home

The Gates-gate Dispatches

The tapes from Gates-gate are out (Transcripts here.) The 911 call makes Lucia Whalen, the person who called in, look good - she says she does not know what is going on. Does not mention "black men." In fact she said that they looked "kind of hispanic." The 911 dispatcher seems brusque.

The dispatch is pretty fuzzy too. Then Crowley seems to answer. Then a call in that "the gentleman says he resides here but it uncooperative." Then a call in to Harvard police. Then Gates is mentioned by name. Clearly he gave his name and identification to Crowley.

Then a call for "the wagon" to the location. This certainly is not helpful to Crowley's account. Update - for those who argue that Crowley's assertion in his police report that he spoke to Whalen at the scene may explain his reference to "two black men with backpacks" is belied by the fact that Whalen's attorney said "[Whalen n]ever once in any of her statements, conversations, and so forth did she ever use the word black. . . . But more importantly, when Sergeant Crowley got there, she didn’t have a conversation with him at all."

Speaking for me only

Comments closed.

< Monday Night TV and Open Thread | Tuesday Morning Open Thread >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    he lied on the police report (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:34:08 AM EST
    and the story finally disappears above the fold on foxnews...............

    Certainly seems that way (5.00 / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:38:05 AM EST
    For the record, Whalen has categorically denied ever saying there were "black men." It seems impossible to believe that she told Crowley at the scene that they were "black men" when she was categorical in the 911 call in not saying it and in her statements through her attorney Wendy Murphy.

    As I have said all along, even ACCEPTING Crowley's now very much discredited police report, the arrest of Gates was clearly stupid and unwarranted.

    Clearly a case of arrest for "contempt of cop."
     

    [ Parent ]

    police reports (5.00 / 0) (#9)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:55:26 AM EST
    Let's take a short poll:

    If you think the police officer lied on the report vote give yourself 18 points.

    If you think he simply made an error on the report, give yourself 5 points.

    If you think contempt of cop is a justifiable arrest, give yourself 0 points.  

    If you think the arrest was stupid, give yourself 242 points.

    Points explanation:

    18-242, you watch msnbc
    5-0.  you watch fox

    247 you probably got fired from msnbc.

    [ Parent ]

    Pretty clear he lied on the report now (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:56:31 AM EST
    Obviously the arrest was stupid.

    I do find the fact that he so obviously falsified his report quite intriguing.

    [ Parent ]

    Yeah, that was one ... (none / 0) (#17)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:03:13 AM EST
    of the points in that Reality Based Community post I liked to several days ago.

    The poster talks about the danger of looking the other way on "testilying" by cops.

    [ Parent ]

    I assume he did it (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:05:13 AM EST
    because he perceived Gates as making accusations of racism but even that does not make any sense.

    I am trying to figure out why he lied about it. I see no reason for him to do so. How did it help his account?

    [ Parent ]

    Which lie? (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:11:06 AM EST
    Most of the lies are to back up the "disorderly conduct" charge, since they use exact wording from the statute.

    The inclusion of the lie about speaking to Whalen may have been to show he followed correct procedure ...?

    [ Parent ]

    Ahh (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:13:03 AM EST
    Great point. Maybe he was supposed to speak to Whalen.

    [ Parent ]
    ummmmmmmmmmmm, (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by cpinva on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:29:21 AM EST
    am trying to figure out why he lied about it.

    because he's stupid? just a WAG, but i submit a darn good one.

    how about this?: it never dawned on him that this would ever explode in his face like this? he figured, worst case, it would get dumped by the prosecutor and he'd never have to testify, so he wouldn't perjur himself in court. since he's a cop, and everyone (yes, everyone) just assumes they tell only the facts ma'am, he'd never get called on it.

    i think officer crowley has some 'splaining to do, but don't everybody hold your breath. he'll be the "victim" poster boy for the local police union.

    [ Parent ]

    True (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:32:15 AM EST
    Stupidity is a rampant condition.

    I wonder though now about the splainin'

    I think Crowley and the Cambridge Pd will in fact have to do some splainin' now. they were all gung ho about the 911 call and the dispatches "vindicating" them.

    Clearly they look a lot worse today than they did yesterday.

    [ Parent ]

    They spoke before before they new all the facts (none / 0) (#46)
    by samtaylor2 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:43:43 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Heh, indeed (none / 0) (#104)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:47:31 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Law enforcement officers make mistakes. (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:39:36 AM EST
    They are human.  I'm not convinced Sgt. Crowley lied.  

    [ Parent ]
    Hell of a mistake that one (5.00 / 0) (#102)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:46:21 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Perceived? (none / 0) (#66)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:01:38 AM EST
    Even in interviews as of yesterday gates is accusing crowely of being a racist.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes percieved that (5.00 / 0) (#103)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:47:08 AM EST
    "race was brought into it."

    BTW, are you arguing that Crowley lied because Gates called him a racist? Interesting.


    [ Parent ]

    Gates (2.00 / 0) (#157)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:49:09 AM EST
    is still bringing race into it.

    Your view is that race was in it from the beginning because you don't seem inclined to understand that there's a difference between discussing systemic racism and accusing one person of being a racist.

    but now am i to understand that Crowely was wrong to think Gates called him a racist?

    please clarify that with a simple and direct response.


    [ Parent ]

    Well. One poster over at dKos (none / 0) (#183)
    by coigue on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:02:35 PM EST
    said: abuse of police power is easier to prove than racism...so Crowley was trying to cloud the issue. (and it worked, did it not?)

    He may have done this knowing that he has a past that belies that he is a racist....and he was looking for an excuse for his own unprofessionalism.

    (Total speculation, of course, but it makes sense)

    [ Parent ]

    huh? (none / 0) (#67)
    by ChiTownMike on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:02:43 AM EST
    Falsified his report about what and based on what evidence?

    [ Parent ]
    Run along (5.00 / 0) (#100)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:46:02 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    as you noted earlier, (none / 0) (#131)
    by cpinva on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:11:02 AM EST
    Stupidity is a rampant condition.


    [ Parent ]
    I scored over 200 (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Fabian on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:01:43 AM EST
    but I don't watch any TV.

    [ Parent ]
    I scored 260... (none / 0) (#16)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:02:41 AM EST
    does that mean I should turn myself in for re-education?

    [ Parent ]
    title 18, section 242 (none / 0) (#21)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:10:29 AM EST
    equals 260....

    [ Parent ]
    and i don't think crowley (none / 0) (#23)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:12:35 AM EST
    violated 18:242, just having some fun with numbers....

    [ Parent ]
    She also clearly said ... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:48:59 AM EST
    suitcases, not backpacks.

    I find it hard to believe she'd change this part of the story either.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama and Gates are fully vindicated IMO (5.00 / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:51:07 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Not that they ... (5.00 / 0) (#8)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:55:06 AM EST
    needed to be.

    [ Parent ]
    I agree. (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by Fabian on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:00:19 AM EST
    Apparent acts of "ordinary racism" don't attract attention.  If the victim is elderly, upper class, educated, and male - then that is apparently "extraordinary racism" and worthy of media attention.

    Why?  Because it happened to someone who has rank and privilege above and beyond common folk?

