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.
: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.
Who is doing *that* Dan? All I have seen is people very justifiably saying that Gates could have and should have shown a reasonable amount of respect and understanding for the police, been more cooperative with the police, and refrained from making a complete ass out of himself almost from the moment the police arrived to investigate the break-in report.
: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.
Probably not. Most people are pretty set in their "worldviews" (Gates being an excellent example of that. . .) and are unlikely to change their minds even when presented with information that should cause them to do just that. One thing I have noticed is how quick people on both sides of the issue are to make ignorant statements that show they haven't made the slightest effort to check the facts about what really happened. . .
: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.
Oh dear. . .
:We may never know exactly what happened.
Well at least you didn't say -
At the end of the day 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.
Really Dan? I read both the police report and Gates own account and both make it abundantly clear that Henry Louis Gates was quite the nutty professor in this affair, if not more generally. . .
:I don't care if he did or not.
I do and so do others. The last thing *any* cops need is self-important nutty professors going ballistic on them for little or no reason, or worse to further their own personal agendas. . . Here are a few snippets of Henry Louis Gates' nuttiness in his own words -
"All of a sudden, there was a policeman on my porch. And I thought, ‘This is strange.’ So I went over to the front porch still holding the phone, and I said ‘Officer, can I help you?’ And he said, ‘Would you step outside onto the porch.’ And the way he said it, I knew he wasn’t canvassing for the police benevolent association. All the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized that I was in danger. And I said to him no, out of instinct. I said, ‘No, I will not.’"
Yup all the hairs stood up on the back of Gates' neck, and he *knew* he was in danger because a Cambridge police officer asked him to "step outside onto the porch."
"He (Crowley) said ‘I’m here to investigate a 911 call for breaking and entering into this house.’ And I said ‘That’s ridiculous because this happens to be my house. And I’m a Harvard professor.’"
That's ridiculous alright. . . Gates looks completely ridiculous if as "a Harvard professor" he doesn't have the grey cells to rub together to figure out that someone might have made a 911 call upon witnessing his own apparent breaking and entering into his house. And what does his being a Harvard professor have to do with whether or not anyone broke into his house anyway. In his own "interview" he even acknowledged that he suspected the front door was jammed as a result of an earlier break-in attempt.
"Now it’s clear that he had a narrative in his head: A black man was inside someone’s house, probably a white person’s house, and this black man had broken and entered, and this black man was me."
Wow! Gates is not only a Harvard professor but a mind reader too. . . It should be glaringly obvious that if anyone had "a narrative in his head" in this matter it was, and still is. . . Mr. Henry Louis Gates. Can you say psychological projection Dan?
"By the time I was processed at the Cambridge jail, I was booked, fingerprinted, given a mug shot and answered questions. Outrageous is the only word that I can use. The system attempts to humiliate you. They took my belt; they took my wallet, they took my keys, some change; they counted my money. And I knew that because they said, ‘We’re going to release you upon your own recognizance, and the fine is $40, and we know you can pay it because we went through your wallet.’
It’s meant to be terrifying and humiliating. And I couldn’t believe that this was happening to me."
Yup the boring, mundane, and routine standard police procedure that *everyone* regardless of race, social status, or indeed guilt or innocence. . . goes through after being arrested is "outrageous" and "meant to be terrifying and humiliating." God forbid that Henry Louis Gates should have to do what tens of thousands of other Americans have done before him.
"I was in jail for four hours. I told them that I was claustrophobic, that I couldn’t be in this cell."
Someone might want to check into whether or not Gates *really* is claustrophobic. In light of all the other things he has said this comes across more like, "I told them that I was *special*, that *I* famous Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates couldn’t be in this cell." That being said, in light of all the other evidence that Gates is a deeply insecure person in this "interview" maybe he is claustrophobic, neurotic and paranoid to boot.
"But I am determined that this experience, my experience, as horrendous as it was and as outrageous as it was, be used for the larger good of the black community."
