Why-Because I'm A Black Man In America?

[financeguy]

..






Does anybody sense damage control?

There is an attempt to bury this story and sweep it all under the rug, now that Obama and Gates look to be in the wrong side of the issue.

Lesson: when you cast aspersions, malign a police officer and are wrong in doing so, get both parties together, don't admit you're wrong and apologize -just have a beer and make it all go away.


Sad.

<>

Brother Diamond, I'm afraid I must disagree with you here. The conservative approach should be to resolve issues by negotiation and agreement, rather than a (liberal style) shouting match. These efforts to resolve their differences amicably should meet with approval from conservatives.

 

[BVS]

It really has nothing to do with fucking conservative or liberal it's just the adult way of settling things.

 

[financeguy]

But conservatives are more inclined to settle things by negotiation, liberals are more inclined to use lawsuits and the like.

 

[diamond]

Brother Diamond, I'm afraid I must disagree with you here. The conservative approach should be to resolve issues by negotiation and agreement, rather than a (liberal style) shouting match. These efforts to resolve their differences amicably should meet with approval from conservatives.

I was thinking more in the terms of acountability.

<>

 

[BVS]

But conservatives are more inclined to settle things by negotiation, liberals are more inclined to use lawsuits and the like.

You try way too fucking hard. That or you flat out live in delusion.

 

[yolland]

and it's not just american media that cater to the lowest common denominator (of which we have an example present in the thread).

Clearly we have several examples, seeing as how the thread is 9 pages long!

In the past most presidents would not have touched this type of issue deferring to the local authorities and excusing themselves for lack of knowledge on the case, but not this president.

Past (i.e. white) presidents would never have been asked to comment on a case like this to begin with.

1-If Gates had become so unmanageable to impede the investigation because of his yelling and unruliness and it hadn't been determined yet that he was suppose to be in the house legally-than that would necessitate an arrest for disorderly conduct.

2-As yelling in a crowded theater one could be arrested for disorderly conduct, one can also be arrested for disorderly conduct for yelling at peace officer who in the process of completing an investigation.

No, if the police didn't believe him to be a lawful occupant, then the charge would've been breaking and entering. And it's clear from both the police report ("I radioed my findings to ECC on channel two and prepared to leave...I told Gates that I was leaving his residence and that if he had any other questions regarding the matter, I would speak with him outside") and from Crowley's subsequent interviews ("The professor at any time could have resolved the issue by quieting down and/or going back inside his house") that Crowley was making to leave when he stepped outside. Breaking and entering is a felony; the police don't just go "Oh f* it, I don't feel like dealing with this jerk now, I'm gonna forget it and leave" if they don't feel satisfied that it didn't happen.

The Massachusetts disorderly conduct statute is quoted verbatim at the end of the police report:

[On 7/16/2009 was a disorderly person, in that he or she did,] with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, engage in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior, or did create a hazardous or physically offensive condition by an act that served no legitimate purpose of the defendant, in violation of the common law and GL c.272.53.

Which is why the police report was stretching to convey the impression that a disruption to the neighborhood they couldn't let slide was transpiring ("When I left the residence" Crowley noted that "at least seven passers-by were looking in the direction of Gates, who had followed me outside" and that these passers-by "appeared surprised and alarmed"). As if "passers-by" don't always stop and gawk when there's a knot of police officers on someone's lawn; as if the police were somehow dutifully intervening in a pre-existing disturbance posed by Gates to his neighbors, rather than one where they "at any time could have resolved the issue by" LEAVING. This is just plain old entrapment: Now that I got you where I want you, a*hole, take a look at these handcuffs and I dare you to call me that again.

But conservatives reasonable peoples are more inclined to settle things by negotiation, liberals Americans are more inclined to use lawsuits and the like.

Fixed that for ya!




Anyway, the latest development:

Police Release 911 Tape, Dispatches of Gates' Arrest; Tapes Vague, Do Not Settle Differing Accounts

ABC News, July 27


The Cambridge Police Department today released the 911 tape and radio dispatches in the arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr., in which the police are heard saying that the "gentlemen says he resides here" and is uncooperative, and advises to keep the backup cars coming.

Massachusetts police release a copy of the 911 and radio dispatch tapes. In the 911 call, a woman--identified in the media as Lucia Whalen--reports seeing two men break the screen door of Gates' front entrance to enter the house. The woman admits she saw suitcases, and she suggests several times that the men be the house residents. "I don't know if they live there, and they just had a hard time with their keys," she's heard saying. " But I did notice that they kind of used their shoulders trying to barge in and they got in." When asked about the race of the men, the caller said she thought one looked "kind of Hispanic," but didn't see what the other man looked like.

