Sergeant at eye of storm says he won't apologize

[RetiredGySgt]

I don't care if Gates called the cop a ******. The cop was in the wrong to arrest him.

The only way to solve this is to admit that whites hate blacks is what your solution sounds like, Willow. Good luck with that.

No Ravi,, what my solution is puts a stop to everytime a black has a confrontation with police the white police are automatically stamped "wrong, white and racist." you automatically believe the Mr. Harvard.. He bears no responsibility whatsoever for his conduct. I think you have it ass backwards, what is becoming clear in America with each passing moment is that blacks hate Whites,, don't believe me? read this forum on race. Good luck with denying that. I will say one other thing.. take it or leave.. racial equality will never be established in America with the attitutes we see now. If you are not willing to respect authority from white people then hire black people. that is so simple. the first words outta profs mouth "why are you here?? it's because I'm a black man in America." Rev. bullfrogs chickens are coming home to roost his message of hate has taken hold. I think you think a black man can be excused for any behavior just because in the past his race was mistreated so now today we have to give them a free pass.. ie charlie bass don't want no white woman reporting nuttin a black gentleman does.. it is so funny

I put myself in the shoes of mr gates, and i can't imagine a cop treating moi, white as snow, in the same manner....and If I were treated in the same manner, then I would personally be pissed.

Treated like what? The police received a report of a house break in. Cops were sent. Cops arrive and find man inside house with broken door. Cops ask for ID and are treated instead to verbal abuse and false accusations of racism. Rather then arrest him right then, the cop reasons with him and gets the dumb ass to show ID. Problem should have been solved. Instead this man continues to berate and yell at cops doing their fucking JOB. Trying to protect HIS fucking property.

If YOU had refused to show ID, do you think the cops would have bothered to reason with you? You are not a protected class, you are not black and allowed multiple passes on basic common sense. You as a white woman probably would have found yourself handcuffed and in the back of the squad car begging now to show them ID.

You dumb asses are IGNORING the facts. Cops did not just show up and begin harassing some poor put upon black man cause he was black. They showed up because they were CALLED about a BREAK IN. A break in that in fact HAPPENED. They arrived and found this man in the house. They did not snatch him arrest him and handcuff him as a thief, they ask him for ID so they could be sure he BELONGED there and in fact did not just break in.

Instead of complying the man went into a screaming ranting fit about how he was being picked on for being black. When no such had occurred. The cops, remaining cool collected and professional calmed the situation down and got the man to show ID. Then tried to leave.

Rather then let the police leave this man continued to scream at them about being racist. So much so as to follow the cop out of his HOUSE. He was then warned about being disorderly in PUBLIC and refused to calm down, refused to return to his house and instead continued to YELL at the cop. A cop that did nothing more then his JOB, protecting this ungrateful turds property.

I hope to high hell had you acted the same you too would have ended up arrested.

 

[Care4all]

What evidence is there that suggest Crowley let his emotons get the better of him?

by luring gates outside of his home...if it is true that he refused to give gates his id/badge info inside the home and insisted that gates ''come outside'' to get it....

inside the home, no matter the yelling or vitrol verbally spilled, no law was broken in massachusetts...because no one in the public was threatened etc, there was no disturbance of the peace, or disorderly conduct, according to the law....

only among the public can these accusations or charges take place...

it is possible that gates irked crowley so much, that 'crowley wanted to arrest him', so he lured him outside, in to the public....by refusing to give gates his badge information inside his home even though at this point crowley KNEW he was the legal habitant,...hoping for a disturbance of the peace or disorderly charge opportunity? I dunno? anything is possible...

less than a 100lb 15 year old has been killed by cops, that already had him cornered, using a stun gun...not all cops can keep their level headedness all the time....it seems to me, and if this turns out to be the case in this scenario, it would not surprise me.

BUT MOST of them CAN....I'm not saying they can't...

Classic liberal tactic. Point to another incident to justify this one. Fact is one doesn't have a damn thing to do with the other.

Another fact is that Crowley used his descretion in determining whether or not Gates violated the law. To play Monday morning quarterback is is as useless as it is ridiculous.

Fact: Crowley's name and badge number are pinned to his shirt. all one would have to do is read it. Fact: All Gates needed to do was provide ID at the officers request, the officer would thank him for his patience apologize for the inconvenience and be on his way. But noooooo Gates had to be a dickhead. Think about it. would you want the police to investigate your home if there was a report of a break in? And to be certain the the person found inside the home actually belonged there? You liberal nutcases never cease to amaze me. I thank God my children are smarter than that.

On a side note. Answer me this, who was the first of the two to make it about race?

It would not surprise me if Gates wanted to make it about race, but that would be beside the point or actually make my point, if true, that crowley lured gates outside for an arrest....because Gates pissed him off....