    [ Parent ]

    Benefit of the doubt (5.00 / 0) (#20)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:09:35 AM EST
    not only creates injustice but unchecked power.  Unfortunatlely, despite what appears to be fabrication on a police report on a simple case, benefit of the doubt will not be addressed and in my estimation that is the root of the problem.  
     

    [ Parent ]
    well... (none / 0) (#167)
    by coigue on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:56:10 AM EST
    sometimes peope might think that harassment is more of a class issue. This type of case really belies that.

    [ Parent ]
    I disagree (none / 0) (#56)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:54:55 AM EST
    What evidence have they given that the stupid arrest was racially motivated?

    [ Parent ]
    Obama is vindicated by you (none / 0) (#106)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:48:17 AM EST
    You said it was a stupid arrest.

    [ Parent ]
    But not for (none / 0) (#115)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:55:51 AM EST
    Implying it was racial.

    [ Parent ]
    Did he imply that? (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:16:47 AM EST
    I missed that myself but go on with that one.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes (none / 0) (#159)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:51:11 AM EST
    You missed the simple fact that there's a difference between saying "It's unclear to what extent race played a part," and saying "it's unclear IF race played a part."

    [ Parent ]
    omg...really? (none / 0) (#170)
    by coigue on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:57:18 AM EST
    ridiculous distinction.

    What extent can include no extent at all.

    [ Parent ]

    Yes (none / 0) (#178)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:00:33 PM EST
    But one statement is more clear than the other on the issue.

    The two statements are not the same.


    [ Parent ]

    Vindicated of what? (none / 0) (#63)
    by ChiTownMike on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:59:45 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    She never spoke to Crowley (5.00 / 0) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:55:28 AM EST
    according to her attorney.

    [ Parent ]
    And his report says he did ... (none / 0) (#12)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:59:31 AM EST
    which means he lied about the events prior to even approaching the house.

    [ Parent ]
    FYI (none / 0) (#60)
    by ChiTownMike on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:57:04 AM EST
    the police transmission transcripts that you link to are incomplete. I listened to the recording posted in one of the Boston newspapers yesterday and there is more in the recoding that there is in the transcript. For instance a minute of so into the recording Crowley says the Gates is being uncooperative which is very important in that at the point it is SOP top call for backup and a wagon if one is subsequently needed. So IF you are going by the transcript which says right at the top that both the 911 and the police transmission are "Edited" to try Crowley in public you are working with incomplete information.

    I've said this many times here but many want to ignore it - Obama even said in his news conference that 'Gates overreacted'. That statement supports Crowley.

    There is also the case that Crowley requested the Harvard Campus police to the scene who are independent of the Police Department and who by no account that I have seen have disagreed with Crowley's report. That is an important detail.

    There is also the case that upon the arrest the Crowley want to make sure Gates' house was locked up. Upon which Gates told him the door cannot be locked because it appeared someone tried to break in while he was away. But yet Gates was pissed because the cops were there to investigate a possible B&E when in fact Gates saw with his own eyes that previous to the Whalen call there was an attempted B&E but chose to call the police racists!

    Subsequently the police allowed, with Gates' permission for a campus maintenance man to secure the door. So they gave Gate many courtesy's after the arrest including changing the position of the handcuffs.

    I'd suggest listening to the entire transmission recording or at least referring to a complete transcript and not one that clearly says it is "Edited".

    Lastly where you get the two Black men with backpacks I have no idea because it was not in the police report. And even if it was true he said that, which I've seen no PROOF that it is, what relevance would it have on Gates' behavior and his arrest when Crowley tried to calm him down with warnings several times?

    [ Parent ]

    Heh (none / 0) (#99)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:45:38 AM EST
    What was edited? Do you know? I do.

    "Paul is dead."

    Actually, extraneous unrelated police calls are edited out. Nothing relevant to this incident.

    [ Parent ]

    The comment: Gates overreacted (none / 0) (#192)
    by coigue on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:05:18 PM EST
    supports nothing except Obama's (correct) desire to go back to a neutral place in all of this.

    His conciliatory presser was all politics.

    [ Parent ]

    Sounds like it (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:46:35 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Crowley needed to walk away (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Saul on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:36:28 AM EST
    Of course Gates is angry.  He is in his home.  Let him rave his contempt of the situation.  Crowley knew that this was his home.  

    Crowley wants to make Gates behave like a father with his kids.  He doesn't be quiet so he cuffs him and takes him in.

    Crowley should have just walked away.

    Precisely (5.00 / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 08:38:34 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Of course he should have walked away (none / 0) (#74)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:08:56 AM EST
    And then called his captain or chief to implore them to deal with an unhinged accusation of racism proactively.


    [ Parent ]
    I note that Jonatan Turley (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:01:29 AM EST
    has now lost interest in this story. Defamation suit by Crowley anyone?

    BTD, (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by cpinva on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:35:31 AM EST
    have you read bob somerby's post from yesterday? as i noted in an email to him last night, he appears to be the sole surviving human who still has no clue what transpired at the gate's residence, the police reports, etc notwithstanding.

    i strongly urged him to read your posts on the matter.

    Naw (none / 0) (#41)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:36:48 AM EST
    I like Bob too much and have decided not to let him infuriate me on these issues. He is just clueless on some things. this is one of them.

    [ Parent ]
    One possibility (5.00 / 0) (#52)
    by Bemused on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:50:01 AM EST
      It's now clear that there were two third=-party citizens involved Ms. Whalen who placed the call and the elderly lady who flagged her down.

       It is possible Crowley spoke tothe old lady who described what she swa and Crowley just mistakenly assumed it was the person who placed the 911 call.

      In any event, I really don't think that sspect of the incident is very important. Regardless of what he was told or by whom, it remains clear (or more accurately is now more clear) that Crowley knew there had been no break-in and arrested Gates solely because of hs attitude. It also appears that the tapes don't help Crowley in portraying Gates as out of control; it may be said the recordings didn't capture Gates enough to eliminate the possibility he was acting as Crowley claims but the tapes sure don't help the cops.

     

    Possibly ... (5.00 / 0) (#61)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:58:03 AM EST
    but Crowley identifies her as Whalen in his report.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, this occurred to me, too, as (none / 0) (#65)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:01:07 AM EST
    being the only "out" for Sgt. Crowley--the identification from the sidewalk not by the caller, Ms. Whalen,  but the elderly woman.  But this, too, can be verified, if need be, pretty easily.

    [ Parent ]
    Crowley refers to her as Whalen ... (none / 0) (#84)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:28:53 AM EST
    in his report, says she was holding a cell phone, and that she identified herself as the person who called 911.

    There is no wiggle room in Crowley's report.  He is clearly claiming to have spoken to Whalen.

    [ Parent ]

    Agreed on all points. (none / 0) (#163)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:54:25 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    How sad (5.00 / 0) (#76)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:10:42 AM EST
    But his public comments seemed suspicious to me.  Most law enforcement officers who do the job from the perspective of public servants never seem eager for the spotlight or 15 mins of fame.

    It's the testosterone talking. (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Fabian on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:24:59 AM EST
    Crowley got called out which ticked him off and he started running at the mouth.  I've seen on the internet hundreds of times.  Either they listen to cooler heads who tell them to stop digging, or their attempts to defend themselves (usually by attacking others) make them look like flaming fools.

