday; your remarks at the last meeting were interesting. :D
I was merely pointing out the propensity for some to play the race card a the drop of a straw hat.
Gates was one of them, and you are becoming an apologist.
Stop dragging squirrels.
Gates blew it.
You know it. Gates knows it.
So does anyone who looks a things with out the emotional overlays.
Nice summary, Dan. One criticism and three thoughts.
First, the criticism: Once an arrest was made, it would have to have been the DA who dropped the charges. That's the system, and it's designed that way to prevent the police from abusing their arrest powers. So I think the implication that no one recognized this was out of hand until it got to the DA is not established. Others in the department could well have seen the foolishness of it, but they could not have dropped charges once someone is arrested.
There are two elements to police work that are worth noting here. For starters, the police officers who work overnight are generally of a different makeup than those who work days. Because of the nature of their work, they generally do not have as much need for the soft, people skills that dayside officers have in greater measure. In cases like this, where finesse is required, that's a bad thing. But often times after midnight what's required is someone with the makeup to charge headlong into a dangerous situation and bring things to a halt immediately, which requires a wildly different skill set than daytime officers generally use. Like it or not, you often can't have everything in a police officer, and there are good reasons to have aggressive cops working late at night.
Second, police have a limited set of options when a situation begins escalating. Someone may think that if they challenge an officer, they are effectively aiding their case. But in reality, they are closing off avenues of action for the officer. The more aggressive someone becomes, the less chance the officer is to let it drop. It's simply the way they are trained to handle a situation. So in effect, the louder Gates got, the more he guaranteed he would be arrested.
Finally, I'm not so sure that this case says anything about race, but it does say a lot about people of privilege. Those of us who are not accustomed to lives of privilege and deference know full well that you cannot win an argument with a cop. You don't even try. A cop's world is one of privilege. As long as they have a badge, they don't need to yield to anyone. Professor Gates also inhabits a world of privilege and comfort. To him, the idea that he would need to be submissive to anyone is anathema. So is it any wonder that these two individuals, enjoying their privileged positions in society, would come to loggerheads when they met up. Two people or privilege trying to enforce their status as the most important. Note that even now, what professor Gates wants is to make the officer submissive to him, basically reverse the hierarchy that was imposed upon him by the officer. He wants to school the officer. How ridiculous it all is.
Personally, I think both these guys would benefit from some schooling in how regular people live. It might help them understand that you don't arrest someone for popping off after a long day, and you don't piss on a cop who's out patrolling the streets with heightened adrenaline levels looking for dangerous situations to jump into.
Many thanks for what is the best synthesis I've seen so far of the incident.
I would change only one sentence, as follows (my addition in italics): "Gates responded as someone who felt his dignity had been assaulted because of his race." Viewed in that light Gates' response is entirely understandable, but whether his dignity had in fact been assaulted is not provable. Perhaps a small distinction, but an important one, I think.
Revival – "A cop's world is one of privilege. As long as they have a badge, they don't need to yield to anyone." Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong!
"Professor Gates also inhabits a world of privilege and comfort. To him, the idea that he would need to be submissive to anyone is anathema." How do you know this? And why is he supposed to be submissive in his own house to an overzealous cop?
This thing really does go beyond race. Apparently there is a contingent that believes cops can do whatever they want and anyone who objects is either a fool or an elite snob.
Ever heard of the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
As has been pointed out several times, Treg, the time to voice the objections is not in the middle of the confrontation.
The police DO have a certain amount of authority; it is best not to discount it.
If Gates blew it, how come the cops are apologizing to him?
Treg,
No one (certainly not me) is saying the cop was right. I called him a prick didn't I? I am always very respectful of cops for the simple, common-sensical reason that you never know when you will encounter one that is a prick. That is the mature approach, in my opinion. Not the course Gates took, apparently.
Treg – we both strongly agree the police officer abused his authority and the dignity of Professor Gates.
I read the police report and Mr. Gates' response. We both agree we have not seen evidence, nor apparently has the police chief or district attorney either, that an arrest was warranted or that a conviction was likely.
But I did see enough in both reports that the professor, considering his position in the community and his prominence at Harvard, should have politely thanked the police officer for checking in on him and humbly let the officer be on his way. Even if the police officer was arrogant, rude or disrespectful, Professor Gates should have made more of an effort to be professionally grateful.
