As it should, Obama had a Biden moment and it's gonna cost him. No way he should have made a declaration based upon limited knowledge of the situation. Of course this is just a reflextion of him rushing everything before it's thought out. The police have a tough enough job without the President of the United States making idiotic statements based upon limited information.
Posted by glassman on :
LOL...
when are people going to realise that cops arresting ANYBODY on their OWN property for "disorderly conduct" or whatever it was is a violation of that persons civil rights?
was he waving a gun around? nope
was he drinking? nope.
did one of his (gates) family members file a complaint against him? nope.
was he wearing clothes? yup.
what is disorderly conduct?
it ain't speaking "disrespectfully" to cops.
when cops can arrest you for being talking the way they don't like? that's Fascism (capital F is intentioanl)
is it a bad idea to be disrespectful to cops? of course.
is it illegal? HELL NO!
fact is? i'm not even sure this is a race issue, but if it happened to me? i wouldn't get any press.
Posted by T e x on :
So true...
I'm alone in my house? How on earth can I be disorderly? I might violate a noise ordinance, maybe endanger someone else's safety, etc...but then I'd be in violation of something specific instead of some trumped up "disorderly" charge.
Any cop that doesn't get that should be under some serious review...
Posted by glassman on :
Any cop that doesn't get that should be under some serious review...
he is. the arrest was "nullified" immediately.
this discussion ended before it started.
the cop should apologise before his (current) career is over.
of course he'll be hired somewhere where his type of behaviour is condoned. I wonder if he likes Chines food?
Posted by T e x on :
from one of the CNN stories:
Gates was arrested for "loud and tumultuous behavior in a public space" and was released from police custody after spending four hours at the police station.
All I can say further is, if they think *he* was loud and tumultous...well, you catch my drift: my home is most definitely NOT public space.
Posted by glassman on :
i see the cops are "digging in" and closing ranks in press conference.
the charges were dropped, how are they going to get around that?
it's looking to me like the cops of America may need a sit-down come to Jesus moment with the Cheif Law Enforcement officer of the US. Posted by raybond on :
I stand with the officer right or worng period and cops never apologise for there actions period have you ever seen one do it.
Officers enforce the law wether it easy or hard and sometimes not pleasent to do so.
Officers also take a lot of crap from people that they should not have to take.
Maybe you folks well wake up one day and figure out that we are whats stands between you and the animals police pick them up and corrects keeps them off the streets.
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
I want to see ALL the details come out before I make a decision. Wonder why they wont release everything yet...legal stuff?
Posted by glassman on :
right or wrong? sure about that? where does it stop?
i have known quite a few cops personally and professionally as a repoman.
i can't say as i recall one apologising, and i have been in a few "sticky" situations where i was owed one, i sure as heck didn't demand it, but i also never got arrested for being a smartazz cuz i ain't dumb enough to mouth off to a cop.
the cop made the wrong decision to arrest his guy, that's been made clear.
the cops union could stay out of this and allow it to go away, but it don't look like they want to.
the fact is? Obama is the chief of law enforcemnet of the country like it or not. and all of this "no comment" stuff would sound alot like the last administration wouldn't it?
say you are in your house and a cop comes to you door, or IN your door and demands ID? whatcha gonna do?
i dunno what set this guy off, and i don't aprove of his behaviour, but arresting him is just as bad as what he did, and once a cop makes an arrest? he/she is no longer representing him/herself, he/she is representing the community that EMPLOYS him or her.
the DA made a pretty clear satatement by dropping the case.
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
I could never be a cop...not to offend anyone here that is. I couldnt arrest people for having something petty such as a joint in their house in some states, or write someone a ticket for driving in the left lane on a highway if not passing just driving.
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
Lot of cops don't arrest people when they have a joint in their house. Cops are people too.
I just wish we would mike and video their unforms so that when they are on duty they are recorded. Would take a lot of the he said she said out of enforcement.
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Someone needs to police the police
Posted by glassman on :
sounds like Obama has invited both gentlemen to the White House so they can either bury the hatchet or duke it out
talk about making lemonade out of lemons
the cop is a race relations instructor.
it could blow up in his face too, but somehow i doubt it.
Posted by raybond on :
Cash the police are policed by you the citizen, the laws of the land,and the elected officials. Don,t make laws and get mad when we enforce them.