Well it is open to considerable debate just how "horrendous" and "outrageous" Henry Louis Gates' experience actually was. . . Quite frankly I think that professor Gates' hyperbole and BS is an insult to the thousands of other African Americans, living or dead, who would very happily trade their own genuinely horrendous and outrageous experiences with that of Henry Louis Gates' reasonably professionally handled arrest and four hour stint in jail.
"As a college professor, I want to make this a teaching experience. I am going to devote my considerable resources, intellectual and otherwise, to making sure this doesn’t happen again."
Once the public see through Henry Louis Gates' opportunistic agenda driven publicity stunt, as many saner minds are starting to do. . . Gates' self-vaunted considerable intellectual resources will be called into question. Much of what he has said and done recently can be properly described as just plain stupid.
Thanks, Revival, for one of the best takes I've read on this incident anywhere.
http://medianation.blogspot.com/2009/07/what-gates-story-says-about-culture.html#comment-7251902711484037705
Can another celebrity PLEASE die today to get us out of this tedium.
A few misconceptions battered about.
First, fish, a clerk magistrate will most always issue a criminal complaint on an arrest. If an arrest is made at the scene of a crime, you can bet the farm that the complaint will issue, because the application for a complaint will be written to create probable cause.
While the DA does have sole authority to dump a case, they nearly never do until after consulting with the police department. Note that Cambridge PD and the District Attorney issued a joint statement when they dropped the charge.
It is significant that at first, the DA declined to drop the charges until after arraignment, a position he quickly reversed. Note that a criminal record attaches itself to one's CORI at arraignment. Dumping the charge prior to arraignment prevents the police department from making even a bigger ass of itself.
Here's why:
If the charge had not been dropped prior to arraignment, Gates' attorney would have made a pre-arraignment motion to have the matter sent to the clerk-magistrate for a determination of probable cause. If the clerk said there was no probable cause, it wouldn't go on his "permanent record. But more importantly, it would have made it legally clear that there were no grounds for arrest, because the charge would not have cleared the easiest hurdle to its veracity.
If denied pre-arraignment review by the magistrate, Gates could bring a motion to dismiss the charge and then the judge would review whether probable cause existed for the arrest. If the judge said no probable cause, same result — a judicial finding that there was no legal basis for the arrest.
What Cambridge police did agreeing to drop the charge, is prevent a judicial finding that their cop was out of bounds in making the arrest.
Apparently "restraining" an unarmed, slightly disabled 60 year old man was NOT within the police's rights.
And it's gonna cost them, bigtime.
As the Southern Legal Resource Center has shows, you can't legislate out racism, but you can certainly take all its money.
I honestly doubt that Sgt. Crowley is guilty of racism. There is very little evidence supporting that view and I consider him to be innocent until proven guilty of be a racist. There is however plenty of evidence supporting my view and Revival's view that *privilege* and perhaps *class* (to say nothing of lack thereof) is what lies behind Gates' arrest, with perhaps some testosterone thrown in for good measure. . .
Revival's –
"Two people of privilege trying to enforce their status as the most important."
largely sums it up for me, although I agree that there is more involved here such as Gates' playing of the race card from the get go. I like to think that this LOL Cops photograph of Gates arrest with a satirical parodying of his alleged shouting -
"THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO BLACK MEN IN AMERICA"!
which very closely matches his own version of that assertion -
"Is this how you treat a black man in America?"
will garner some chuckles from those who believe that Gates has made an ass out of himself in this matter regardless of whether or not his arrest was justified.
It seems I made an HMTL error.
Here's The Mything Link.
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.