Please NOTE! I am ONLY speculating...I know nothing for certain.

I ENJOY playing Devil's advocate, in most all scenarios....

 

[Care4all]

No Ravi,, what my solution is puts a stop to everytime a black has a confrontation with police the white police are automatically stamped "wrong, white and racist." you automatically believe the Mr. Harvard.. He bears no responsibility whatsoever for his conduct. I think you have it ass backwards, what is becoming clear in America with each passing moment is that blacks hate Whites,, don't believe me? read this forum on race. Good luck with denying that. I will say one other thing.. take it or leave.. racial equality will never be established in America with the attitutes we see now. If you are not willing to respect authority from white people then hire black people. that is so simple. the first words outta profs mouth "why are you here?? it's because I'm a black man in America." Rev. bullfrogs chickens are coming home to roost his message of hate has taken hold. I think you think a black man can be excused for any behavior just because in the past his race was mistreated so now today we have to give them a free pass.. ie charlie bass don't want no white woman reporting nuttin a black gentleman does.. it is so funny

I put myself in the shoes of mr gates, and i can't imagine a cop treating moi, white as snow, in the same manner....and If I were treated in the same manner, then I would personally be pissed.

Treated like what? The police received a report of a house break in. Cops were sent. Cops arrive and find man inside house with broken door. Cops ask for ID and are treated instead to verbal abuse and false accusations of racism. Rather then arrest him right then, the cop reasons with him and gets the dumb ass to show ID. Problem should have been solved. Instead this man continues to berate and yell at cops doing their fucking JOB. Trying to protect HIS fucking property.

If YOU had refused to show ID, do you think the cops would have bothered to reason with you? You are not a protected class, you are not black and allowed multiple passes on basic common sense. You as a white woman probably would have found yourself handcuffed and in the back of the squad car begging now to show them ID.

You dumb asses are IGNORING the facts. Cops did not just show up and begin harassing some poor put upon black man cause he was black. They showed up because they were CALLED about a BREAK IN. A break in that in fact HAPPENED. They arrived and found this man in the house. They did not snatch him arrest him and handcuff him as a thief, they ask him for ID so they could be sure he BELONGED there and in fact did not just break in.

Instead of complying the man went into a screaming ranting fit about how he was being picked on for being black. When no such had occurred. The cops, remaining cool collected and professional calmed the situation down and got the man to show ID. Then tried to leave.

Rather then let the police leave this man continued to scream at them about being racist. So much so as to follow the cop out of his HOUSE. He was then warned about being disorderly in PUBLIC and refused to calm down, refused to return to his house and instead continued to YELL at the cop. A cop that did nothing more then his JOB, protecting this ungrateful turds property.

I hope to high hell had you acted the same you too would have ended up arrested.

Why would anyone be arrested for being upset and yelling, while on their own property?

So you are saying that Gates followed the cop outside and was not lured by the cop outside?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I put myself in the shoes of mr gates, and i can't imagine a cop treating moi, white as snow, in the same manner....and If I were treated in the same manner, then I would personally be pissed.

Treated like what? The police received a report of a house break in. Cops were sent. Cops arrive and find man inside house with broken door. Cops ask for ID and are treated instead to verbal abuse and false accusations of racism. Rather then arrest him right then, the cop reasons with him and gets the dumb ass to show ID. Problem should have been solved. Instead this man continues to berate and yell at cops doing their fucking JOB. Trying to protect HIS fucking property.

If YOU had refused to show ID, do you think the cops would have bothered to reason with you? You are not a protected class, you are not black and allowed multiple passes on basic common sense. You as a white woman probably would have found yourself handcuffed and in the back of the squad car begging now to show them ID.

You dumb asses are IGNORING the facts. Cops did not just show up and begin harassing some poor put upon black man cause he was black. They showed up because they were CALLED about a BREAK IN. A break in that in fact HAPPENED. They arrived and found this man in the house. They did not snatch him arrest him and handcuff him as a thief, they ask him for ID so they could be sure he BELONGED there and in fact did not just break in.

Instead of complying the man went into a screaming ranting fit about how he was being picked on for being black. When no such had occurred. The cops, remaining cool collected and professional calmed the situation down and got the man to show ID. Then tried to leave.

Rather then let the police leave this man continued to scream at them about being racist. So much so as to follow the cop out of his HOUSE. He was then warned about being disorderly in PUBLIC and refused to calm down, refused to return to his house and instead continued to YELL at the cop. A cop that did nothing more then his JOB, protecting this ungrateful turds property.

I hope to high hell had you acted the same you too would have ended up arrested.

Why would anyone be arrested for being upset and yelling, while on their own property?

So you are saying that Gates followed the cop outside and was not lured by the cop outside?