I don,t work the streets but if an officer ask me for ID I respond with respect and produce it the only reason you are asked is becauseyou are knowingly or unknowingly some place where you should not be or fit the profile of someone they are looking for.Or to clear you of being suspect.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: sounds like Obama has invited both gentlemen to the White House so they can either bury the hatchet or duke it out
talk about making lemonade out of lemons
the cop is a race relations instructor.
it could blow up in his face too, but somehow i doubt it.
Yes, I caught part of his 'not really apologizing' speach. I don't see how the officer can win in this, sadly.
If he says no to the invite (which I think he should) he'll be made into the bad guy since he won't meet with Prof. Gates to 'settle' things.
If he says yes, he'll be seen as admitting that there was something wrong in his conduct that needs explaining or apologizing for.
I renew my prediction that this isn't over and will get worse.
Posted by glassman on :
the rumor i heard is that the cop himself asked...
let's review the scenario. you are in your own home and suddenly you have cops asking you to prove who you are...
you don't know that your neighbor called in suspicious characters.
seems to me the neighbor may be part of the problem here?
the cop is looking for a crook, he has no reason to be polite. so he isn't.
stage set. it gets worse from there
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
I know, Glass, but there is two parts of this that I hate more than anything else...
First, using your scenario, put yourself in Gates' place. In house, cop shows up and asks for ID. Me? I would show him ID and then have a nice conversation with him about forgetting my keys and my nosey neighbor. Gates? Apparently he begins by crying racism and insulting the cop's mother. (Yeah, I know it's probably a generic 'you SoB!' comment.)
When the officer was informed that there were possibly two bad guys and the first person he meets is belligerent, he's going to have to assume there is a safety risk as he's on his own. Nothing in the officer's version of events has been contested by Gates other than he claims he nicely showed two forms of ID during his rant.
(insert sarcasticly incredulous comment of choice here)
Second, and related, Obama basically calls the cop a racist idiot on national TV while admittedly not knowing anything about the case other than a white cop arrested his black friend. And even in his 'apology-that-wasn't-really-an-apology' he still ran up the race card...again!
This is why I think this is going to go straight from the handbasket to the express train. They both tossed out the race card reflexively and accidentally aimed it at a model cop who happens to be a trainer for race relations! Other than if he had had a black wife, he's about as bullet proof of a non-racist as you can get (at least from the reports on him so far).
Sooner or later, we white folk get tired of being labeled racist every time we disagree with someone that isn't of our 'ethnicity.' I think that this time, that frustration is going to boil over into something ugly and Obama is going to take flak from it.
Posted by glassman on :
how many cases get dropped immediately?
from the police report? the arresting officer was not first on the scene. it is not even clear that he was called racist by Gates, it appears from his complaint that another officer was called a racist:
rereading that it appears that another officer wrote the complaint about Crowley and Gates. even more interesting. so Gates was called a racist and another officer wrote it up, so who was the arresting officer?
once again i return to my original statement. arresting people like this on their own property is stupid.
the report says he attracted a crowd of 7 people (wow) and the cop cars in the front yard didn't?
does it not occur to you that by arresting the guy? they sortof validate the race card?
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Black officer at Gates home during arrest said scholar acted strange, supports arrest
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) — A multiracial group of police officers on Friday stood with the white officer who arrested a prominent black Harvard scholar and asked President Barack Obama and Gov. Deval Patrick to apologize for comments the union leaders called insulting.
Obama said Wednesday that Cambridge police "acted stupidly" during the disorderly conduct arrest of his friend, Henry Louis Gates Jr., in his own home near Harvard University. Gov. Deval Patrick said Gates' arrest was "every black man's nightmare."
Dennis O'Connor, president of the Cambridge Police Superior Officers Association, said Obama's remarks were "misdirected" and the Cambridge police "deeply resent the implication" that race was a factor in the arrest.
"President Obama said the actions of the CPD were stupid and linked the event to the history of racial profiling in America," O'Connor said. "The facts of the case suggested that the president used the right adjective but directed it to the wrong party."
Officers responded to Gates' home on July 16 after a woman called 911 and said she saw two black men with backpacks trying to force open the front door. The woman, Lucia Whalen, has not responded to repeated attempts for comment.
Gates has said he returned from an overseas trip, found the door jammed, and that he and his driver attempted to force it open. Gates went through the back door and was inside the house on the phone with the property's management company when police arrived.