But would you suspect you were being hassled because many police have a sort of bully mentality, feeling bolstered by their authority which they frequently abuse. I am suspicious of any police officer that approaches me and I anticipate how they will enjoy flexing their figurative muscles and act macho because they think they are superior. They respond to how much respect they get and react accordingly, which is problematic because it allows them to be flexible with how they enforce laws that should be clear cut. Many police officers will provoke members of the public through cursing and so on. I've experienced it myself. An officer once shoved me onto a concrete set of stairs, snatched my cell phone, and illegally searched my backpack during a so-called "field interrogation" after I told him I would contact legal counsel as he searched my body without permission. This was a little more than a half a year ago at the end of Newbury Street where I was walking around close to Boston University (my brother goes to school there). In that case, I asked for his name and badge number, and he immediately refused, saying I didn't need it. I repeated my request several times until he blurted only his last name very quickly (refused to spell it) and would still not grant me his badge number. It was only later when I reported the assault that I got his full name and an apology from his department and a promise that they would scold the officer about his behavior. I did nothing wrong but was treated like a wild animal. Believe me, in that case, it was the cop who should have been arrested for disorderly conduct, because he was swearing up a storm and verbally abusing me with words intended attempt to emasculate me by referring to my genitals in a diminutive manner repeatedly. It was disgusting, and I was so civil throughout this while expressing my righteous indignation, demanding fair treatment and my Constitutional rights. Now, not all police are like this. But some are and it's those you should be wary about.
Now swing away, conservatives. Tell me how I wouldn't have any rights at all if it weren't for these tough guys to keep me safe and sound in my Ivory Tower. Pffhh. I'm from the streets of Taunton, son.
I think it's interesting that the US locks up more people than any other country yet it hasn't put a dent in our crime rates.
This is about privilege and class, not race.
If Gates were a white guy seen busting into a house, someone still would have called the cops. If a black officer then showed up, and Gates started mouthing off to him about who's boss, he still would have been arrested. This was a hoity-toity Harvard prof squaring off against a working-class cop and neither one thinking things all the way through.
Gates should have the political sense to say he's going to let the matter drop, although as I said, he's a jackass with a God complex and he won't. So now we'll just create more bad blood in Cambridge and waste taxpayer money holding hearings.
Maybe the most prominent Asian in town should tell them both to shut up and move on with their lives…
Amen*
* To the first three paragraphs
@ Marc Larocque who said, "Now swing away, conservatives."
Just thought I would let you know that I am a left leaning liberal from Soviet Canuckistan aka Canada who has had his own run ins with belligerent cops and has been falsely arrested at least once but AFA*I*AC two or three times. Interestingly enough all of the half-dozen or so cops who have arrested me over the last decade or so were very polite and professional about it. I even saw fit to publicly commended them for their courtesy and professionalism. Of course it helped that I didn't go ape shit on them and was civil and cooperative myself. . .
If Gates were a white guy seen busting into a house, someone still would have called the cops.
No, if Gates were a white guy seen busting into a house, someone would have asked if he needed help.
Keep in mind: He's 60, and looks it. He has a cane. He has a limo sitting outside his house. The limo driver is helping him.
The entire situation screamed innocence, except to those who couldn't see beyond the color of his skin.
>>No, if Gates were a white guy seen busting into a house, someone would have asked if he needed help.
Disagree 100 percent. Gates' neighbor apparently had no idea who he was– an increasingly common phenomenon today. I don't know my neighbors either. But if I saw two white guys trying to force open the door next to my apartment, I'd call the police too.
So now you are saying that the neighbor who called 911 is a racist. . .
"Keep in mind: He's 60, and looks it."
Actually I am keeping that in mind when I keep seeing the dated portrait that is being used to illustrate his "interview" and other reports. Why is Skip Gates himself using a photograph that looks like it was taken a decade or more ago? You don't suppose an inflated ego has anything to do with it eh?
>>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.
Most intelligent analysis of this mess I've read yet. Especially since it's quite similar to my own views! Well said, Revival
@Robin Edgar
It's not alright to be falsely arrested. I don't know how it is in Canada, but in the U.S. you have Constitutional rights you should stand strongly behind in the face of oppression or police brutality. This Gates incident has a racial element as an undercurrent of the narrative, nevertheless it is more so an element of overbearing police officers trying to show anyone they can who's the boss.