The evidence SAYS it, there are numerous witnesses to the event. And you are NOT just being devils advocate, you are making a claim that simply does not get supported by the FACTS. The cops history is clear. The knee jerk reaction of the BLACK President and the BLACK Governor inflame the issue and seek to defend an action that we can easily see is indefensible.

 

[Ravi]

So one group (mainly the so called "conservatives") here believes that expressing anger and accusing a cop of racism is a criminal offense. I find this unbelievable.

The cops were NEVER in danger of being hurt by this man. I wish the cops hadn't dropped the charges because I have no doubt in my mind that he would have gotten off with ease.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

by luring gates outside of his home...if it is true that he refused to give gates his id/badge info inside the home and insisted that gates ''come outside'' to get it....

inside the home, no matter the yelling or vitrol verbally spilled, no law was broken in massachusetts...because no one in the public was threatened etc, there was no disturbance of the peace, or disorderly conduct, according to the law....

only among the public can these accusations or charges take place...

it is possible that gates irked crowley so much, that 'crowley wanted to arrest him', so he lured him outside, in to the public....by refusing to give gates his badge information inside his home even though at this point crowley KNEW he was the legal habitant,...hoping for a disturbance of the peace or disorderly charge opportunity? I dunno? anything is possible...

less than a 100lb 15 year old has been killed by cops, that already had him cornered, using a stun gun...not all cops can keep their level headedness all the time....it seems to me, and if this turns out to be the case in this scenario, it would not surprise me.

BUT MOST of them CAN....I'm not saying they can't...

Classic liberal tactic. Point to another incident to justify this one. Fact is one doesn't have a damn thing to do with the other.

Another fact is that Crowley used his descretion in determining whether or not Gates violated the law. To play Monday morning quarterback is is as useless as it is ridiculous.

Fact: Crowley's name and badge number are pinned to his shirt. all one would have to do is read it. Fact: All Gates needed to do was provide ID at the officers request, the officer would thank him for his patience apologize for the inconvenience and be on his way. But noooooo Gates had to be a dickhead. Think about it. would you want the police to investigate your home if there was a report of a break in? And to be certain the the person found inside the home actually belonged there? You liberal nutcases never cease to amaze me. I thank God my children are smarter than that.

On a side note. Answer me this, who was the first of the two to make it about race?

It would not surprise me if Gates wanted to make it about race, but that would be beside the point or actually make my point, if true, that crowley lured gates outside for an arrest....because Gates pissed him off....

Please NOTE! I am ONLY speculating...I know nothing for certain.

I ENJOY playing Devil's advocate, in most all scenarios....

If Gates wanted to make it about race?!?!?! That's the first thing he did !! Damn, you people really need to take a course on reading comprehension because you people cannot be that stupid. Crowley did not lure anyone anywhere. read the police report, read Gates' own statement, read the eyewitness accounts, nowhere at no time did Crowley "lure" Gates outside. Fact: Gates ask for ID. Fact: ID (name tag and bage w/ number)is present on the officers shirt, and this guy is a professor?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So one group (mainly the so called "conservatives") here believes that expressing anger and accusing a cop of racism is a criminal offense. I find this unbelievable.

The cops were NEVER in danger of being hurt by this man. I wish the cops hadn't dropped the charges because I have no doubt in my mind that he would have gotten off with ease.

No stupid, the name calling is not the crime, causing a disturbance, being diorderly and not complying with officers is and it doesn't matter that you're in your own front yard.

You oughta sell your computer and buy some common sense.

 

[Care4all]

Treated like what? The police received a report of a house break in. Cops were sent. Cops arrive and find man inside house with broken door. Cops ask for ID and are treated instead to verbal abuse and false accusations of racism. Rather then arrest him right then, the cop reasons with him and gets the dumb ass to show ID. Problem should have been solved. Instead this man continues to berate and yell at cops doing their fucking JOB. Trying to protect HIS fucking property.

If YOU had refused to show ID, do you think the cops would have bothered to reason with you? You are not a protected class, you are not black and allowed multiple passes on basic common sense. You as a white woman probably would have found yourself handcuffed and in the back of the squad car begging now to show them ID.

You dumb asses are IGNORING the facts. Cops did not just show up and begin harassing some poor put upon black man cause he was black. They showed up because they were CALLED about a BREAK IN. A break in that in fact HAPPENED. They arrived and found this man in the house. They did not snatch him arrest him and handcuff him as a thief, they ask him for ID so they could be sure he BELONGED there and in fact did not just break in.

Instead of complying the man went into a screaming ranting fit about how he was being picked on for being black. When no such had occurred. The cops, remaining cool collected and professional calmed the situation down and got the man to show ID. Then tried to leave.

Rather then let the police leave this man continued to scream at them about being racist. So much so as to follow the cop out of his HOUSE. He was then warned about being disorderly in PUBLIC and refused to calm down, refused to return to his house and instead continued to YELL at the cop. A cop that did nothing more then his JOB, protecting this ungrateful turds property.