Police said he flew into a verbal rage after Sgt. James Crowley, who is white, asked him to show identification to prove he should be in the home. Police say Gates accused Crowley of racial bias, refused to calm down and was arrested. The charge was dropped Tuesday, but Gates has demanded an apology, calling his arrest a case of racial profiling.
Gates, 58, maintains he turned over identification when asked to do so by the police. He said Crowley arrested him after the professor followed him to the porch, repeatedly demanding the sergeant's name and badge number because he was unhappy over his treatment.
Crowley has refused to apologize, saying he followed protocol.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
That's not the way I read the report, Glass.
The report writer(Off. Figueroa) clearly mentions that upon arriving Sgt. Crowley was already presnent and speaking with Gates. The report continues to state that Gates refused to provide ID when asked and called Crowley a racist.
After leaving to get a witness statement, he returned to find Gates and Crowley on the porch (instead of in the house) and Gates is still ranting at Crowley and continuing to call him racist. From page 2 of the report, it was the ranting on the porch that got Gates his trip to the station.
Crowley didn't write the report, so his statement does hold with the report.
Posted by thinkmoney on :
NO one is perfect and many bad cops- But, in this case the cop was good and the african american was simply yelling racism as alot of blacks do - maybe, understood due to history but not justified -
Someone placed a 911 call and if I ever place a 911 call I want cops to come and check out -
So, cops are there legitmately and this african american is offended and is yelling and is belligerant and brings race in -
IMO nothin to do with race but a response to a 911- but the african american is offended as most are - mostly screaming racism vs taking accoutnability and improving african americans' lives- so I am a cop and 911 placed and someone yells and is angry and out of line - refuse to show ID and then he shows it -
So, IMO tempers flared up on both sides but COP was good and tried to do job but scholar wants to yell racilism vs understnading -
Obama shoudl off never spokem before he knew---
Cops have a tough job and Obama made it tougher for them and definetely was biased - Obama is a man infleuneced by Wright and anti- USA esp. cops stuff and Wright consistantly called cops stupidly - ???
The cop should have left after id but man was not right to be yelling and belligereant - cop doping job to best of ability and scholar yelling racism and he was WRONG!!!
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: That's not the way I read the report, Glass.
The report writer(Off. Figueroa) clearly mentions that upon arriving Sgt. Crowley was already presnent and speaking with Gates. The report continues to state that Gates refused to provide ID when asked and called Crowley a racist.
After leaving to get a witness statement, he returned to find Gates and Crowley on the porch (instead of in the house) and Gates is still ranting at Crowley and continuing to call him racist. From page 2 of the report, it was the ranting on the porch that got Gates his trip to the station.
Crowley didn't write the report, so his statement does hold with the report.
yeah, i missed the I (identifying Figeroa as the writer) the first time i read it, after i posted the link i reread it and spotted the I.
missing the I made methink Crowley was writing about Figeroa not vice versa... i don't read to many police reports so i was assuming it was first person narrative by the arresting officer.
i wonder how common it is for a second officer to write the narrative?
maybe both guys will own up to their mistakes? Gates was obviously misbehaving. i'm not convinced he was due an arrest and neither was the DA since he was th one who dropped the charges.
Posted by rounder1 on :
Here is my opinion for what it is worth......
I have a love/hate relationship with police. It stems from the fact that I love the service that they provide....but many times; the low wage coupled with the authority atracts the wrong type of enforcer...(nuther subject....get into that later)
Almost always.....if a police officer comes to your home in response to a disturbance.....someone is going to jail......(color has nothing to do with it). If my wife phoned the cops and said she felt threatened; I promise you that I would spend the night in the "clink.".....
Police officer responds to a disturbance call and encounters a person that is automatically offended.......Gates is understandably "put out" and is inclined not to comply.....but given his level of inteligence, education, position, commen sense.......he should have realized that you do not argue with a cop responding to a situation that could have very well been dangerous to his/her person.
If the reports of his behaviour were accurate.....he was going to be arrested regardless of his color.
Any president should have the wherewithall to hold their tongue on an issue that trivial.......and it absolutely trivial. There are one thousand layers between the presidency and a private citizen.....I would not choose to elect any president that feels the need to comment on such a situation.....especially when there is layer after layer of qualified jursist capable of rectifying the situation.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:maybe both guys will own up to their mistakes? Gates was obviously misbehaving. i'm not convinced he was due an arrest and neither was the DA since he was th one who dropped the charges.