Which of the following are you asserting, Dan:
1. Gates was definitely not guilty of the crime/misdemeanor of "disorderly conduct" and anyone who impartially observed his conduct that day would have come to the same conclusion (unless they're dumb)
2. There's no such thing as "disorderly conduct" and nobody should ever be arrested for that phony, overly subjective, and possibly unconstitutional charge.
What happened to the taxi driver? Was he there while all this was going on?
@ Aaron Read:
It's unclear from your post about bicycling on Harvard Square sidewalks… but do you realize that City of Cambridge ordinance forbids riding a bicycle on a sidewalk in any of five business districts in the city? (Boston bans sidewalk riding altogether.)
Harvard Square is one of those business districts: you can find maps and text describing the boundaries of the no-bicycling-on-sidewalks zones online, as well as see the markings painted on sidewalks at intersections demarcating the boundaries.
Cambridge is the only city in Massachusetts I know of that enforces its laws on bicyclists — such as ticketing riders who don't stop for stop signs or red lights. It sounds like you can add enforcement (attempts) on sidewalk bicycling to the list.
And, yes, Cambridge's streets are (sort-of) safe for cycling. I commute daily on a bike to Cambridge.
@ Robin Edgar:
Gates' response to the responding officer — "That’s ridiculous because this happens to be my house. And I’m a Harvard professor." — is actually germane to establishing proper police procedure in this incident.
While Gates said that the house is his, the land is owned and maintained by Harvard Real Estate. That's why Gates phoned someone at HRE to come over and fix the door.
And that is also why Cambridge PD would (eventually) call in HUPD. That's how they deal with the overlapping jurisdictional issue — because HUPD will typically lead the response/investigation when it occurs on university property.
While it is easy for many people to jump on Gates' comment about being a Harvard Professor as some kind of elitist attitude, his was an appropriate and relevant statement to make when dealing with Cambridge PD vs. HUPD.
Somehow, I don't think that there is a bright boundary line between Harvard property and the City of Cambridge. The laws of Cambridge still apply.
Gates lost it…and then…
He tried to play a) the race card, b) the celebrity card, and c) the Haavaard card.
He got caught by his own hubris.
matteomht: First, it wasn't a neighbor who called; it was a woman from a completely different town. Second, what you are saying is, everytime someone gets locked out of their house, they should just call the police in advance, since the society we want to live in is "call the cops first and use your head second."
Robin: Why is Skip Gates himself using a photograph that looks like it was taken a decade or more ago?
Who says the news orgs aren't using file photos? And what does that have to do with anything? Ego is not a crime.
lckape keeps claiming Gates got "caught" and yet Gates is the only one who stands to make any money out of this Keystone Kops charade.
And the only price he pays is a bunch of racist losers hate him even more than they did before.
Gates wins. Big.
His willingness to make money over his racist attitudes puts him in the league with Reverend Al.
Disgusting.
Typical, but still disgusting.
"typical," lk? typical of what? those people? the coloreds, as o-fish would say? i'd like an explanation on that one and feel free to play twister with yourself as you do it.
Somehow, I don't think that there is a bright boundary line between Harvard property and the City of Cambridge. The laws of Cambridge still apply.
Yes, there is…and no, they don't.
I'm not really being facetious, either. A similar situation exists on the campuses of Boston University, Boston College and (I presume) most other major universities that have their own Police Department. Not campus security, I mean a real Police Department. BUPD is one and I'm pretty sure HUPD is the same. In BUPD's case, their jurisdiction is the campus and the only thing they are not allowed to do is issue traffic citations (due to a long and ugly union fight).
It's been a while since I was an undergrad and cared about this stuff, but I believe the BUPD had the authority to boot the BPD out of their business if the jurisdiction was proper. But the BUPD also usually liaised with the BPD for major crimes that were "outside the usual" for a college, for the obvious reasons relating to expertise and resources.
In this case I don't know where Gates' house is, so I can't say for sure if it should've been the HUPD sent over…but my hunch is that it was correct for the CPD to go; just because a building is owned by Harvard doesn't automatically make it part of the campus, nor part of the HUPD's jurisdiction.
