Dr. Henry Louis Gates Arrested

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

Also, getting loud and asking for ID, again, is not disorderly conduct.

It very well could be, depending on the circumstances. You're basing your entire argument here on this sort of out-of-hand dismissal, which seems unwarranted at best and disingenuous at worst.

Using common sense, with all the attention this has garnered, I don't necessarily think the charges would have been dropped if they were legitimate in the first place.

Demonstrably false:

They didn't just drop those charges because of who Gates is.

... yet you've earlier argued that these charges would be dropped against a white person of similar stature. Hmm, interesting, and chock full o' bias and poor reasoning.

They dropped them because they couldn't convict him. They didn't have enough.

... or it's more trouble than it's worth, or the city didn't feel like assigning multiple prosecutors to defend against a high-powered, expensive and very public legal team over a couple hundred bucks, or they wanted it out of the news cycle because they would have to defend the cop rather than prosecute the accused, or . . .

Furthermore, they had a slight problem...the cop refused to give his identifying information to Gates. Legally he can't do that.

Aren't you in law school? This really may have very little bearing on the case - it may influence views on the officer's credibility, but if you know anything at all about witness credibility, you'd realize cops . . . have it. Implicitly. I'm not certain the "legal" ramifications of not giving your badge number include "throwing out the case" in this situation - are you?

For what it is worth, Massachusetts courts have limited the definition of disorderly conduct to: fighting or threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or creating a hazardous or physically offensive condition for no legitimate purpose other than to cause public annoyance or alarm. Dr. Gates was not causing public annoyance or alarm. He wasn't fighting or threatening. He wasn't violent. He did not create a hazardous or physically offensive condition. He was also not in public. The officer only arrested him once he stepped onto the porch. I don't think the porch qualifies as a public place.

Notice you left out "tumultuous" . . . is there a reason for that? Are you sure that a man yelling at a cop in his front yard causes no alarm?

Additionally, words can certainly escalate to the point where these definitions could be met. You're just saying "they didn't" without any real support is unconvincing.

The responses to this incident are further evidence of why race relations in this country will remain somewhat stagnant. if every single time an incident happens, people blow it off, no one will ever take a stance against racial profiling or the bigotry of the police. and for the record, I'm not saying that anyone should believe that EVERY incident involves racism.

You're not "saying" that - you're "showing" that, in every thread. You've never taken anything but a contrarian stance against those who bring up anything to suggest an incident might not have the explicit racial overtones you give it.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Aren't you in law school? This really may have very little bearing on the case - it may influence views on the officer's credibility, but if you know anything at all about witness credibility, you'd realize cops . . . have it. Implicitly. I'm not certain the "legal" ramifications of not giving your badge number include "throwing out the case" in this situation - are you?



Notice you left out "tumultuous" . . . is there a reason for that? Are you sure that a man yelling at a cop in his front yard causes no alarm?

Additionally, words can certainly escalate to the point where these definitions could be met. You're just saying "they didn't" without any real support is unconvincing.



You're not "saying" that - you're "showing" that, in every thread. You've never taken anything but a contrarian stance against those who bring up anything to suggest an incident might not have the explicit racial overtones you give it.

Tumultuous was not left out on purpose. That was an oversight on my part. And to answer your question, I don't think his behavior was cause for alarm. I have seen far worse behavior from individuals who were in the presence of cops, and they were not arrested. The cop went overboard and now his refusals to apologize are making him look even more suspect. as an officer of the law he should be held to a higher standard. At the very least he could apologize and be the bigger person. That would go a long way towards helping his case. since he is some kind of instructor on racial profiling his apology could simply be that he did not make Dr. Gates feel as though he was the victim of racial profiling, and that he simply was responding to a call. Doing that would not kill him. Instead he is continuing to be a bit of a jerk about it. This shows a complete lack of sensitivity.

As for your question about the cop ID information, I did not mean for you to interpret my statement as saying that was the reason it was thrown out. My point was that they not only threw the case out because they couldn't maintain the charge, but also because they were hoping to avoid having him file a complaint because the officer did not comply with his request.


Finally, while words CAN escalate to the point where those "requirements" are met, the key word is CAN. There is still nothing to indicate that this is what happened. Despite the fact that there are hundreds of accounts of what happened, the fact remains is that the only thing they have been able to say was that Dr. Gates repeatedly asked for the officer's information and was angry. He didn't hit anyone, he didn't swing at anyone, and he didn't do anything that they could point to that created a hazardous environment.

[SydneyK]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

The cop went overboard and now his refusals to apologize are making him look even more suspect. as an officer of the law he should be held to a higher standard. At the very least he could apologize and be the bigger person.

Some would argue that Gates went overboard, too. And I've yet to hear him apologize. As a highly educated man, he should be held to a higher standard. At the very least, Gates could apologize and be the bigger person. (See what I did there?)

I don't think the cop was in the wrong any more than Gates was. And if the police officer is chastised for refusing to apologize, then Gates should be as well. Works both ways.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

As for your question about the cop ID information, I did not mean for you to interpret my statement as saying that was the reason it was thrown out. My point was that they not only threw the case out because they couldn't maintain the charge, but also because they were hoping to avoid having him file a complaint because the officer did not comply with his request.


Finally, while words CAN escalate to the point where those "requirements" are met, the key word is CAN. There is still nothing to indicate that this is what happened. Despite the fact that there are hundreds of accounts of what happened, the fact remains is that the only thing they have been able to say was that Dr. Gates repeatedly asked for the officer's information and was angry. He didn't hit anyone, he didn't swing at anyone, and he didn't do anything that they could point to that created a hazardous environment.

Good post, I agree with basically everything you've said here - I still think it's important to point out where our platitudes fail, and anecdotal evidence sucks, but I like the explanation you've given here.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Good post, I agree with basically everything you've said here - I still think it's important to point out where our platitudes fail, and anecdotal evidence sucks, but I like the explanation you've given here.

Really?

Even about what Gates was doing? Isn't that pretty significant in evaluating the overall event and how racially motivated it was?

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Really?

Even about what Gates was doing? Isn't that pretty significant in evaluating the overall event and how racially motivated it was?

I meant to edit out the first paragraph, which I don't agree with (but actually has some analytic thought, instead of direct-to-video posturing and platitudes, so at least it's contributing to the discussion).

I guess here's my bottom line: __________ is likely to act like an entitled, arrogant asshole when they feel disrespected and challenged without cause.

Fill in the blanks: Cop? Harvard professor? Both seem to fit well for me.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I meant to edit out the first paragraph, which I don't agree with (but actually has some analytic thought, instead of direct-to-video posturing and platitudes, so at least it's contributing to the discussion).

I guess here's my bottom line: __________ is likely to act like an entitled, arrogant asshole when they feel disrespected and challenged without cause.

Fill in the blanks: Cop? Harvard professor? Both seem to fit well for me.

Or you could fill it in with any GreekChat poster's name.

This seems stupid though: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8163051&page=1

It would seem like both would be eager to put the specific incident behind them. I found it admirable that Gates didn't make any noise about a false arrest suit.

Assuming the police office did stupidly sue, could he name Obama as well?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Or you could fill it in with any GreekChat poster's name.

This seems stupid though: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8163051&page=1

It would seem like both would be eager to put the specific incident behind them. I found it admirable that Gates didn't make any noise about a false arrest suit.

Assuming the police office did stupidly sue, could he name Obama as well?

It's illegal to sue the President.