Dr. Henry Louis Gates Arrested

[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.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

It's illegal to sue the President.

Really? I'd expect him to have immunity for most official actions, but I wouldn't think he could defame or slander with impunity.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

It's illegal to sue the President.

Executive privilege is a very squishy, grey, untested area.

Here, my feeling on the subject is that in theory, if the alleged slander arose from the President's duties since he was commenting on a matter of public concern during a Presidential press conference. That should probably be a privileged statement.

Even if the statement wasn't privileged, I don't know if it'd be actionable anyhow for a few reasons. 1) The police officer is a limited purpose public figure -- he's famous, of public concern, etc. 2) since the President's statements weren't made with malice (he didn't know the statement was false or wasn't necessarily reckless with regard to the truth), and even if he did that it's hard to say that the President's words would have the tendency to lower the police officer's standing in the community. The whole story is out there and the President's remarks are a mere sideshow.