From there Professor Gates could have used any of his many forums to describe the incident and the attitude of the police officer with perhaps more constructive and civilized results.
In addition, he could have visited the police chief, mayor and spoken to city councilors expressing his view of the attitude, perhaps without much satisfaction as they would have been quick to explain that police have a difficult job.
But, nevertheless, there were more dignified paths Professor Gates could have followed – an obligation he has to the University and the community.
Professor Gates himself said that he repeatedly asked for the officer's name and badge number, thus verbally displaying his displeasure. Such rudeness was not necessary as the first responding officer's name would have been on the report, and if Professor Gates doesn't know that he isn't smart enough to be teaching anywhere.
Putting that aside, the police officer was horribly wrong and abusive in particular to the city he represents, and the freedoms and dignity this country attempts to preserve for all its citizens.
I'm not saying it's right. Just that it is so. Police officers have privileges in this world beyond those of ordinary citizens by virtue of their employment. Tenured Harvard faculty members also enjoy privileges far beyond those of ordinary citizens by virtue of their employment. Though perhaps Professor Gates will jump in here from his Martha's Vineyard getaway to explain how I've got this wrong.
I just don't buy that this is ultimately about race or profiling. I believe it's about two individuals coming from cultures of privilege butting heads over who trumps who, and acting very uncivilly in the process.
NewsHound –
Gates had a right to be undignified under the circumstances. I'm not agreeing that he was. But if so, so what?
And this statement, I can't quite believe:
"Such rudeness was not necessary as the first responding officer's name would have been on the report, and if Professor Gates doesn't know that he isn't smart enough to be teaching anywhere."
Do you actually believe this should have occured to Gates in the heat of the moment? And why should he have to petition the local police precinct for an officer's name and badge number?
And, do you think a police officer has never succeeded in concealing his participation in misconduct? Why should Gates have been confident that he would easily be able to learn that officer's name later on? That's just incredibly naive.
I suspect that the apology from the police is all about politics.
Given your studied cynicism Mr. B1, I would have thought you would have jumped on that.
Mr Gates has the right to be as undignified as he wants to be.
He needs only accept responsibility for his role in the matter.
He blew it.
I think that Revival is absolutely correct in his assessment. All of us know cops who have become obnoxious in the performance of their duties. Some of us also know that there is no scorn quite like that sprayed by academia when the "don't you know who I am?" question hits a stone wall.
Like DeNiro said: "Most folks respect the badge. Everyone respects the gun."
I think a substantial part of the problem here is that no matter what actually happened that day, the Cambridge Police Department showed a marked lack of judgment in arresting Gates. I mean, it's Harvard f**king Square, people…anyone who lives in a HOUSE there is either filthy rich or a VIP. As a cop, you don't "arrest" anyone from there…you "politely chauffeur them to a more convenient location to settle the disagreement".
This touches on a larger issue: how cops in eastern Massachusetts have a nasty habit of stupidity. I could write a book about how Boston cops (and cops in other departments) routinely manage to run the gamut from exercising poor judgment to blatant criminal behavior. Remind me again where all the evidence processing happens these days for Boston crimes? What's the homicide clearance rate…still worst in the nation for a major city?
I feel, and have felt for years, that police in many areas…not just Massachusetts…have forgotten that they are the representation of the law, and as such must be "Caesar's Wife" and act in a manner so as to be above suspicion. It's easy to forget that given what they deal with on a regular basis, but nevertheless it's hard to view this as an incredible lapse of judgment. Speculating further, it's hard not to see this as "annoyed white cop showing angry black man who's REALLY in charge".
Short of physical altercations, or the explicit threat of them, Gates is perfectly within his CONSTITUTIONALLY-GUARANTEED rights to be a total a**hole to the police if he wants to be. You can say all you like that Gates SHOULD have acted nicer and maybe this could've been avoided. That may be true, but the law does not require us to be nice to each other. As such, Crowley almost certainly stepped over the line.
The sad thing is that no good will come of this. The problem is largely ingrained culture, and no lawsuit settlement or judgment that Gates can acquire can change that culture.
I feel the urge to share this anecdote from my college days…
I was riding my bike to work in Cybersmith in Harvard Square in the summer of 1997, and largely zipping down the sidewalks…which are fairly broad in most places in the Square.