Just my opinion on that part, Glass. I think it's more likely the DA recognized Gates' name and the brewing controversy\fallout potential and dropped the charges out of cowardice\prudence (whichever you care to believe) rather than base it on the case's merits.
But just MHO.
Posted by glassman on :
the cops arrested Gates for yelling (nothing else is listed) and you think the DA dropped it because it because he's afraid ?
cuz if the DA dropped it as you say, "out of fear" that the cops might look stupid? i agree with you.
controversey? the controversey is here.
arresting people for yelling int here homes or on there porch is Fascism.
no weapons were involved, no nudity, no drugs or alcohol.
i suggest you read the first ammendment very carefully
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
now the 4th:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
cuffing the guy for yelling and removing him from his property violated his right to be secure in person and house.
Obama spoke as a constitutional lawyer when he said the cops were being stupid.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
Step down from your soap box, Glass, and take a breath.
I've been reading several books lately on the Founding Fathers and the Constitution so I don't need a refresher on the Bill of Rights, but thank you anyways.
quote:Obama spoke as a constitutional lawyer when he said the cops were being stupid.
No, I don't think he was. He was speaking as an admittedly ignorant (of the details) citizen. To assume he spoke from any other vantage is drawing conclusions without evidence.
Here's a definition for the discussion.
Disorderly Conduct:
Almost every state has a disorderly conduct law that makes it a crime to be drunk in public, to "disturb the peace", or to loiter in certain areas. Many types of obnoxious or unruly conduct may fit the definition of disorderly conduct, as such statutes are often used as "catch-all" crimes. Police may use a disorderly conduct charge to keep the peace when a person is behaving in a disruptive manner, but presents no serious public danger.
Whether you agree with the nature of the statute or not is irrelevant. The facts as they stand presented by the police report support that Gates' behaviour was clearly within this definition and could have been prosecuted as such had the DA chosen to pursue it.
Posted by glassman on :
No, I don't think he was
then you did not listen to Obama's exact words:
"I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry. Number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home. And number three - what I think we know separate and apart from this incident - is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that's just a fact."
there are three separate points perfectly and purposefully separated from each other.
you are listening to spin doctors trying to meld it all into one single point.
Gates' behaviour was clearly within this definition and could have been prosecuted as such had the DA chosen to pursue it
not in his own house.
and that is absolutely critical.
suppose he had a wife and kids? MAYBE, for their protection.
we grant teh police a certain amount of leeway to DIFFUSE certain situations that could get worse.
in this case? the cops could simply have left.
wait until the recordings come out, apparently this confrontation was recorded.
i find it interesting how people like to pick and choose which parts of the constitution they want to adopt.
the second amendment is critical to you, yet you seem to be unconcerned about the right to disagree with authority when it suits your political beleif system.
one of the defining aspects of Fascism is the idea that those in authority have the right to arrest people they don't agree with.
how many "conservatives" calim the govt is getting too big and spending too much time of THEIR moeny? LOL...
but when the govt arrests someone in their own home for yelling at them they suddenly beleive the powers of the govt are needed?
the hypocrisy is breathtaking
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only one who's possibly picking and choosing what they focus on, Glass....
Let's take that quote you used...
"I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry...
At what? Being asked to show ID to prove that you aren't a burgler? THAT'S when Gates flew off the handle. Not after his arrest (though I'm sure he was upset then as well), but just for being asked to show ID.
...Number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home...
That's not why he was arrested. He was arrested for screaming at the cops OUTSIDE of his home (on his property still, conceded) and refusing to calm down. A crowd had gathered who witnessed Gates' tirade. That's the reason for the disorderly conduct arrest.
...And number three - what I think we know separate and apart from this incident - is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that's just a fact."
Never let a race card moment go to waste. Not constitutionally based arguement. Not that the arrest had no legal basis. It just had to be racially motivated.
It just had to.
Now, back to your reply...
quote:not in his own house.
and that is absolutely critical.
suppose he had a wife and kids? MAYBE, for their protection.
we grant teh police a certain amount of leeway to DIFFUSE certain situations that could get worse.
in this case? the cops could simply have left.
With him ranting and raving? Suppose they had done that and he went back inside grabbed a gun and shot his neighbor that called the cops on him? Someone had to have seen Off. Figueroa take witness statements from the neighbor. It wouldn't have taken much to find out who called in the complaint.