    I think the moral of this story is that if the only thing you can think of is how angry you are, you might want to take a time out until you can be more objective.  Now matter how bad things seem, you can probably do something to make them even worse! ;)

    [ Parent ]

    Would that Prof. Gates had heeded your (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:37:25 AM EST
    advice when Sgt. Crowley first contacted him.  Doesn't justify the later contempt of cop arrest, but still.  This highly educated, greatly respected scholar was offended from the git go because he thought Sgt. Crowley should have been more polite to him at the door.  Sgt. Crowley's initial inquiry was polite.  

    [ Parent ]
    Gates is also a man. (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Fabian on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:41:53 AM EST
    And suffers from the same unfortunate tendencies of his gender.

    (Now I want to talk to transgendered folk to see if they notice a difference in themselves when they carry a different hormone balance.)

    [ Parent ]

    I really don't think most males (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:07:24 AM EST
    would react the way Prof. Gates did to Sgt. Crowley's initial contact.  

    [ Parent ]
    That said (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:16:34 AM EST
    I find it hard to argue with Andrew Sullivan's characterization of the encounter as a "d*ck-swinging contest."

    [ Parent ]
    Indeed, two egos colliding. (none / 0) (#166)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:55:44 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    According to the police report (5.00 / 0) (#95)
    by lilburro on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:40:03 AM EST
    Crowley radios first that the resident is "very uncooperative."  After receiving Gates' ID, he radios for the Harvard U Police.  After this he is by his own account prepared to leave and going.  Crowley is at this time in the house, where Gates can say whatever he likes to the officer without repercussion.

    Why then did he radio for more police cars if he was ready to leave and Gates hadn't yet left the house?  That doesn't make sense to me at all.  I think the "strategy to arrest" interpretation is the most plausible.

    what are we going to talk about after (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:49:47 AM EST
    Thursdays beer??????

    But I've learned so much (5.00 / 2) (#151)
    by CST on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:36:55 AM EST
    1.  Media will jump at any excuse not to discuss healthcare rationally.

    2.  Police are allowed to arrest someone for being a jerk.

    3.  Presidents should never ever comment on local news about their friends.

    4.  "Olive skinned" is not the same as white.  (Although this one begs the question - what kind of olive?  green olives - I hope not, black olives - I doubt it - perhaps olive oil?)  Although last week I learned that Italian isn't white either, so who knows.

    5.  Obama has bad taste in beer.


    [ Parent ]
     Although last week I learned that Italian isn't white either, so who knows.
    My point was...that there's not just a big box full of "white" people. That there's white and then there's white. And it has a lot to do with ethnicity, privilege, etc. That some people assess other people as "white" but not "white like us."

    Take your North End residents for example. (My dad spent some years there as a child. He's Italian-Irish, both his parents were right off the boat.)

    And I'll go further in that that is the reality of most if not all ethnicity/races in America.

    For example Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, Haitians are all Hispanic but for many/most of them, the others are not "Hispanic like us."

    [ Parent ]

    We can keep talkin' about tyranny... (5.00 / 0) (#169)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:56:22 AM EST
    it ain't going away, and now we know how many tyranny fans there are in this country....eternal vigilance is definitely required.

    [ Parent ]
    A detailed discussion (none / 0) (#114)
    by Fabian on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:55:17 AM EST
    of the sad state of beer drinking in America!


    [ Parent ]
    I think (5.00 / 0) (#116)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:57:30 AM EST
    every citizen in American should have to answer a 911 potential burglary call.

    Most people would be scared sh*t.ess to even go to the door. Yeah, I'm sure that many here who rush to say Crowley is a bad racist cop would not go to that door. I suspect Gates would never have the cajones to do it.

    Officer Crowley may have made a mistake (he said, she said) -- potentially one many of you would make under the same circumstances.  Can you say adrenaline?

    Obviously he did nothing that would get him desk duty or he certainly would have been on desk duty now.  This would be bad, bad, bad, for the Cambridge police if it wasn't arguable.  It's an ambiguous case.  


    every citizen (5.00 / 0) (#130)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:10:59 AM EST
    should get an opportunity to take a call just like this one.  A man with suitcases, a woman calling it in who says that he may live there.  Probably a limousine or car in front (anyone who takes "cars" as opposed to taxis knows exactly what they look like as do most good police)  or the livery on their plate.....

    Try being black for a year or two.  Why don't I see you making that recommendation?

    [ Parent ]

    Sure (5.00 / 0) (#132)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:12:08 AM EST
    Arrest for contempt of cop is just fine with you.

    We know where you stand on the whole civil liberties thing.

    [ Parent ]

    I should not fear cops (none / 0) (#143)
    by lilybart on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:26:52 AM EST
    so much that I don't dare say anything that could be seen as negative.

    [ Parent ]
    bull (none / 0) (#210)
    by coigue on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:19:24 PM EST
    The police are trained to take abuse and diffuse a situation.

    Read this, from the cop's perspective:

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106990080

    I say zero tolerance for power-abusing cops.

    [ Parent ]

    some support for Crowley's account (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by souvarine on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:58:33 AM EST
    Crowley claimed in his radio interview that he left the residence because he was having trouble communicating with ECC, the recording shows the ECC was having trouble contacting him while he was in the residence. According to Cambridge police that was why they dispatched more patrols to Gates's residence. On the radio recordings you can hear Gates talking over Crowley, further supporting Crowley's contention that the acoustics and Gates's talking made it difficult for him to communicate with ECC.

    On the 911 call Ms. Whalen is asked to stay at the house so that she can talk to the responding officer. Crowley's report says that the person with a wireless phone was calling to him from the sidewalk while he was at the door, it is entirely possible that he misheard "two black suitcases" as two blacks with backpacks. It is not clear from Whalen's Lawyer's statement whether or not she or someone with her called out to Crowley when he was at Gates's door, as Crowley reports. But in any case it would be odd for Whalen not to communicate with the responding office after being specifically asked to by the 911 operator to meet the officers when they get there.

    These recordings and professor Gates's own account line up pretty well with Crowley's report and interviews. Gates did refuse to step outside, he did become agitated at Crowley's attempts to establish his identity, and he did follow Crowley out to the porch and continue to berate him. Claims that Crowley lied in his police report don't hold up to scrutiny.

    Whether Crowley was justified in arresting Gates after Gates followed him onto the porch is a separate question.


    Refutation of Crowley (5.00 / 0) (#124)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:07:23 AM EST
    who said the reason was he could not hear because of "acoustics" and Gates' yelling.

    If his radio was not connecting, why say it was because of "acoustics and Gates' yelling?

    [ Parent ]

    radio difficulties (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by souvarine on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:54:38 AM EST
    My mistake, Crowley stated in the police report, not the radio interview, that "My reason for wanting to leave the residence was that Gates was yelling very loud and the acoustics of the kitchen and foyer were making it difficult for me to transmit pertinent information to ECC or other responding units."

    If you've ever used a radio to communicate you would know that you can't tell if it "connects", all you can go on is the acknowledgment from the other party. So all Crowley knew is that he couldn't hear acknowledgments from ECC. From the recordings we know that he did not respond to repeated calls from ECC, so it is likely he did not hear those either.

    Crowley did radio that the person was being uncooperative and to send a wagon, as he reported and as we hear in the recording, but according to the NY Times "As the encounter between the two men escalated, the Cambridge police tried to reach Sergeant Crowley on his radio at least three times, but he did not respond, police officials said, revealing previously unreported details. Because of his worrisome silence, they said, six more police cars soon clogged the one-way street, surprising Professor Gates."  Again as we hear in the recordings.