I hope to high hell had you acted the same you too would have ended up arrested.

Why would anyone be arrested for being upset and yelling, while on their own property?

So you are saying that Gates followed the cop outside and was not lured by the cop outside?

The evidence SAYS it, there are numerous witnesses to the event. And you are NOT just being devils advocate, you are making a claim that simply does not get supported by the FACTS. The cops history is clear. The knee jerk reaction of the BLACK President and the BLACK Governor inflame the issue and seek to defend an action that we can easily see is indefensible.

i hadn't read anything on the case yet, other than a blog, at the time i took devil's advocate roll...

well, i just read the police report for the first time a second ago, and yes gates was pulling the race card heavily....

but crowley did lure him outside the last time Gates asked for his badge info...he said because he couldn't understand all that was being said to him because of the kitchen echo or something like that.....

Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Police Report - July 23, 2009

the whole thing seems silly and a waste of tax payer's dime....from the point of knowing he was the resident of said place...

and i personally do NOT believe obama should have jumped in to it as he did.

 

[Anguille]

I read this on a blog similar to usmb....

by Mark Kleiman
Category: Crime Control

Lowry Heussler, who has worked on police-misconduct cases in Massachusetts, writes:

****************

A couple of years ago, my neighbor locked herself out and figured she could save the locksmith charge if she could get to an unlocked door on her second floor porch. A Cambridge police officer happened by and helped us carry an extension ladder across the street from my garage. He even held the ladder steady while my nimble neighbor ascended to the porch. The police officer never asked two laughing Caucasian women to prove we were not burglars.

We all know that race and sex explain the difference in the way Sgt. James Crowley treated Professor Gates, but I'd like to leave that to the side for now. The incendiary issue of race in policing diverts public attention from examining the foundation of Crowley's misconduct. When addressing basic errors in law and fact can solve a problem, we should start there before tackling the enormous and slippery issues of race and crime investigation. We're all talking about whether Lucia Whalen should have called the police and whether race was a factor in Sgt. Crowley's deplorable treatment of Gates, but so far, I have seen no straightforward analysis of Crowley's own account of his actions.

Sgt. Crowley's report almost certainly contains intentional falsehoods, but even accepting his account at face value, the report tells us all we need to conclude that Crowley was in the wrong here, and by a large factor.

The crime of disorderly conduct, beloved by cops who get into arguments with citizens, requires that the public be involved. Here's the relevant law from the Massachusetts Appeals Court, with citations and quotations omitted:

The statute authorizing prosecutions for disorderly conduct, G.L. c. 272, § 53, has been saved from constitutional infirmity by incorporating the definition of "disorderly" contained in § 250.2(1)(a) and (c) of the Model Penal Code. The resulting definition of "disorderly" includes only those individuals who, "with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof ... (a) engage in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior; or ... (c) create a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.' "Public" is defined as affecting or likely to affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access.

The lesson most cops understand (apart from the importance of using the word "tumultuous," which features prominently in Crowley's report) is that a person cannot violate 272/53 by yelling in his own home.

Read Crowley's report and stop on page two when he admits seeing Gates's Harvard photo ID. I don't care what Gates had said to him up until then, Crowley was obligated to leave. He had identified Gates. Any further investigation of Gates' right to be present in the house could have been done elsewhere. His decision to call HUPD seems disproportionate, but we could give him points for thoroughness if he had made that call from his car while keeping an eye on the house. Had a citizen refused to leave Gates' home after being told to, the cops could have made an arrest for trespass.

But for the sake of education, let's watch while Crowley makes it worse. Read on. He's staying put in Gates' home, having been asked to leave, and Gates is demanding his identification. What does Crowley do? He suggests that if Gates wants his name and badge number, he'll have to come outside to get it. What? Crowley may be forgiven for the initial approach and questioning, but surely he should understand that a citizen will be miffed at being questioned about his right to be in his own home. Perhaps Crowley could commit the following sentences to memory: "I'm sorry for disturbing you," and "I'm glad you're all right."

Spoiling for a fight, Crowley refuses to repeat his name and badge number. Most of us would hand over a business card or write the information on a scrap of paper. No, Crowley is upset and he's mad at Gates. He's been accused of racism. Nobody likes that, but if a cop can't take an insult without retaliating, he's in the wrong job. When a person is given a gun and a badge, we better make sure he's got a firm grasp on his temper. If Crowley had called Gates a name, I'd be disappointed in him, but Crowley did something much worse. He set Gates up for a criminal charge to punish Gates for his own embarrassment.