@ mike_b1
:Who says the news orgs aren't using file photos?
Not me. I know that they are. My question was why is *Skip* himself is using a photo that appears to be a decade or so old to illustrate his "interview" in The Root. And you guessed it *ego*. And you're right Skip Gates' massive ego, which may be overcompensating for some deep personal insecurities from what I can see. . . is not a crime. It is however a major contributing factor to what has gone down in Cambridge over the last week or so. From what I can see, Skip Gates' overweaning sense of self-importance has a lot to do with generating what is now an national scandal.
Careful with the nickel psychology. Citizens everyday respond in strong and negative fashion to overbearing cops. Because Gates is smarter and better-known in some circles than most people doesn't mean ego played a role in any of this.
That said, to be black is to be insecure. Or perhaps you know of a KKK-like organization that looks to eliminate whites instead of blacks? The entire system is rigged against blacks. And regardless of what you think of this incident, there's no question racism is alive and well in Boston.
lkcape, apparently you join PP in wanting to do away with the judicial system.
Perhaps you would enjoy living in Iran instead. I'd be happy to buy you the ticket.
Good lord, could Crowley have possibly picked a worse way to respond to this mess?
First, to respond not in a press conference, not at a neutral newspaper or radio news outlet, but to go on WEEI's morning show and basically say "F**K YOU!" to the world has got to set a new record for classlessness on greater Boston's police forces' already poor reputation.
If Crowley was so sure he was right, why did he have to go on the most possibly police-friendly media outlet? The one place he could be guaranteed the hosts would be even bigger cheerleaders for himself than he is? A place that's not a news station and doesn't even pretend to be!
Sad. Very sad. If I were in the Cambridge PD's PR department I'd want Crowley's head on a plate right now…
do you realize that City of Cambridge ordinance forbids riding a bicycle on a sidewalk in any of five business districts in the city? (snip)
And, yes, Cambridge's streets are (sort-of) safe for cycling. I commute daily on a bike to Cambridge.
Well this was back in 1997, but I did know full well, even then, that you're not supposed to ride a bike on the sidewalk. That's why I mentioned about being "in the wrong".
And I can't speak for 2009, but in 1997 the streets of Harvard Square were most definitely NOT safe to bike in. In one lousy summer I was hit by two cars, "doored" four times (someone opens their car door right in front of you), and wiped out a half-dozen times while trying to avoid a crash with a moving car…one time causing a crash into a parked car that wrecked my bike.
This was when I had daily bike rides from Allston Village to the BU Campus to the old WBCN studios in Fenway to Harvard Square, back to Allston Village. A lot of those routes have nice, wide sidewalks so I usually DIDN'T ride on the street…it was too damn dangerous, as outlined above.
Laws be damned, I'd rather be yelled at by a cop than killed by a speeding car, thank you very much.
>>Second, what you are saying is, everytime someone gets locked out of their house, they should just call the police in advance, since the society we want to live in is "call the cops first and use your head second."
No, Mike B1, it isn't. I'm saying that when someone forces his way into a home in front of another person, it's reasonable to expect that other person to call the police and report someone breaking into a home. That *is* using your head first.
If this woman actually wasn't a neighbor of Gates's, as you say, that makes the case all the stronger. She only saw two people forcing open a door, called the police, and said 'you might want to deal with it.'
I mean, if some stranger saw two people forcing their way into your house, wouldn't you want her to call the police? Yeesh, people, good behavior isn't that hard.
This just in. . .
Cambridge police Sgt. James Crowley, the cop at the center of a firestorm over the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., has taught a racial profiling class at the Lowell Police Academy for five years.
Doh!
Ikcape-
"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."
But you only have the cop's word for it that Gates did anything to warrant his arrest. Gates denies he did any of those things.
Neither you nor I know what who is telling the truth–yet you seem sure that Gates is at fault, that he "lost it" …"played the celebrity card" etc.