In the radio dispatches, a police officer identifies Gates as the man inside the house, saying he is uncooperative. Except for vague noises in the background, the conversation between Gates and the officers is mostly unclear. Since Gates cannot be heard on the police tapes, the tapes do not settle the differing accounts between Gates and the arresting officer, Sgt. James Crowley. Gates claims Crowley ignored his requests for his name, while Crowley claims that Gates was loud, accused him of arresting Gates because he "was a black man in America," and even made a reference to Crowley's mother. Gates was charged with disorderly conduct, although the charges were later dropped.

...[T]he White House's beer diplomacy may be a challenging task, as the two men are standing steadfastly by their argument that the other is not telling the truth...Gates denied he told Crowley, as the police report states, that "I'll speak with your mama outside." Gates added that Crowley must have gotten that line from watching the '70s TV show "Good Times."

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

I love FYM

 

[diamond]

Clearly we have several examples, seeing as how the thread is 9 pages long!

Past (i.e. white) presidents would never have been asked to comment on a case like this to begin with.

:

Wrong, President Bush commented on the Byrd murder case from Texas when asked.

So based on the statute Gates was guilty of 'disorderly conduct' because on his behavior in a legal sense. For political and cultural reasons the charges were dropped.

The elephant(s) in the room that left minded people are choosing to ignore are:

Gates has a predisposition to reverse racism; Gates favors Malcom X's views to MLK's. He saw Crowely as a Mark Furhman type character when Crowley was probably the closet thing to being Gate's advocate as possible-as far as national racial issues are concerned.

Barrrack's latent predisposition as well, by referring to the policeman and dept. stupid-without knowing the facts. He knew it was a white police officer involved and who Gates was. He hasn't shaken the 20 years of Jeremiah Wright sermons from his consciousness yet it appears.

There has been no mention that Gates had donated a 1 million dollars to the Obama campaign. Obama knew this before the question was asked and who Gates was.

The question at the press conference about this situation was pre planned and it backfired on Obama terribly.


I could go on, but why, really. There will be no accountability for this, therefore "fair minded" ppl on the left can rest easily.


<>

PS-

If Gates were white and came at Crowely the same way he would have still been arrested, however there wouldn't had been a need for a national story. There would be nothing to exploit or manipulate.

 

[BVS]

Why did the white working class cop have a hard on for black upper class educated men?

 

[diamond]

Maybe because he was disorderly, yelled at him, got in his face?

<>

 

[swizzlestick]

The police were called out to investigate a possible burglary, correct? They verified that the identity of the "suspect" was in fact the owner of the house, correct? So the 'case,' so to speak, was closed at that point, correct?

I disagree. Something I haven’t heard discussed is what if there actually was a burglar in the house? The caller did say there were two men. What if they had Gates’ wife (assuming he is married) held at gunpoint telling Gates to “get rid of the cops” or she dies? Lets just say he shows his ID and the cop leaves, but the next day the headline reads “Professor and wife shot to death after cop leaves the scene”

I’m not a cop, but I would think they are trained to not take anything for granted and keep all possibilities open.

Just a point.

 

[anitram]

In her 911 call, Lucia Whalen, who works at the Harvard alumni magazine, repeatedly tells the operator she is not sure what is happening.

Speaking calmly, she tells the operator that she was stopped by an elderly woman who told her she noticed two men trying to get into a house. Whalen initially says she saw two men pushing on the door, but later says one of the men entered the home and she didn't get a good look at him. She says she noticed two suitcases.

"I don't know if they live there and they just had a hard time with their key. But I did notice they used their shoulder to try to barge in and they got in. I don't know if they had a key or not, 'cause I couldn't see from my angle," Whalen says.

She does not mention the race of the men until pressed by a dispatcher to describe them.

"Um, well, there were two larger men," Whalen says. "One looked kind of Hispanic, but I'm not really sure. And the other one entered and I didn't see what he looked like at all. I just saw it from a distance and this older woman was worried, thinking, 'Someone's been breaking in someone's house. They've been barging in.'"

The officer who arrested Gates, Sgt. James Crowley, said in his police report that he talked to Whalen soon after he arrived at Gates' home. "She went on to tell me that she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch," Crowley, who's white, wrote in his report.

Whalen's attorney, Wendy Murphy, said her client never mentioned the men's race to Crowley and is upset by news reports she believes have unfairly depicted her as a racist.

So the woman who called in is now insisting that the police report is inaccurate and that she never told the police officer that she saw black men with backpacks.

Interesting.

 

[yolland]

Wrong, President Bush commented on the Byrd murder case from Texas when asked.

Bush as governor personally signed the execution warrants for the two men receiving the death penalty for Byrd's murder, then went on to cite their harsh punishments as an argument against Texas' passage of the Byrd Hate Crimes Act. The latter fact did become a minor campaign issue in 2000, and it was perfectly natural for it to become so, since it directly involved him. I wasn't suggesting this was some outrageous sly trap on 'the media's' part to ask Obama to comment--just pointing out that if he weren't the nation's most visible black authority figure, he would never've been asked to comment on a dropped misdemeanor charge in Cambridge, MA which 'just happened' to have controversial racial undertones.