By telling Gates to come outside, Crowley establishes that he has lost all semblance of professionalism. It has now become personal and he wants to create a violation of 272/53. He gets Gates out onto the porch because a crowd has gathered providing onlookers who could experience alarm. Note his careful recitation (tumultuous behavior outside the residence in view of the public). And please do not overlook Crowley's final act of provocation. He tells an angry citizen to calm down while producing handcuffs. The only plausible question for the chief to ask about that little detail is: "Are you stupid, or do you think I'm stupid?" Crowley produced those handcuffs to provoke Gates and then arrested him. The decision to arrest is telling. If Crowley believed the charge was valid, he could have issued a summons. An arrest under these circumstances shows his true intent: to humiliate Gates.

No one who is familiar with law enforcement can miss the significance of Crowley's report. As so often happens with documentary evidence, a person seeking to create a false impression spends lots of time nailing down the elements he thinks will establish his goal, but forgets about the larger picture. Under color of law, Crowley entered a residence to investigate a possible break-in, and after his probable cause had evaporated, he continued to act under color of law, but without any justifiable purpose. And he covered it up with false charges. Figuring that his best defense was a criminal charge, Crowley did what bad cops do. He decided he would look better if Gates looked worse. Perhaps one day cops will figure out that trumped-up charges worsen a case of investigating something that turns out not to have been a crime. It is horribly wrong when police officers falsely accuse an injured arrestee of A&B PO ("assault and battery on a police officer," a felony) but at least there is some logic to the lie. If a disorderly conduct charge follows an investigation of a non-crime, chances are pretty good that the cop handled himself badly. Pursuit of charges should be strongly disfavored.

The lying matters. I'm afraid that part of the decision to nolle prosse the case stems from the CPD's reluctance to have Mr. Ogletree produce evidence contradicting Crowley's statements.

I'm not surprised that the CPD backed away from this, but I take a hard line on completing an investigation, regardless of whether Gates pushes for one. I've detailed what I think are serious abuses of authority by Crowley, even if his report is taken as true, but I am also very concerned about "testilying" in police reports. Most of us would be fired for giving our employer a false report, even if it concerned relatively minor matters. Employers need to know they can trust us. When a person is prosecuted in the name of the Commonwealth, a testifying police officer is essentially the eyes and ears of the citizenry. Don't lie when you're my agent.

If Crowley lied about Gates' statements, he should not be permitted to investigate crimes ever again. Investigation for the government is a sacred responsibility. Unless Cambridge investigates and acts properly, we're ratifying his actions. We're also putting the public at risk of false arrest and police persecution. Lying cops are like biting dogs. After the first bite we can't say we weren't warned. Conservatives love "zero tolerance" for crime. Could we have zero tolerance for testilying?

People scoff at the idea of disciplining a cop for lying in a report, let alone firing a cop for a single episode of lying. Complete truthfulness in the police may be an impossible dream. But the goal of policing is a crime-free community, isn't it? The police have to keep working toward the unattainable goal of eliminating crime. The rest of us should be uncompromising in our efforts to eliminate police misconduct.

I haven't read the police report yet, but when gates asked for crowley's id and crowly said he would only give it to him if he stepped outside...crowley could have been setting him up for an arrest of disorderly conduct...

As long as the ruckus was carried on inside his home crowley could not arrest him on disorderly conduct...did crowley, refusing to give gates his id information unless gates went outside, really want to set up mr gates for an arrest?

something doesn't smell right to me...

Thank you, Care. Good to know other people are taking a dispassionate look at this and seeing beyond the superficial.

 

[Anguille]

So one group (mainly the so called "conservatives") here believes that expressing anger and accusing a cop of racism is a criminal offense. I find this unbelievable.

The cops were NEVER in danger of being hurt by this man. I wish the cops hadn't dropped the charges because I have no doubt in my mind that he would have gotten off with ease.

The conservatives do seem to harbor some strange convictions. I guess in this case, might (or white?) makes right to some. Imagine if it had been a black cop arresting a white guy? Or a woman arresting a white guy?

I do hope some of these people who support abuse of police power don't ever find themselves in the same situation where a cop comes to their door demanding ID and then arrests them for giving him a less than open armed reception.

 

[Anguille]

So one group (mainly the so called "conservatives") here believes that expressing anger and accusing a cop of racism is a criminal offense. I find this unbelievable.

The cops were NEVER in danger of being hurt by this man. I wish the cops hadn't dropped the charges because I have no doubt in my mind that he would have gotten off with ease.

No stupid, the name calling is not the crime, causing a disturbance, being diorderly and not complying with officers is and it doesn't matter that you're in your own front yard.

You oughta sell your computer and buy some common sense.

He wasn't in his front yard. Still twisting facts in an attempt to get attention? He was in his own home, on his own porch.