    [ Parent ]

    They heard (5.00 / 0) (#171)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:57:40 AM EST
    "Keep em coming."

    My what a nice interpretation you give for Crowley.

    too bad his police report just can not be squared with your previous comment.

    [ Parent ]

    Again (5.00 / 0) (#177)
    by lilburro on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:00:17 PM EST
    Crowley said "keep the cars coming."  He requested those cars, even though he was fairly certain it was Gates' residence.  I don't think they arrived "because of the silence."

    [ Parent ]
    Maybe because Gates was yelling (2.00 / 0) (#146)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:28:56 AM EST
    inside the house.

    [ Parent ]
    Counter to the comment (5.00 / 0) (#150)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:36:26 AM EST
    you loved so much which said  ECC could not communicate with Crowley due to transmission issues being the reason he stepped out of the house.

    [ Parent ]
    The comment I loved so much? (none / 0) (#152)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:39:53 AM EST
    I am wrestling with why the Crowley's decision to arrest Gates for disorderly conduct makes his whole account of the incident false. Gates, in subsequent interviews, says he noticed a footprint before he entered his house and he and the driver had trouble getting the front door open so the driver shouldered the door to gain entry.  

    [ Parent ]
    his whole account? (5.00 / 0) (#155)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:45:38 AM EST
    No need for you to knock down straw.

    There are parts of it that we can take as gospel.

    The part of the report that is really problematic NOW is where Crowley asserts he spoke with Witness Whelan who told him that there were two black males carrying backpacks.

    Whelan denies even speaking to him on any of the substance of the event much less to that detail.

    does that not trouble you? Where did that come from?

    [ Parent ]

    This is why I'd like to read the Cadlogs (none / 0) (#168)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:56:10 AM EST
    and listen to all the radio traffic.  The 911 operator was trying to pin down Whalen about the ethnicity of the two men she saw from a distance from the back and the operator even suggested an ethnicity.  What did Crowley hear on the radio before he arrived?  

    [ Parent ]
    Ther transcript is clear (5.00 / 0) (#175)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:59:27 AM EST
    No racial id . . . THEN maybe one hispanic. NEVER black.

    the dispatch called it out.

    It is right there in the transcript.

    And you who are so careful about details when discussing these issues. Tsk tsk.

    [ Parent ]

    You are correct. (none / 0) (#186)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:03:45 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I always am . . . (none / 0) (#200)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:07:58 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    From the transcript (none / 0) (#181)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:00:58 PM EST
    "Police transmissions

    Female dispatcher: Respond to 17 Ware Street for a possible B and E in progress. Two SPs [suspicious persons] barged their way into the home, they have suitcases. R-P 5-SP. Stand by, trying to get further.

    Officer 52 (Crowley): 52. Ware Street right now, 17?

    Dispatcher: 17 Ware Street . . . both SPs are still in the house, unknown on race. One may be a Hispanic male, not sure. . . .

    Officer 52: Stand by. Can you have the caller come to the front door? . . .

    Dispatcher: It's not her house, she doesn't live there. She's a witness in this."

    [ Parent ]

    Please don't confuse this discussion (3.66 / 3) (#123)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:04:54 AM EST
    with details or, god forbid, original sources.  

    [ Parent ]
    BS comment from you (5.00 / 0) (#128)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:09:06 AM EST
    A lot of us are not re-reciting the facts because we assume familiarity.

    For example, in the comment you praise, there is no reference to the police report where Crowley said he could not hear because of the acoustics and Gates' yelling.

    this report actually contradicts Crowley.

    But let's not let details get in the way of an unfair swipe.

    [ Parent ]

    The discussions here, and I am not (2.00 / 0) (#134)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:15:57 AM EST
    referring to you, do not uniformly exhibit acquaintance with the original sources, i.e., reports of Crowley and Figueroa, subsequent interviews of Gates at Sirius and The Root, 911 tapes.  

    There is no question, if Crowley based the arrest on the facts as stated in his and Figueroa's report, he should not have arrested Gates for disorderly conduct.

    But, to my mind, Sgt. Crowley made a good faith contact with Gates for purposes of investigating a possible breaking and entering.  To me, Gates' ethnicity or what Crowley knew about the witness description of the ethnicity of the persons seen by Whalen or the older female before Crowley contacted Gates is irrelevant.  

    [ Parent ]

    Well (5.00 / 0) (#137)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:17:58 AM EST
    I assume even Crowley would disagree with you on the last part as he teaches a class on the issue of "racial profiling."

    [ Parent ]
    Is it your opinion Sgt. Gates only (none / 0) (#138)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:19:58 AM EST
    contacted Gates because of racial profiling by Crowley?  

    [ Parent ]
    Of course not (5.00 / 0) (#139)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:22:04 AM EST
    My point is there is a need to teach a course ABOUT racial profiling and thus the ethnixity of the persons involved is of course relevant.

    so is their gender.

    You see, race and gender are always in it.

    you may have heard that from me before.

    [ Parent ]

    This is a first: 2.66/3. (none / 0) (#145)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:28:21 AM EST
    Yes, I know.  Ratings don't matter here.

    [ Parent ]
    the 1 is from me (none / 0) (#147)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:29:25 AM EST
    I explained why.

    [ Parent ]
    That's a first also. (none / 0) (#149)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:31:44 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    It was Crowley (none / 0) (#127)
    by lilburro on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:08:15 AM EST
    who requested back up.  The police didn't just send the cars because of Gates' noise.  See my comment above.  Notably, if the transcript and police report match (as they should) Crowley requested backup as he was preparing to leave the residence.  So what is that all about.

    [ Parent ]
    Crowley had back up. Figueroa (none / 0) (#148)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:30:00 AM EST
    arrived after Crowley was in the house.

    [ Parent ]
    If you compare (5.00 / 0) (#153)
    by lilburro on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:40:16 AM EST
    the police report and the transcript it seems like Crowley radioed to "keep the cars coming" after he believed that Gates was indeed the resident of the house.  "I radioed on channel 1 that I was off in the residence with someone who appeared to be a resident but very uncooperative."  Transcript:  "Officer 52: I'm up with a gentleman who says he resides here (background voice) but uncooperative. But uh, keep the cars coming."  I don't understand the decision to deluge the man's house with police when Crowley was already fairly confident that Gates was the resident.

    [ Parent ]
    Crowley is in the house, probably with (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:48:47 AM EST
    Figueroa.  No officer has swept the house to determine who else may be inside or if weapons are present.  Not sure if Gates's driver was still in the house.  No officer has patted down Gates or anyone else in the house to determine if they are armed.  Gates, according to both Crowley and Figueroa, is irrationally angry.  Crowley can't count on additional backup arriving at any particular time.  Crowley says, I'm going outside now.  If you have any questions, ask me outside.  Crowley goes outside.  Gates, still irrationally angry, follows him outside and spouts his diatribe to the gathered group of civilians and law enforcement.  

    I don't see anything wrong w/Crowley calling for backup under the circumstances.

    [ Parent ]

    How is it any of his business (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:52:25 AM EST
    who else is in the house?