Now, we have cops that left an obviously angry man who has shot someone because they left.
What a headline that would have made.
quote:wait until the recordings come out, apparently this confrontation was recorded.
Unless it shows Crowley beating the crap out of Gates, I don't think there will be anything that revealing in it.
Posted by glassman on :
Suppose they had done that and he went back inside grabbed a gun and shot his neighbor that called the cops on him?
LOL..
paper tigers again? stick to facts. in your scenario we have a (horror sci-fi) story that is called the minority report.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: i find it interesting how people like to pick and choose which parts of the constitution they want to adopt.
the second amendment is critical to you, yet you seem to be unconcerned about the right to disagree with authority when it suits your political beleif system.
one of the defining aspects of Fascism is the idea that those in authority have the right to arrest people they don't agree with.
how many "conservatives" calim the govt is getting too big and spending too much time of THEIR moeny? LOL...
but when the govt arrests someone in their own home for yelling at them they suddenly beleive the powers of the govt are needed?
the hypocrisy is breathtaking
I wanted to address this seperately because I don't think it has anything to do with Gates\Crowley here.
Yes, I hold the Constitution dear. Especially the Bill of Rights including the 1st and 4th you mentioned. You seem to believe(unless I misunderstood your posts) that I have something against Prof. Gates' right to voice his opposition to 'authority.' I have said nothing to support such a belief. He was arrested under a legal statute for disrupting the peace. Not for his opinion. For his actions.
My entire thrust of this discussion is that the reflexive use of the race card by anyone, let alone the President of the United States is both vulgar and insutlting; both to the police addressed by it and to all of us as a whole. Now, I use the word reflexive on purpose, because that is what I think its become...automatic and involuntary. Anytime there is a confrontation between a white person and a black person it is instantly labeled racist. No proof needed or sought for. WHAM!! Out comes the race card. That is what I find disgusting about this.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Suppose they had done that and he went back inside grabbed a gun and shot his neighbor that called the cops on him?
LOL..
paper tigers again? stick to facts. in your scenario we have a (horror sci-fi) story that is called the minority report.
Fact: Prof. Gates went on a tirade in public view.
Fact: Disorderly Conduct is a legal statute.
Fact: Prof. Gates' behaviour fits the definition.
Fact: Prof. Gates was arrested for violated said statute.
No other 'facts' have even been offered to contradict these, Glass. Not even by Gates himself.
Posted by glassman on :
and my entire thrust of this convo is to avoid the race card entirely.
i cannot know how it "feels" to be a person of color who is 60 plus years old, and neither can you.
it is in fact your stated intention to hold this (old) guy hostage for having feelings that he EARNED the hard way.
progress has been made, but it doesn't change the makeup of the individuals that lived thru it.
i'm not excusing the guy from being rude, but the guy never left his porch until he was cuffed.
the neighbors? they see cops? and the cops are as much a part of any disturbance as the angry man.
My entire thrust of this discussion is that the reflexive use of the race card by anyone, let alone the President of the United States is both vulgar and insutlting;
and i would suggest that people offfended by the truth have some sort of problem
because the sword of justice specifically has two edges.
the race card is only a trump card if people make it into one. it takes two to do that.
Gates may learn that this cop is not a racist, or he may refuse to learn, but the fact is that someone has to take the lead in teaching.
cuffing the guy may have taught people to not be rude to cops, but it also reinfroces the impression that many already have, and that is that cops are bullies
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Suppose they had done that and he went back inside grabbed a gun and shot his neighbor that called the cops on him?
LOL..
paper tigers again? stick to facts. in your scenario we have a (horror sci-fi) story that is called the minority report.
Fact: Prof. Gates went on a tirade in public view.
Fact: Disorderly Conduct is a legal statute.
Fact: Prof. Gates' behaviour fits the definition.
Fact: Prof. Gates was arrested for violated said statute.
No other 'facts' have even been offered to contradict these, Glass. Not even by Gates himself.
like i said? tirades in public are not illegal in America.
if you think they are, then you just don't have any sense of what freedom of speech is.
it is absolutely ludicrous to think people should be arrested for yelling. i think the DA knew this and so do the cops, but they also know that alot of people will respond just as you are doing right now to defend them, they expect the charges to be dropped, and they won't even get a slap on the wrist for false arrest because the the laws are vague enough that they can point to them.
i can show you thousands of videos of people yelling at cops and not being arrested. hundreds of thousands.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:and i would suggest that people offfended by the truth have some sort of problem
Calling someone racist doesn't make it the truth, Glass. Gates had absolutely NO basis to assume Crowley was racist. Neither did Obama. Yet both are going to get away with calling him one because noone will call them on it for fear of being called racist themselves.
quote:like i said? tirades in public are not illegal in America.