I wasn't going pell-mell, but admittedly I wasn't exactly riding sedately, either. A nearby cop yelled at me to stop riding on the sidewalk. I yelled back that when he made it safe to ride in the street, I'd consider it.
Needless to say, I started riding a lot faster after that! :-)
Nothing came of it, but I wonder if I'll ever have the balls to mouth off at a cop when I was so clearly in the wrong.
Treg – interesting observations.
I agree Professor Gates has a right to be undignified in his own home, to a point, at least. But, while he has such a right, considering his prominence he should not have been.
We are suppose to be in a civilized society, and that truly should be up to Professor Gates if he wants to join in. He has a right to be rude and uncooperative and that most certainly can breed any number of undesirable results and we are seeing one version of the many alternatives right now.
If Professor Gates had remained polite he would not have been arrested, and had he subsequently complained as he may have indicated was his intent, little to nothing would have resulted, with or without the officers name and no one gives a hoot, really, about his badge number.
At the police station or city hall they may have offered some hollow words of empathy towards the incident, but that would have been the end of it.
If Professor Gates wants to make an issue of something, it is best that he is not involved to the extent that his objectivity is questioned.
The police should not act this way in any home under such circumstances but trying to fix this problem is a horribly difficult challenge and Professor Gates certainly should be smart enough to know that the time and place is not in his kitchen with one student so emotionally charged that no one is able to communicate anything to anyone.
I see a lot of attempts to equate Gates' and the officers' behavior. Doesn't work. Let's stipulate for the sake of argument that each party was equally obnoxious. So? It was Gates' home. The police had no business being there once they had established that fact.
If the police report is accurate, then Gates handled the situation poorly. As was his right.
And Dan, restraining Mr. Gates was within their rights, too. That is the point.
You say: "I see a lot of attempts to equate Gates' and the officers' behavior. Doesn't work…."
Did I see you elected as grand arbiter of all things controversial?
I would suggest that Gates' was more out of line.
But hey, he is a noted academic with a vacation spa on the Vineyard. The police should have known that.
Another squirrel, I think.
So according to Ikcape it doesn't matter whether someone is obnoxious, the police can arrest anyone, anywhere for any reason at all. It doesn't even matter if you are respectful and submissive. It's your own fault.
Nice logic– I can see why you don't want any squirrels around.
My understanding is that the criminal complaint of Disorderly Conduct was issued against Gates, which only happens after a clerk magistrate (judicial branch) determines that there was probable cause to arrest. In fact, arraignment was scheduled for August. That means the Sergeant has no worries. Gates might though, I suspect that's why he has suddenly clammed up again.
Once probable cause is found by the court, sadly a police officer must learn quickly not to worry about what happens to the case from there on in. With politicians as DAs, and defense attorneys, and ex-legislators as clerks and judges, political bag jobs are the order of the day.
As for Democrat Jerry Leone's decision not to prosecute –and it is ultimately his decision– isn't this the same guy who refused to prosecute Sen. Marzilli on the first allegations, leaving him free to attack more women?
BobG,the argument is not whether or not the cops have the right to arrest anyone for anything, the point is that Gates put himself in a position where they had cause.
Now that was a pretty dumb thing to do for a guy with such academic credentials. He may loose "smart" points for such stupidity…
OMG, Obama has weighed in on live TV without reading the police report. DRUDGE headlining "Cambridge Police acted stupidly."
How long before Obama is apologizing, or clarifying? I called the White House already to complain.
"Crowley says Gates kept demanding his name and badge number even though he'd already told him several times. Gates says he kept demanding it because Crowley wouldn't give it to him."
Crowley said he couldn't give him the information because Gates kept interrupting him by talking and yelling, which is a fallacy on it face. Crowley blames Gates for Crowley not giving Gates his name and badge number.
Why would Gates try to argue the officer did not if the officer did? Isn't that information the reason Gates followed the cop out to the porch? Gates wanted to file a complaint about the cops behaviour and Crowley would not give him the information. Crowley reacted by arresting him.
The DA knew the arrest was stupid.
Officer Crowley sees no reason to apologize for acting stupidly. STORY
Dan, a nice summation of a disappointing affair.
And I have to say the tired –but expected–"Boston troubles" canard is unfortunately too easy for a indolent national media not to run with.
I just want to know what percentage of the settlement Professor Gates will donate to charity.