    [ Parent ]
    Officer safety. (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:57:43 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Safety to do what? (5.00 / 0) (#176)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:59:30 AM EST
    Once he was satisfied that Gates was who he said he was, he should have walked away. As far as I'm concerned, everything he did after that was improper.

    [ Parent ]
    C'mon Andgarden, don't you watch TV? (5.00 / 1) (#209)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:16:21 PM EST
    Just joking, but in reality, until the situation is clear, the cops are still at risk. Say a burglar breaks in after having stolen Gates identity and tries to bluff the cops by berating them for questioning their superior, a big time prof and friend of Obama. Or worse, burglar is in the house holding a hostage and makes Gates go verify his identity and get the cops to leave. Not saying the later arrest was warranted, but I think in the early stages of this conflict it's clear Crowley wasn't satisfied Gates was who he said he was. And that's Gates' fault. Gates' response to the cops questioning him was out of line. When people respond in bizarre ways, and the situation isn't clear, cops are trained to escalate. Hence, more cops. The cops went too far, AND Gates could have just had a normal response, said thank you for your good work, and proven his identity beyond a doubt.

    [ Parent ]
    This is really bad (5.00 / 0) (#198)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:07:21 PM EST
    you KNOW this was a contempt for cop arrest and you are pretending to not know that? Pathetic.

    [ Parent ]
    the reported burglars (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by souvarine on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:00:42 PM EST
    Neither Gates nor Crowley know for certain that there are no burglars in the house.

    I once had police barge into my house in hot pursuit of a suspect, while I was asleep. Once they were satisfied that I was the resident and not the suspect they checked my house to make sure the suspect had not snuck in. I thanked them for it, though I couldn't get back to sleep.

    [ Parent ]

    Gates knew (5.00 / 0) (#195)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:06:40 PM EST
    Come on people.

    this is pathetic.

    [ Parent ]

    He should have asked Gates (none / 0) (#187)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:03:48 PM EST
    if he wanted the house searched. What do you think the answer would have been?

    [ Parent ]
    Crowley is entitled to consider his own (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:11:11 PM EST
    safety and that of any other officer present.

    [ Parent ]
    Not Responsive (none / 0) (#206)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:13:13 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Pat down a homeowner (5.00 / 0) (#161)
    by eric on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:52:53 AM EST
    inside his own house?  Sweep the house?  He KNEW it was Gates' house!

    [ Parent ]
    Not initially. Gates basically (1.00 / 0) (#174)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:58:33 AM EST
    told Crowley to f#uck himself.

    [ Parent ]
    So what? (5.00 / 0) (#185)
    by eric on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:03:44 PM EST
    Gates was in his own house, and Crowley knew that.  End of story.

    [ Parent ]
    "F*ck yourself?" That's your (5.00 / 0) (#189)
    by lilburro on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:04:35 PM EST
    interpretation.  I don't see in the police report anything as violent or confrontational as that...although he did say mind your own business and attempted to call the police station.

    [ Parent ]
    No, Gates didn't say that. (none / 0) (#196)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:06:40 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    . . . and go f**k youself (5.00 / 0) (#194)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:06:01 PM EST
    here are my IDs.

    you are not seriously questioning that Crowley did not know it was Gates' house are you? Really?

    [ Parent ]

    Crowley did not know it (5.00 / 0) (#204)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09:58 PM EST
    was Gates's house (which it wasn't, it belongs to Harvard) before Crowley went to the front door.  Until Gates produced photo id with that address, Crowley was justified in continuing his investigation of the possible breaking and entry dispatch.

    [ Parent ]
    It's standard procedure to call for backup (1.00 / 0) (#182)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:02:01 PM EST
    when the person is being uncooperative. If someone stole Prof Gates' ID and broke into his house while he was out of town, they could claim they're Gates, show the ID, and get huffy to try to get the police to back off. For that very reason, cops are trained to escalate when people are uncooperative, and in this case there's no reason for Gates to be uncooperative if the police are there to protect him and his property.

    In reality, if a neighbor called the cops on you as a potential burglar in your own house, would you raise a stink? Or would you just establish your identity beyond a reasonable doubt and let the cops do their jobs? I think Gates has a huge chip on his shoulder because of his skin color, with plenty of rich man elitism to fuel the fire. In his eagerness to call the cops racist he overreacted to their questioning him. Even if Crowley screwed up by going to far, Gates was out of line to give public servants a hard time for not recognizing his holy greatness. Elitism is just as destructive in our society as the rest of the isms.


    [ Parent ]

    Stole his ID (5.00 / 0) (#190)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:04:45 PM EST
    WTF? Two picture IDs?

    [ Parent ]
    You're arguing a conceded point (5.00 / 2) (#193)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:05:27 PM EST
    Crowley believed that it was Gates and Gates and that it was his house. I don't see how the discussion continues after that.

    [ Parent ]
    I would show them (none / 0) (#191)
    by eric on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:05:05 PM EST
    my ID and tell them to get the hell out.  The quicker you get rid of cops, the better, IMO.

    [ Parent ]
    Whalen's attorney (none / 0) (#129)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:10:32 AM EST
    said that Whalen did not have any substantive discussion with Crowley.

    [ Parent ]
    really theresa? (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by cpinva on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:26:53 AM EST
    Officer Crowley may have made a mistake (he said, she said) -- potentially one many of you would make under the same circumstances.  Can you say adrenaline?

    how then to explain the self-evident falsity of the statements he made, after the fact, in his official report?

    frankly, for would-be burglars, gates and his friend were pretty damn inept: car in front of the house, keys out, luggage in their way, door unlocked, them inside, broad daylight. geez, what could possibly go wrong?

    is eddie murphy going to play prof. gates and his friend, in the movie version?

    Google Wendy Murphy (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by jerry on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:49:15 AM EST
    I have nothing against Whalen -- I always thought it odd people blamed her, but google her attorney.  I believe Whalen, I have no reason whatsoever to believe anything her attorney would say on any matter.

    You can start here: Media Matters: O'Reilly, guest falsely accused ACLU of supporting child's "constitutional right to have sex with adults"

    Then check out her bizarre behavior and proclamations during the Duke False Rape Scandal.

    I never cared for Murphy ever (5.00 / 0) (#165)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:55:40 AM EST
    but I think we can trust her to convey what her client says.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, Wendy Murphy has always struck (none / 0) (#199)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:07:34 PM EST
    me as a hang 'em high, ask questions later kind of quick to judge person.

    [ Parent ]
    This may be old news or may have been said (5.00 / 0) (#162)
    by ctrenta on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:54:05 AM EST
    Dan Kennedy, formerly of The Boston Phoenix, wrote on his blog Media Nation that the discrepancy between Whalen and Crowley's report has not really been addressed. He writes...

    Wendy Murphy's appearance on WTKK Radio (96.9 FM) a little while ago. But in listening to host Jim Braude's recap, it's now clear that Murphy says Lucia Whalen never told anyone -- including Sgt. James Crowley -- that the two men she saw were black.

    That directly contradicts not only what's in Crowley's arrest report, but also what he told the Boston Herald: "Obviously, I stand behind everything that's in the police report. It wouldn't be in there if it wasn't true."

    Update: A question -- did Crowley speak with another woman at the scene and, later, mistakenly identify her as Whalen?