We've had the 'Freedom of Speach' discussion in other threads. That freedom is not absolute. Like all 'freedoms' in a society, some limitations are naturally placed on them for the good of the whole. That is not SeekingFreedom talking, that is the Supreme Court.
Go sit in your yard and start screaming obscenities at passers-by, Glass. See what happens. Tell the cops that you are just exercising your freedom of speech. Posted by T e x on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: I stand with the officer right or worng period and cops never apologise for there actions period have you ever seen one do it.
Officers enforce the law wether it easy or hard and sometimes not pleasent to do so.
Officers also take a lot of crap from people that they should not have to take.
Maybe you folks well wake up one day and figure out that we are whats stands between you and the animals police pick them up and corrects keeps them off the streets.
Way, way too often the cops *are* the animals...
Posted by glassman on :
Calling someone racist doesn't make it the truth, Glass. Gates had absolutely NO basis to assume Crowley was racist. Neither did Obama. Yet both are going to get away with calling him one because noone will call them on it for fear of being called racist themselves.
Obama did not call him one. i posted you the exact quote.
Obama said: And number three - what I think we know separate and apart from this inciden - is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that's just a fact."
i beleive that you are hearing what you want to hear.
i also beleive you are ignoring what you want to ignore.
it IS just a fact.
if it isn't an acknowledged problem? then why does Gates give a class on it?
as for your statement about not being angry to have to prove who you are in your own home?
i don't beleive you. if it was demanded of you out of context? you would be angry, and we do not know in what context it was demanded yet.
in any case? i get pretty annoyed every time i get stopped at roadblock, but i comply.
Go sit in your yard and start screaming obscenities at passers-by, Glass. See what happens. Tell the cops that you are just exercising your freedom of speech.
uh, last i checked? obscenities were not part of this discussion.
the cops decided to make sure this guy understood that they are not to be argued with, an d we all know that.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
ROFL, we'll just have to agree to disagree...again.
On that note, here's a little humor to lighten the mood.
Here's an article written by a UCLA Law Professor.
Adam Winkler Professor at UCLA School of Law Posted: July 25, 2009 03:35 PM
On Thursday, President Obama weighed in on the arrest of African-American Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, saying a Cambridge police officer "acted stupidly" when he arrested Gates for disorderly conduct. The next day, Obama backed down from his harsh comment.
Obama was right the first time.
I don't know if the police officer arrested Gates because of the Harvard professor's race. A lot of white people would say that if they mouthed off to a cop, they too would be arrested.
But one thing is clear: Gates did not violate any law. Under Massachusetts law, which the police officer was supposedly enforcing, yelling at a police officer is not illegal.
There are clear decisions of the Massachusetts courts holding that a person who berates an officer, even during an arrest, is not guilty of disorderly conduct. And yet that is exactly what Gates was arrested for.
The Massachusetts statute defining "disorderly conduct" used to have a provision that made it illegal to make "unreasonable noise or offensively coarse utterance, gesture or display," or to address "abusive language to any person present." Yet the courts have interpreted that provision to violate the Massachusetts Constitution's guarantee of freedom of speech. So police cannot lawfully arrest a person for hurling abusive language at an officer.
In several cases, the courts in Massachusetts have considered whether a person is guilty of disorderly conduct for verbally abusing a police officer. In Commonwealth v. Lopiano, a 2004 decision, an appeals court held it was not disorderly conduct for a person who angrily yelled at an officer that his civil rights were being violated. In Commonwealth v. Mallahan, a decision rendered last year, an appeals court held that a person who launched into an angry, profanity-laced tirade against a police officer in front of spectators could not be convicted of disorderly conduct.
So Massachusetts law clearly provides that Gates did not commit disorderly conduct.
The Cambridge Police should be training their officers to know the difference between legal and illegal conduct. What Gates did was probably not so smart -- in general, be nice to people carrying guns -- but it wasn't disorderly conduct. At least not in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
That explains why the charges against Gates were dropped. It wasn't because the police were trying to defuse the situation. It was because Gates had done nothing illegal.