That leaves two possiblities–either, like I said before, you think that the police can arrest anyone, anytime, for any reason they want, so it doesn't matter what Gates did or didn't do. Or that when you have to choose between a white cop, and a black professor, you are so sure that the black professor is lying that you are willing to say so without qualification.
Which is it?
No… "Typical" for self-absorbed people to extend their 15 minutes of fame for profit.
Disgusting.
didn't see any "typical" self-absorbed white folk in your comment.
Robin, all that means is that he doesn't apparently practice what he preaches. God knows how many police each day are caught driving drunk.
matteomht said…I'm saying that when someone forces his way into a home in front of another person, it's reasonable to expect that other person to call the police and report someone breaking into a home. That *is* using your head first.
Right, because thugs intent on robbing houses typically come in their own limos.
Don't confuse me with the facts.
Mike_b1, given the information we have, I don't think we can draw any conclusions about the person who called the police. Depending on the precise circumstances when she happened by, it really could have looked like someone was breaking in.
The problem is with the boneheaded and abusive manner in which the police responded. There is no reason they couldn't simply stop by, check in with Gates, then be on their way.
Wrong Treg. Sgt. Crowley had no idea who he was dealing with as Gates might say. . . Until Gates identified himself he could have been an armed criminal who might have gunned Sgt. Crowley down to make an escape. Why do you think Crowley asked him to step out on the porch?
mike_b1 said… Robin, all that means is that he doesn't apparently practice what he preaches. God knows how many police each day are caught driving drunk.
Dealing with outrageous hypocrites who do not make the slightest effort to practice what they preach on an ongoing basis I will concede that as a possibility, but I have not seen anything in what Sgt. Crowley said or did that looks like racism. As others have pointed out this was more a matter of a couple of Alpha males having it out with each other with race having little or nothing to do with it other than in Gates' own internal "narrative". Gates was insecure, defensive, and even just a tad paranoid AFA*I*AC the minute Crowley showed up and was effectively calling Crowley a racist very early in their interaction. Giving Crowley the benefit of any doubt I can see how if I was a cop who taught classes on racial profiling on an unpaid volunteer basis I would be deeply insulted by someone ignorantly and abusively labeling me a racist just for trying to do my job.
I can guarantee you someone will pop up who was locked out of their house and whom received much different treatment from Crowley.
And…that person will be white.
:Citizens everyday respond in strong and negative fashion to overbearing cops.
Been there. Done that. . . but not in the moronic belligerent manner that Gates did. I protested in front of the implicated police station and handed out copies of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to cops entering and leaving the building. When dealing face to face with overbearing cops I stay calm, cool and collected even if and when I do give them a piece of my mind.
:Because Gates is smarter and better-known in some circles than most people doesn't mean ego played a role in any of this.
You're right *that* doesn't. Other evidence does though. If anyone was overbearing in this incident it was Gates. . .
:That said, to be black is to be insecure.
I think that is an over-generalization that plenty of African Americans would take exception to but I am sensitive to where it is coming from. AFAIAC Gates' obvious deep insecurity bordering on paranoia was not justified by the situation he found himself in and he could have and should have been more polite and cooperative with Crowley. Even if Crowley was somewhat overbearing Gates badly over-reacted to this situation.
:Or perhaps you know of a KKK-like organization that looks to eliminate whites instead of blacks?
Al-Quaeda?
:The entire system is rigged against blacks.
What "system" the police system or The System? Either way it looks like "the system" is presently falling all over itself to kow tow to Gates.
:And regardless of what you think of this incident, there's no question racism is alive and well in Boston.
I never disputed that. The public reaction to this incident makes that abundantly clear. I just do not believe that racism played much of a role in Sgt. Crowley's conduct. Gates is the one who made this into a racist incident with his "narrative" aka agenda.
The police officer was angry because of the way he was being treated. He should not have been treated that way. Had he been going door-to-door selling life insurance for example, he would have had little choice but to say he was sorry for the interruption and walk away.
Instead, due to the policeman's perhaps rightful anger, he abused his authority by applying punitive measures towards the professor.