    What's also telling about Crowley is the first interview he gave was to "Dennis & Callahan," a morning radio show on sports station WEEI. Dennis & Callahan were suspended several years ago for comparing black children to gorillas. How stupid is Crowley?

    On top of that, in 1999 The Cambridge Chronicle reported the Cambridge Police discovered the Cambridge Police Department was training its officers to believe Mexicans and members of other ethnic groups who routinely eat spicy foods were immune to pepper spray. There you have it on the Cambridge Police.  


    This was an attitude arrest. (5.00 / 0) (#179)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:00:38 PM EST
    Plain and simple. Gates gave Crowley attitude, so of course he HAD to be arrested. He would have arrested a white guy for the same BS reason. As long as this crapola continues, we will continue to live in a police state.

    Indeed (5.00 / 0) (#184)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:03:17 PM EST
    Some are having trouble coming to terms with that and the fact that Crowley's police report did not hold up.

    [ Parent ]
    Question (none / 0) (#19)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:06:31 AM EST
    Did Gates give Crowley a Harvard ID or a drivers license?  In my experience a school ID would not have confirmed residence.  

    Gates said he gave ... (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:18:23 AM EST
    both.  Crowley only mentions the Harvard I.D..

    But it doesn't matter.  Police can check a residence based on a name.

    And Crowley, even in his now discredited police report, accepted the I.D. as proof and was leaving at that point in his narrative.

    [ Parent ]

    Yup (5.00 / 0) (#27)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:19:05 AM EST
    No indication anywhere that he didn't believe Gates lived there. That should have been the end of the story.

    [ Parent ]
    Sure (none / 0) (#31)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:28:59 AM EST
    But there's a difference between belief and verification.  

    [ Parent ]
    Even Crowley says ... (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:37:58 AM EST
    he was leaving after he saw the I.D..

    Why would he leave, if he didn't think he had verification?

    [ Parent ]

    Actually (none / 0) (#58)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:55:24 AM EST
    He says he's leaving the residence.  And many here said just the other day that he was only stepping outside as a pretense to arrest Gates.  So he was either leaving to go elsewhere or luring Gates outside or trying to hear his radio.  Also unclear.  

    [ Parent ]
    There's nothing in the report ... (none / 0) (#75)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:09:15 AM EST
    that indicates Crowley doubted Gates was the resident after he saw the I.D..

    [ Parent ]
    Did verification require an arrest? (none / 0) (#33)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:30:51 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Heh (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:33:22 AM EST
    Look, the Crowley defenders are taking a big hit today. A surprising one frankly. Who would have thought that Crowley's falsification in his report would be exposed so utterly?

    [ Parent ]
    But he's a hero; he taught a class! (5.00 / 0) (#42)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:37:34 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Lord (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:36:34 AM EST
    Yes please put words into my mouth that I didn't say.  I've never defended the arrest; i don't think it was necessary.  But I will defend the idea that investigating an emergency call requires more than just a cursory check.  Especially if the resident acts out of proportion to what is happening.  I asked this the other day and no one bothered to answer, but since, from all accounts Gates was non-cooperative from the start - yet has said he understands and appreciates why Whelon called the policy - i wonder exactly how he thinks the situation should have been handled.  

    If the call is valid, and the follow-up is valid, why not coorperate?  

    [ Parent ]

    hmm (5.00 / 0) (#44)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:39:22 AM EST
    Hell of a "non-defense" there of Crowley.

    Any comment on the apparent falsehoods in Crowley's police report?

    [ Parent ]

    You know (2.00 / 0) (#48)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:45:59 AM EST
    It just really bothers me that the idea that Gates behaved inappropriately is not just not questioned by many, but held up as his inalienable right as an American.

    Forget if this is an encounter with police, I object the herofication of asshole behavior.  I object to the idea we too often hear on reality tv, "that's just the way i am" when someone is a total jerk.  Should Gates be arrested for that?  no.  But should it be ignored or lionized?  no.  So I'd really like to know how any police officer could have behaved to prevent Gates from being a jerk.  

    [ Parent ]

    FAIL (5.00 / 0) (#49)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:46:45 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Whatever (none / 0) (#53)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:52:36 AM EST
    I've dealt with too many assholes who believe they are entitled to asshole behavior just .... well there's rarely a good reason.  Just because escalation usually causes them to get their way.  It's not something I'm going to condone even if someone else is in the wrong.  

    [ Parent ]
    It's a red herring (none / 0) (#54)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:53:38 AM EST
    And I think you know it.

    [ Parent ]
    Really? (none / 0) (#59)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:56:00 AM EST
    how so mindreader?

    [ Parent ]
    Ok, so maybe you don't know it (none / 0) (#64)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:00:04 AM EST
    I was trying to be charitable!

    [ Parent ]
    Please (none / 0) (#70)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:05:10 AM EST
    don't gild the lily.  say what you think.

    [ Parent ]
    I have lionized Gates in the (5.00 / 0) (#57)
    by samtaylor2 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:54:57 AM EST
    past because he is an amazing man, who has done great things.  I haven't read anyone lionizing him because he got arrested.  Stop pretending Gates needed this for his career.  

    Unfortuantely Gates was probably in a bad mood because he just got off a flight from China and couldn't get to the one thing he cared about- his bed.  And then had some police officer go after him- that would put anyone over the edge.  

    [ Parent ]

    Did I say that? (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:04:23 AM EST
    Did I say he was doing something for his career?  No.  And "a police officer going after him"?  He arrived at the door - and from all accounts, Gates was non-cooperative from the start.  So that goes back to my initial question.  How, exactly, could a police officer have started this encounter so that Gates would have been cooperative?  

    But again, this is a case in point.  I'm going to do a little reading between the lines and note that since you are making excuses for Gates' behavior (ie jetlag), you do not think it was ideal.  So would you similiarly make excuses for Crowley's behavior?  

    I don't envy police officers.  They have a difficult job.  I also don't love dealing with them; something that I have to do frequently in my work.  I've met many who are willing to just be jerks because they can.  That makes them similiar to 95% of people with any sort of authority.  Including college professors.  The answer to this isn't "he's a victom; he's a villian", it's "how could this situation be handled - by both parties - to not get to this point?"

    There has been ad naseum discussion here and elsewhere on what Crowley should have done different.  I would like to know what Gates thinks could have been done to avoid this situation as well.  When, again, he was non-cooperative from the start.

    [ Parent ]

    Gates could have realized he was being a jerk (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by samtaylor2 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:14:55 AM EST
    Quickly gone grabbed some cookies and milk and offered it to him.  He then, over a glass of cold milk and a cookie, could have appologized to the police officer for the fact that he rudely challenged him in his own home after everyone knew who lived there.  

    The other option is that the police officer could have gotten out of his house and laughed about what a jerk those Harvard types all are.

    [ Parent ]

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:18:55 AM EST
    I frequently laugh at what a jerk Harvard types are.  It's fun and easy.  

    I also frequently complain about having to deal with police types who are all around where I work.  I'd recommend that as a strategy for both parties going forward.  Cattiness is a lovely substitute for escalation.

    [ Parent ]

    You falsely said we made a hero of Gates (5.00 / 0) (#94)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:39:46 AM EST
    What we have bveen saying, and what you have been strongly protesting, is that Crowley acted stupidly and it now appears falsified his police report.

    you have been "non-defending" Crowley for days now.