 

[Anguille]

Treated like what? The police received a report of a house break in. Cops were sent. Cops arrive and find man inside house with broken door. Cops ask for ID and are treated instead to verbal abuse and false accusations of racism. Rather then arrest him right then, the cop reasons with him and gets the dumb ass to show ID. Problem should have been solved. Instead this man continues to berate and yell at cops doing their fucking JOB. Trying to protect HIS fucking property.

If YOU had refused to show ID, do you think the cops would have bothered to reason with you? You are not a protected class, you are not black and allowed multiple passes on basic common sense. You as a white woman probably would have found yourself handcuffed and in the back of the squad car begging now to show them ID.

You dumb asses are IGNORING the facts. Cops did not just show up and begin harassing some poor put upon black man cause he was black. They showed up because they were CALLED about a BREAK IN. A break in that in fact HAPPENED. They arrived and found this man in the house. They did not snatch him arrest him and handcuff him as a thief, they ask him for ID so they could be sure he BELONGED there and in fact did not just break in.

Instead of complying the man went into a screaming ranting fit about how he was being picked on for being black. When no such had occurred. The cops, remaining cool collected and professional calmed the situation down and got the man to show ID. Then tried to leave.

Rather then let the police leave this man continued to scream at them about being racist. So much so as to follow the cop out of his HOUSE. He was then warned about being disorderly in PUBLIC and refused to calm down, refused to return to his house and instead continued to YELL at the cop. A cop that did nothing more then his JOB, protecting this ungrateful turds property.

I hope to high hell had you acted the same you too would have ended up arrested.

A lot of misinformation in there, buddy.
I bet you identify with the cop who wanted to teach Gates a lesson because you've been called a racist before and don't like it.

 

[Againsheila]

I read this on a blog similar to usmb....

by Mark Kleiman
Category: Crime Control

Lowry Heussler, who has worked on police-misconduct cases in Massachusetts, writes:

****************

A couple of years ago, my neighbor locked herself out and figured she could save the locksmith charge if she could get to an unlocked door on her second floor porch. A Cambridge police officer happened by and helped us carry an extension ladder across the street from my garage. He even held the ladder steady while my nimble neighbor ascended to the porch. The police officer never asked two laughing Caucasian women to prove we were not burglars.

We all know that race and sex explain the difference in the way Sgt. James Crowley treated Professor Gates, but I'd like to leave that to the side for now. The incendiary issue of race in policing diverts public attention from examining the foundation of Crowley's misconduct. When addressing basic errors in law and fact can solve a problem, we should start there before tackling the enormous and slippery issues of race and crime investigation. We're all talking about whether Lucia Whalen should have called the police and whether race was a factor in Sgt. Crowley's deplorable treatment of Gates, but so far, I have seen no straightforward analysis of Crowley's own account of his actions.

Sgt. Crowley's report almost certainly contains intentional falsehoods, but even accepting his account at face value, the report tells us all we need to conclude that Crowley was in the wrong here, and by a large factor.

The crime of disorderly conduct, beloved by cops who get into arguments with citizens, requires that the public be involved. Here's the relevant law from the Massachusetts Appeals Court, with citations and quotations omitted:

The statute authorizing prosecutions for disorderly conduct, G.L. c. 272, § 53, has been saved from constitutional infirmity by incorporating the definition of "disorderly" contained in § 250.2(1)(a) and (c) of the Model Penal Code. The resulting definition of "disorderly" includes only those individuals who, "with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof ... (a) engage in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior; or ... (c) create a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.' "Public" is defined as affecting or likely to affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access.

The lesson most cops understand (apart from the importance of using the word "tumultuous," which features prominently in Crowley's report) is that a person cannot violate 272/53 by yelling in his own home.

Read Crowley's report and stop on page two when he admits seeing Gates's Harvard photo ID. I don't care what Gates had said to him up until then, Crowley was obligated to leave. He had identified Gates. Any further investigation of Gates' right to be present in the house could have been done elsewhere. His decision to call HUPD seems disproportionate, but we could give him points for thoroughness if he had made that call from his car while keeping an eye on the house. Had a citizen refused to leave Gates' home after being told to, the cops could have made an arrest for trespass.

But for the sake of education, let's watch while Crowley makes it worse. Read on. He's staying put in Gates' home, having been asked to leave, and Gates is demanding his identification. What does Crowley do? He suggests that if Gates wants his name and badge number, he'll have to come outside to get it. What? Crowley may be forgiven for the initial approach and questioning, but surely he should understand that a citizen will be miffed at being questioned about his right to be in his own home. Perhaps Crowley could commit the following sentences to memory: "I'm sorry for disturbing you," and "I'm glad you're all right."