Disorderly conduct must have a victim. Repeatedly asking for the police officer's name so that he can make a complaint against a specific person, and thus being angered because a response is not being presented in a tone and manner that is clear to hear and understand, hardly infringes on the police officer's right to be undisturbed.
This situation is close if not crossing the line of violating several Constitutional protections including the Fourteenth Amendment.
Police are deliberately provided with strong powers, but abuse of those powers, even on occasion, is horrible and if overlooked, a horrible threat to the inner core and fiber of this country.
Clearly, there was no fundamental, objective reason for the arrest. The conduct did not infringe on anyone's rights, nor were there any victims.
There was no public annoyance or cause for alarm. Officer Crowley was annoyed.
Even if Professor Gates was rude, of which is most likely the case, he became the victim of abuse by a false arrest as a result of the police officer's punitive action due to his anger and dominance.
Robin, do you really think Muslims are black? I mean, honestly?
Incredible.
You're the one who is incredible as in lacking in credibility mike_bs.
Nothing in what you asked me necessitated that the "KKK-like organization that looks to eliminate whites instead of blacks" needed to be composed of African Americans aka blacks. In any case I guess your sarcasm detector is broken. I would have thought that the question mark would be a clue. . .
Has anyone considered the background of Sergeant Crowley? He is a highly respected officer in Cambridge. In fact he is so well respected by his fellow officers, African Americans included; he was asked to teach cultural sensitivity.
On the other hand, if anyone were to read some of Professor Gates essays they may very well surmise that the man clearly blames the white race for all the ills of the poor black man. So I ask you, which of these two are more likely to be racist?
The fact that the governor of Massachusetts squashed the charges because he is a friend of Professor "Skip" Gates is outrageous. This should have gone to court, then perhaps the true story would have come out.
In fact I feel the comments made by the governor of Massachusetts, the major of Cambridge, and our President [all Black] were inappropriate to say the least. As society leaders, they should have been more biased. I feel they all owe Sergeant Crowley a public apology. Especially our President, he should apologize to Crowley, the Cambridge Police department, and all law enforcement for his lack of respect. It seems our President’s true colors may be coming out, rather than uniting us as promised he may have set racial discrimination back about 100 years. Personally if I were an educated African American, I would be ashamed and embarrassed by the leadership representing my race and their behavior.
And finally, our president, who has also stated to be a friend of "Skip Gates", claims the professor is not one for public confrontation. Yet, the professor is the one speaking out to the media. I think Professor Gates acted vulgar and irrationally and it appears to me that in order for him to save face he is now embellishing the truth. I have far more respect for the person who shows humility and maturity. I'm leaning towards the record and integrity of Sergeant Crowley.
Beachwalker – I have every reason to believe that Sergeant Crowley is an excellent police officer with a superb record.
And what you wrote about Professor Gates most likely is true, also. Further, the politicians should not have intervened simply because of race accusations, the professors stature, friendships, etc. The only thing that should count are the merits.
In this particular incidence, all of the reports indicate that Officer Crowley was angered at the response he received from Professor Gates. It is possible the attitude was initiated by the officer. Regardless, the professor should have been courteous. If it had been me I would not have been arrested. I would have been angered perhaps, but I would have attempted to bring the occasion to civility and thanked the officer for checking my home so quickly and efficiently. Professor Gates clearly was wrong, and perhaps continues to be. I'd be embarrassed.
Officer Crowley should have politely written down his name and badge number on a piece of paper in the professor's kitchen, and left. If at that time Professor Gates was subsequently found to be following up with a disturbance in the street after police had left that would have been grounds to make an arrest after a warning to return to home.
Both could have avoided the arrest, and both should have. But, it was the officer, not the professor, who did make the arrest and abuse the authority because he was angry and proceeded for punitive reasons.
This comment is brought to you in honor of No. 99, The Great One, Wayne Gretzky.
robin wrote Nothing in what you asked me necessitated that the "KKK-like organization that looks to eliminate whites instead of blacks" needed to be composed of African Americans aka blacks.
Please, could you say it in English?