    [ Parent ]

    Nope (none / 0) (#105)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:47:50 AM EST
    I said some people have made a hero of Gates - I did not say you have.  I stand by that given the number of people who have said something along the lines of "I'd go apeshit" too.  I also said a lot of people have ignored his behavior or made excuses for it.  Which has happened frequently here and elsewhere.  

    I have never said the arrest was justified.  And frankly, it is he said, she said if the report is "falsified."  As someone else pointed out, Gates has disputed only the "mama" part.

    [ Parent ]

    At this site? (none / 0) (#107)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:49:09 AM EST
    Please demonstrate the evidence to support your assertion.

    [ Parent ]
    Well (none / 0) (#121)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:02:21 AM EST
    for starters there is this.  And this.

    [ Parent ]
    "That makes them similiar to 95% (none / 0) (#80)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:20:27 AM EST
    of people with any authority"

    Showstopper.  

    [ Parent ]

    I thought I read he returned the day before (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by nycstray on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:07:40 AM EST
    And had just flown in from somewhere here in the states?

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah (5.00 / 0) (#81)
    by lilburro on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:24:51 AM EST
    I can see my dad (a white male a few years younger than Gates) being put over the edge and being "uncooperative" in this kind of situation (confronted in his own home).  I don't think Gates' reaction is particularly unusual and he's certainly within his right to say whatever he wants to the police in his home.

    And why he radio-ed for more cops, I have no idea.

    [ Parent ]

    He didn't just arrive from China. He says (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:32:01 AM EST
    in one of his interviews post arrest he overnighted somewhere else on East Coast of US  DC I think.  

    [ Parent ]
    Sorry you are correct (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by samtaylor2 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:46:19 AM EST
    He had been traveling for 2 days (at least). Eveyone knows the second day of traveling is like a spa day.  Great counter point.

    [ Parent ]
    sam, the details are on Gates' own website (none / 0) (#112)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:54:08 AM EST
    where he went to great lengths to describe the trip he was returning from, and the stops he made. He traveled with his daughter and she doesn't live in Cambrige, so they stopped at her place enroute.

    I forget the name of his site, but it was posted several times yesterday.


    [ Parent ]

    Okay, but what is your point (5.00 / 0) (#118)
    by samtaylor2 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:59:09 AM EST
    My point is the dude was most likely very tired, wanted to get into bed and was cranky.  What is your point?

    [ Parent ]
    The Root. (none / 0) (#119)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:00:28 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Spa day! (none / 0) (#120)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:01:16 AM EST
    LOL!

    [ Parent ]
    Gosh (5.00 / 0) (#62)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:58:15 AM EST
    I would be happy to stop well short of the heroification of Gates, if everyone would at least agree on his non-arrestification.

    I think your claims regarding Gates' lionization are sort of an exaggeration.

    [ Parent ]

    I already have to deal with (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:07:10 AM EST
    law enforcement attitude that as far as they are concerned I live in a police state.  I will not promote this belief or perception any more than it already is by double and triple questioning persons who have been assaulted by them.  It's like telling a rape victim they had it coming. Police officers are pubic servants.  I will personally require of them to act like it or find a different job that perhaps they can execute more appropriately!

    [ Parent ]
    Take it up with Crowley... (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:08:04 AM EST
    he made Gates a hero and himself a poster boy for authoritarian abuse of power...sounds like your beef is with Crowley for making a hero out of an arse.

    [ Parent ]
    Gates was a hero to most . . . (5.00 / 0) (#92)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:37:43 AM EST
    Actually, if you could point to where I have written even a kind word about Gates, I would be most obliged.

    (Subject line reference to Public Enemy song "Fight the Power" ("Elvis was a hero to most . . ."))

    [ Parent ]

    What falsehoods? (none / 0) (#45)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:41:41 AM EST
    It's he said, she said.  As it has been all along.  The witness says she didn't talk to Crowley; he says she did.  Aside from having a third party verify, there's no way of knowing who is correct.  Although I see you are jumping to conclusions on that.

    [ Parent ]
    Very good (5.00 / 0) (#47)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:45:49 AM EST
    Whalen is a potential liar now too?

    If we are talking NOW about conflicting stories, gates says the entire police report is BS.

    You prepared to now stop asking questions about what Gates did?

    Because, let's face it, that is all you are doing.

    Any questions for Crowley?

    [ Parent ]

    Technically, she did (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:32:58 AM EST
    Even Whalen's own lawyer said that Whalen told Crowley, "Excuse me, I'm the one who called," and then he told her "Wait right here."

    So, while it may have been fleeting and certainly not substantive, they did in fact, speak, and he could have written down the wrong name on his report.

    Just to keep the facts straight here, as so many have gotten thrown out with conjecture and speculation.

    [ Parent ]

    And, the teaching/learning opportunities (5.00 / 0) (#109)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:50:33 AM EST
    Just keep on coming.

    Apparently, Wendy spoke before she got all the facts.

    [ Parent ]

    Not really (none / 0) (#111)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:52:17 AM EST
    It actually can be consistent. That report has Crowley speaking to her but Whalen not speaking to him.

    Nice try though.

    [ Parent ]

    Not what Murphy said in the link (none / 0) (#96)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:41:40 AM EST
    I have in my post.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes by all means (none / 0) (#51)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:49:28 AM EST
    Do not answer questions that you object to.  

    I didn't call Whelon a liar, I said that we don't know who is accurate.  Now I know you have made up your mind who is in the wrong in every possible way in this scenario.  That is your right.  But I'm looking at two conflicting reports from two people (and Gates has no knowledge of their conversation outside so that is totally irrelevant.)

    I think the situation could have been handled better all around; but I am not willing to overlook one person's conduct in my haste to demonize someone else.
     

    [ Parent ]

    Did you ask a question? (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:44:23 AM EST
    Should Gates have been nicer I think is the gist of it?

    To adopt your tactic, how do you know he didn't?

    I actually think it is pretty clear he did not.

    But it is not against the law to act uncivilly.

    My concern in terms of public policy is now mostly about the abuse of authority that seems manifest now by Crowley  by arresting Gates for "contempt of cop."

    You seem more interested in Miss Manners issues.

    [ Parent ]

    Perhaps (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:52:17 AM EST
    I am interested in not having everyone approach unpleasant situations by being jerks.  It's the "civil" part of a "civil society".  

    My actual question what was how Gates thought the situation should have been handled so that he would have been more cooperative.  As I understand it, he believes the officer should have been more polite.  Perhaps he has a Miss Manners issue as well.

    I don't support "contempt of cop" arrests.  I also don't support, "I'm going to be an ass just because I can" behavior.

    [ Parent ]

    Well (5.00 / 0) (#133)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:15:26 AM EST
    n the scheme of things I am much more worried about the guys with guns and handcuffs.

    [ Parent ]
    being a jerk is a constitutional (5.00 / 0) (#203)
    by coigue on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09:51 PM EST
    right. And other police have been interviewed by NPR saying it is a cops job to diffuse such a situation. That the standard is different if one is in one's own home, and that Crowley overstepped.