Spoiling for a fight, Crowley refuses to repeat his name and badge number. Most of us would hand over a business card or write the information on a scrap of paper. No, Crowley is upset and he's mad at Gates. He's been accused of racism. Nobody likes that, but if a cop can't take an insult without retaliating, he's in the wrong job. When a person is given a gun and a badge, we better make sure he's got a firm grasp on his temper. If Crowley had called Gates a name, I'd be disappointed in him, but Crowley did something much worse. He set Gates up for a criminal charge to punish Gates for his own embarrassment.

By telling Gates to come outside, Crowley establishes that he has lost all semblance of professionalism. It has now become personal and he wants to create a violation of 272/53. He gets Gates out onto the porch because a crowd has gathered providing onlookers who could experience alarm. Note his careful recitation (tumultuous behavior outside the residence in view of the public). And please do not overlook Crowley's final act of provocation. He tells an angry citizen to calm down while producing handcuffs. The only plausible question for the chief to ask about that little detail is: "Are you stupid, or do you think I'm stupid?" Crowley produced those handcuffs to provoke Gates and then arrested him. The decision to arrest is telling. If Crowley believed the charge was valid, he could have issued a summons. An arrest under these circumstances shows his true intent: to humiliate Gates.

No one who is familiar with law enforcement can miss the significance of Crowley's report. As so often happens with documentary evidence, a person seeking to create a false impression spends lots of time nailing down the elements he thinks will establish his goal, but forgets about the larger picture. Under color of law, Crowley entered a residence to investigate a possible break-in, and after his probable cause had evaporated, he continued to act under color of law, but without any justifiable purpose. And he covered it up with false charges. Figuring that his best defense was a criminal charge, Crowley did what bad cops do. He decided he would look better if Gates looked worse. Perhaps one day cops will figure out that trumped-up charges worsen a case of investigating something that turns out not to have been a crime. It is horribly wrong when police officers falsely accuse an injured arrestee of A&B PO ("assault and battery on a police officer," a felony) but at least there is some logic to the lie. If a disorderly conduct charge follows an investigation of a non-crime, chances are pretty good that the cop handled himself badly. Pursuit of charges should be strongly disfavored.

The lying matters. I'm afraid that part of the decision to nolle prosse the case stems from the CPD's reluctance to have Mr. Ogletree produce evidence contradicting Crowley's statements.

I'm not surprised that the CPD backed away from this, but I take a hard line on completing an investigation, regardless of whether Gates pushes for one. I've detailed what I think are serious abuses of authority by Crowley, even if his report is taken as true, but I am also very concerned about "testilying" in police reports. Most of us would be fired for giving our employer a false report, even if it concerned relatively minor matters. Employers need to know they can trust us. When a person is prosecuted in the name of the Commonwealth, a testifying police officer is essentially the eyes and ears of the citizenry. Don't lie when you're my agent.

If Crowley lied about Gates' statements, he should not be permitted to investigate crimes ever again. Investigation for the government is a sacred responsibility. Unless Cambridge investigates and acts properly, we're ratifying his actions. We're also putting the public at risk of false arrest and police persecution. Lying cops are like biting dogs. After the first bite we can't say we weren't warned. Conservatives love "zero tolerance" for crime. Could we have zero tolerance for testilying?

People scoff at the idea of disciplining a cop for lying in a report, let alone firing a cop for a single episode of lying. Complete truthfulness in the police may be an impossible dream. But the goal of policing is a crime-free community, isn't it? The police have to keep working toward the unattainable goal of eliminating crime. The rest of us should be uncompromising in our efforts to eliminate police misconduct.

I haven't read the police report yet, but when gates asked for crowley's id and crowly said he would only give it to him if he stepped outside...crowley could have been setting him up for an arrest of disorderly conduct...

As long as the ruckus was carried on inside his home crowley could not arrest him on disorderly conduct...did crowley, refusing to give gates his id information unless gates went outside, really want to set up mr gates for an arrest?

something doesn't smell right to me...

I read the police report...it states that the first time Gates asked the officer for his ID, the officer gave him his name, the second time Gates asked him for ID, gates continued yelling at him while the officer gave Gates his name. The third time, Gates was so out of control, the officer really had to arrest him.

Face it, Gates was tired, it'd been a long trip. When he got home, he had to break into his own house. To add insult to injury, the cops show up, called by a neighbor, he reacted badly. He should be apologizing to the cop. Even the neighbor that said they shouldn't have arrested Gates said Gates shouldn't have been acting that way.

The cop was justified in the arrest, Gates was not justified in his behavior.

If you keep yelling at a cop and demanding ID and not listening when the cop tries to talk, you can expect to get hauled downtown. It's a given.

 

[Againsheila]

So one group (mainly the so called "conservatives") here believes that expressing anger and accusing a cop of racism is a criminal offense. I find this unbelievable.

The cops were NEVER in danger of being hurt by this man. I wish the cops hadn't dropped the charges because I have no doubt in my mind that he would have gotten off with ease.