Arresting someone for doing something that isn't illegal is pretty stupid.
Then again, perhaps Obama was wrong. Maybe the police officer wasn't acting stupidly. He was just acting abusively. That is even worse.
Posted by glassman on :
From the joint press release:
The City of Cambridge and the Cambridge Police Department have recommended to the Middlesex County District Attorney that the criminal charge against Professor Gates not proceed. Therefore, in the interests of justice, the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office has agreed to enter a nolle prosequi in this matter.
The City of Cambridge, the Cambridge Police Department, and Professor Gates acknowledge that the incident of July 16, 2009 was regrettable and unfortunate. This incident should not be viewed as one that demeans the character and reputation of Professor Gates or the character of the Cambridge Police Department. All parties agree that this is a just resolution to an unfortunate set of circumstances. Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Im sure this is going to be blamed on being inherited from the previous administration just like everything else that goes wrong.
Posted by rounder1 on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: From the joint press release:
The City of Cambridge and the Cambridge Police Department have recommended to the Middlesex County District Attorney that the criminal charge against Professor Gates not proceed. Therefore, in the interests of justice, the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office has agreed to enter a nolle prosequi in this matter.
The City of Cambridge, the Cambridge Police Department, and Professor Gates acknowledge that the incident of July 16, 2009 was regrettable and unfortunate. This incident should not be viewed as one that demeans the character and reputation of Professor Gates or the character of the Cambridge Police Department. All parties agree that this is a just resolution to an unfortunate set of circumstances.
The release of such a press release is one of the more intelligent things I have read in a while.....I hope that both sides stick by this "joint" statement and seek no other recourse.
Tempers fly all the time. It is refreshing when the responsible parties from both sides "appear" to acknowledge that perhaps there demonstrated course was not necessarily the right one.
However, I would like to float this idea as a trial baloon.......in my mind neither the police or Mr. Gates are the real villains.....perhaps the "bad guy" is the media.
In an effort to fill up time slots on 24 hour news networks; "incidents" are magnified well beyond there merit.........Thoughts?
Posted by raybond on :
do you really htink the media blew this way more than it really was? I for one don't.
Professor Gates said what he said and the officer responded like he did.
Mr. Gates felt he was in his own house and felt he did not have to put up with anything and the Officer was trying to get an ID to see for sure who he was.
I really think the whole mess would have never happened if the Univercity ploice responded they would have known Gates and asked if he was ok and left. Which is really how s professor wants to and exsoects to be treated.
Posted by Newbie13 on :
You all are laughable!
P-Yes officer I locked myself out, I live here. O-Can I see an ID please.. P-Why yes here you go... O-Thank you sir... P-Thank you for checking I am who I say I am
Pretty simple wouldn't you say? On both ends.
2 years ago a so called friend stole one of my cards and charged up almost $3000 dollars at various stores. If the cashiers did there JOB AND ASKED FOR ID to check that they he was who he was I wouldn't have been out the money until he repaid it. Pretty simple request!
And if the officer had taken his word and he was a burgler and left all holy hell would have broke loose.
Yes the officer may have over reacted, but the Professor also acted like a little punk! Come on have a little common sense guy! I've never seen so much bickering and your wrong I'm right BS in these forums where everyone bends the truth for there view. How about looking at it for what it is. Ridiculous!
Good night and Cheers!
Posted by raybond on :
An officer has to have picture id end of story if not he has to asume that the person in front of him is a perp
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Some updates coming out on the tape. Looks like this was turned into one big racial event by the one being arrested using the race card/race baiting.
Posted by Machiavelli on :
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I want to see ALL the details come out before I make a decision. Wonder why they wont release everything yet...legal stuff?
Wow that's a first... you waiting for all details lol can't stay stop Mooing to this one...
Posted by Machiavelli on :
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Im sure this is going to be blamed on being inherited from the previous administration just like everything else that goes wrong.
I spoke too soon... Posted by CashCowMoo on :
This was about race before the event even happened.
"As always, whitey now sits in judgment of me, preparing to cast my fate. It is your decision either to let me blow with the wind as a nonentity or to encourage the development of self. Allow me to prove myself."
As always....."whitey" now sits in judgement of me. Bitter anyone?
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Were Down]](graemlins/weredown.gif)