    [ Parent ]
    I have listened to interview of (none / 0) (#85)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:30:01 AM EST
    Prof. Gates on Sirius, read the intervew of him at his website The Root, and read Dowd' account of her telephone interview of him.  None of these sources contain a statement by Prof. Gates that he dispute the entire arrest report written by Sgt. Crowley or the report written by Officer Figueroa.  He does dispute the "mama" comment.  He does not provide a line by line refutation of the arrest reports.  

    I would like to see the Cadlog transcription of all the radio traffic re this event.

    Notwithstanding the above, Sgt. Crowley should not have arrested Prof. Gates based on the Crowley/Figueroa report.

    Crowley did order Gates to quiet down while Gates was being "tumultous" outside his house.  But Crowley failed to document any fear for his own safety or that of others.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Not really ... (none / 0) (#55)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:54:10 AM EST
    Crowley's description of Whalen's comments to him directly conflict with what she told the 911 operator minutes earlier.

    This seems to back up her claim that she didn't speak to him.

    Why would she change her story in a matter of minutes?

    [ Parent ]

    At the time.... (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:47:54 AM EST
    Gates didn't know a dime was dropped, all he knew at jumpstreet was there was a squad car at his crib...thats enough to make me very ornery.

    What keeps getting lost in this debate is the crime...an unlawful arrest.  You could even call it kidnapping if you wanted too.  

    I don't care if Gates is the most pompous prick on planet earth, I don't care if Crowley donates half his paycheck to the United Negro College Fund...the issue here is unlawful arrest aka kidnapping....and thats all. Well, maybe now the common practice of falsified police reports will become an issue too...I hope.

    [ Parent ]

    Indeed (5.00 / 0) (#68)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:03:31 AM EST
    A cogent analysis by our friend kdog!

    Personally, if the cops show up at my house suspicious of whether I'm robbing the place as opposed to being the resident, I'm probably not going to go apesh*t on them, but I'm also not going to be like "oh thank you, brave men and women of the police force, for being so thoughtful as to investigate a possible B&E at my house!" which is how some folks would have it.

    [ Parent ]

    I'd love to go apesh*t.... (none / 0) (#90)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:37:20 AM EST
    on 'em, but that never ends well...just ask the prof.

    [ Parent ]
    What kdog said. (none / 0) (#89)
    by caseyOR on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:35:06 AM EST
    I don't always agree with you, kdog, but on this, my friend, you are oh so correct.

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks casey... (none / 0) (#122)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:04:25 AM EST
    if you agreed with me all the time I'd worry about ya kid:)

    Seriously though, that means more than you know...Lady Liberty needs all the friends she can get.

    [ Parent ]

    Well, I said the other day ... (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:08:15 AM EST
    that the fact that I agreed with Kdog and Squeaky on the same issue was probably a sign of the apocalypse.

    ;)

    [ Parent ]

    Prof. Gates has sd. in subsequent (none / 0) (#78)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:15:18 AM EST
    interview he expected Sgt. Crowley to be more polite when Gates was inside and Crowley talked to him at the front door.  How are you sir?  Something like that.

    [ Parent ]
    Thank you n/t (none / 0) (#83)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:27:51 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Crowley also ... (none / 0) (#29)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:23:19 AM EST
    states in his report that Gates "appeared to be a resident" prior to asking for his I.D..

    [ Parent ]
    No idea (none / 0) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:13:50 AM EST
    But I imagine both.

    [ Parent ]
    When do we start calling this Crowley gate? (none / 0) (#28)
    by samtaylor2 on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:22:16 AM EST


    Not as catchy a title (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:23:36 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    how about (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by cpinva on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:30:58 AM EST
    "idiot gate"?

    [ Parent ]
    Not identifying (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:33:55 AM EST
    Too many idiot-gates to just apply to this one.

    [ Parent ]
    It would end up ... (none / 0) (#88)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:33:16 AM EST
    like the SAW movies.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually (none / 0) (#113)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 10:54:17 AM EST
    Jsut too many idiots, period.  Who all need to STFU.

    [ Parent ]
    oops! (none / 0) (#39)
    by cpinva on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 09:36:05 AM EST
    that should be the "gates'" residence.

    Accusations of racism always put an (none / 0) (#140)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:23:16 AM EST
    addition negative twist on a situation like this. Officer Crowley was likely on edge from the potential risk of dealing with an armed intruder. With adrenaline and testosterone cranked up and nowhere to go, he acted like a jerk when Prof Gates criticized him and belittled his honorable attempt to protect the property and public. Gates may have been tired and irritable and probably has a huge chip on his shoulder about white cops questioning black men. So he acted like a jerk, and Crowley followed up with his own stupidity. Then Obama jumps in with a statement that allows the right wing to claim that Obama's own skin color may make him biased against whites and more supportive of African Americans. How will that play out in racially based programs coming out of the Obama Administration? Programs that are race based instead of need based will be identified as part of the Obama bias against poor and working class whites.

    Gates, Crowley and Obama all blew it. But the worst damage is that Obama gave the right wing a little more ammunition. Faux News will take it off the air now that people are saying Crowley lied on the police report, but they'll hang onto the Obama sound bites for future use with their clan.

    What's lost in the discussion is that police abuse of power isn't necessarily race based, and we're not going to solve the abuse problem while the country is re-pitted against each other over race. We'll never know whether Crowley would have arrested a belligerent white guy in the same situation. In this case, race is an ingredient and a complication, but because people are so eager to call the cops or the neighbor racist (look how quickly the neighbor got lawyered up to clear the accusation of racism on her part), the end result is that the underlying problem of police abuse of power will not be properly dealt with.

    Exactly (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:57:52 AM EST
    Anyone truly interested in the abuse of power that Crowely is guilty of should be critical of Gates's and Obama's attempt to sidetrack that discussion.


    [ Parent ]
    Wha? (5.00 / 0) (#188)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:03:53 PM EST
    Are you nuts?

    [ Parent ]
    All I know is (none / 0) (#197)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:06:57 PM EST
    False accusations, and silly conjecture about Crowely's motives are getting in the way of the fact that Crowely acted stupidly and made an improper arrest.


    [ Parent ]
    I am discussing his ACTIONS (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09:32 PM EST
    which NOW seem to include falsifying a police report.

    Any concerns about that?

    [ Parent ]

    Sure (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by The Last Whimzy on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:13:41 PM EST
    Any concerns about making statements about motive?

    If we wanted, for the sake of argument, to agree that Crowely has committed a crime that's fine, now let's discuss if it was a hate crime motivated by race?

    Your thoughts on that.....

    [ Parent ]

    Now, stupid defenses of Crowley (5.00 / 0) (#202)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09:43 PM EST
    are, for some, getting in the way of the fact that he acted improperly and then lied about what happened in his report.

    [ Parent ]
    The 911 caller said they might (none / 0) (#142)
    by lilybart on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:25:54 AM EST
    just be having trouble with the door, so Crowley should not have been that fearful.

    [ Parent ]
    Nonsense (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:43:41 AM EST
    Cops get blown away in situations where they're approaching an unknown potential criminal. The initial contact period is the most risky. They even get killed pulling people over for traffic violations, because anyone they stop can be a criminal and have a gun.

    All burglary calls are potentially life threatening events for the police.


    [ Parent ]

    They are all having a beer (none / 0) (#141)
    by lilybart on Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 11:25:00 AM EST
    together on Thursday and I think that is just brilliant of the White HOuse. Winger heads will explode as they show people how adults act.