No, continuing to yell at a cop after being warned TWICE, to calm down is an offense, it's called disorderly conduct. The officer was justified in the arrest, Gates was not justified in his tirade. End of story.

 

[Sweet Willy]

You think? hahaah not so sure are you? The fact is you have to produce ID anytime an officer request it or risk going to jail. But since you don't mind going to jail then what is your problem?

What would prevent someone from giving the authorites a false name? And what if that false name that was given, had an outstanding warrant.

You have got to be the dumbest person I've seen in this group by far. Do yourself a favor and it may save you future embarrassment. Call you local police station and ask them what would happen if you refused to provide an ID when asked. And then ask them why they would even bother with such a request. I'll be back tomorrow to read your response.

You are only required to give your name to a police officer and that's only set in stone in 21 states. Nowhere in the US is there any law requiring that you even carry ID, much less show it. And yes, it would be a lot of fun for me if I was arrested for failure to have an ID. You do realize that drivers license and picture IDs are fairly new things for people to carry around? How did we ever manage to know who anyone was in 1888?

You always HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT. Maybe you've heard of that.

Yes and in this case had he refused to provide ID the police officer would have been justified in arresting his ass for breaking and entering. You see dumb ass, a complaint was filed and a witness was available to provide first hand report that this man and another FORCED their way into the home. With no compelling evidence that the man in the home lived there the police would have had to arrest him until they could identify him or contact the owner.

One had better identify themselves or face arrest when the police have a justifiable reason to believe a CRIME has occurred. Pretty damn simple concept, you would think, except to retardo Liberals.

Whatever the specifics of this case, I am merely makinng the point that failure to have or show ID is not a crime.

 

[Sweet Willy]

You think? hahaah not so sure are you? The fact is you have to produce ID anytime an officer request it or risk going to jail. But since you don't mind going to jail then what is your problem?

What would prevent someone from giving the authorites a false name? And what if that false name that was given, had an outstanding warrant.

You have got to be the dumbest person I've seen in this group by far. Do yourself a favor and it may save you future embarrassment. Call you local police station and ask them what would happen if you refused to provide an ID when asked. And then ask them why they would even bother with such a request. I'll be back tomorrow to read your response.

You are only required to give your name to a police officer and that's only set in stone in 21 states. Nowhere in the US is there any law requiring that you even carry ID, much less show it. And yes, it would be a lot of fun for me if I was arrested for failure to have an ID. You do realize that drivers license and picture IDs are fairly new things for people to carry around? How did we ever manage to know who anyone was in 1888?

You always HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT. Maybe you've heard of that.

You obviously failed in reading comprehension. I never said you were required to carry ID, I said you were required to produce it when asked by an officer of the law or face the penalty. Fairly new? Define "fairly new".
The miranda rights are usually introduced when yo're being arrested. If an officer pulls you over and you exercise your right to remain silent, then you will most certainly be going to jail. You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride. I would surmise that idiots like you would be uncooperative and end up wasting the cops time by being a little billigerent bitch.

There is no penalty for "failure to have an ID". If you can prove that such a penalty exist, do it. You only have to give your name, if they have a cause to ask.

If you are driving a car, you are exercising a priviledge and you do have to show a license. But that is a whole different game than standing in your own front yard.

 

[Anguille]

Whatever the specifics of this case, I am merely makinng the point that failure to have or show ID is not a crime.

And the fact that it is not a crime seems to irk some people. I think the idea of a police state is attractive to them.

 

[Againsheila]

So one group (mainly the so called "conservatives") here believes that expressing anger and accusing a cop of racism is a criminal offense. I find this unbelievable.

The cops were NEVER in danger of being hurt by this man. I wish the cops hadn't dropped the charges because I have no doubt in my mind that he would have gotten off with ease.

I wish the charges hadn't been dropped also, as I'm equally as certain the Gates would have been convicted.

As for speaking to my "momma"...you have to cross over to do that.

 

[Againsheila]

Whatever the specifics of this case, I am merely makinng the point that failure to have or show ID is not a crime.

And the fact that it is not a crime seems to irk some people. I think the idea of a police state is attractive to them.

You know, I'm as big at claiming we are becoming a facist state as anyone. But in this case, Gates was wrong, the cop was right.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Whatever the specifics of this case, I am merely makinng the point that failure to have or show ID is not a crime.

And the fact that it is not a crime seems to irk some people. I think the idea of a police state is attractive to them.

Not only irk some, but Lonestar says you aren't required to show ID but if you don't, you'll face the consequences. Leaves me wondering if Lonestar understands the concept of a requirement? If there is a consequence, then it's a requirement. To contend that showing ID is not required, but there is a consequence is.....well, it's stupid. If it isn't required, why are you punishing people for not doing it? Authoritarian idiots.