So based on the statute Gates was guilty of 'disorderly conduct' because on his behavior in a legal sense.

This sentence makes no sense at all.

If Gates were white and came at Crowely the same way he would have still been arrested, however there wouldn't had been a need for a national story.

Possibly he might've been--and it would've been just as wrong to arrest him in that case. There's no "need" for a national story either way; it's just that it involves a prominent African-American author, TV documentary host, and scholar being led away in handcuffs, then accusing the police of racially motivated injustice. That sells papers.



The rest of your post is a WorldNetDaily-derived blend of b.s., intentionally inflammatory speculation, and utter irrelevancy (actually all of it is irrelevant to the topic, namely the arrest), none of it worth addressing.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

It's quite simple, really. With the advent of 24/7 'news' channels, there needs to be something to fill all that airtime, so stories like this get talked about ad nauseum.

true. it's the only reason i can think of as to why michael jackson's death is still being discussed on cnn, though that's another thread.

 

[No spoken words]

They'll discuss it until they see ratings dip, then they'll move on to the next sensational story. It's a sick fucking industry and I look forward to leaving it.

 

[diamond]

.

Yolland,

Are you purposely dodging elephants in the room?


The only reason it was a national story is because Obama made it one by having a planted question at a news conference and by not knowing the facts of the case, inwhich it all back fired on him.

He tried to exploit a case that wasn't exploitable.

It should be "teachable moment" for Obama and Gates.


<>

 

[BVS]

Thank you Glenn Beck...

 

[yolland]

Nope, just Aaron Klein's usual shrill flailing for a conspiracy angle, which I've been giggling at in the Orthodox Jewish press for years. Of which his speculation that Sweet's question was planted is but another example.

 

[Mr. V]

Yolland,

Are you purposely dodging elephants in the room?


The only reason it was a national story is because Obama made it one by having a planted question at a news conference and by not knowing the facts of the case, inwhich it all back fired on him.

He tried to exploit a case that wasn't exploitable.

It should be "teachable moment" for Obama and Gates.


<>

... you can't be serious?

Anyway, in other news, which should show who was wrong here:

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.

Hat tip to Eric Posner of the Volokh Conspiracy.

From: Adam Winkler: Obama Was Right About the Gates Arrest
Also check out: The Volokh Conspiracy - What is “disorderly conduct” anyway?

 

[Bono's shades]

Yolland,

Are you purposely dodging elephants in the room?


The only reason it was a national story is because Obama made it one by having a planted question at a news conference and by not knowing the facts of the case, inwhich it all back fired on him.

He tried to exploit a case that wasn't exploitable.

It should be "teachable moment" for Obama and Gates.


<>

Oh, Diamond.

Do you really think Obama would purposely have someone ask him a question on a explosive topic like race relations at a press conference that is supposed to be all about health care reform - something he really, really wants to get accomplished?

Don't ever change.

 

[anitram]

The only reason it was a national story is because Obama made it one by having a planted question at a news conference and by not knowing the facts of the case, inwhich it all back fired on him.

You live in la-la land.

Not only was it a national story long before Obama spoke, but it was an international one. I'm not in the US at the moment and I'd seen that story not only on Canadian news and the BBC but on a Croatian news channel (I'm house sitting for my parents and they have satellite) the day that it happened, which was well before Obama answered the question at the news conference.

 

[diamond]

You live in la-la land.

Not only was it a national story long before Obama spoke, but it was an international one. I'm not in the US at the moment and I'd seen that story not only on Canadian news and the BBC but on a Croatian news channel (I'm house sitting for my parents and they have satellite) the day that it happened, which was well before Obama answered the question at the news conference.

Only because the lame stream media tried to make it a story on profiling, when it wasn't one; while Obama tried to up the ante' but shot himself in the foot in the process.

Good job Barry, good job lame stream media.

We now have the real story.

 

[Jive Turkey]

The only reason it was a national story is because Obama made it one by having a planted question at a news conference and by not knowing the facts of the case, inwhich it all back fired on him.

Ya, because the media is always asking the president questions about obscure local news stories

 

[No spoken words]

Jive Turkey, do yourself a favor and just tell Diamond that he's right. It will save you many many posts, and lots of frustration. It's too late for BVS and Anitram, bless their souls....but it's not too late for you. Run. Run while you still can. And don't look back.....don't you looooook back.

 

[diamond]

Oh, Diamond.

Do you really think Obama would purposely have someone ask him a question on a explosive topic like race relations at a press conference that is supposed to be all about health care reform - something he really, really wants to get accomplished?
.

Absolutely, the guy loves moments like these attempting to wax eloquence-but inadvertently showed his true colors on that night.

I also think it would be naive to think the President would not have some idea of what reporters and subjects of questions that we're scheduled to be asked in a upcoming press conference.

<>

 

[anitram]

Jive Turkey, do yourself a favor and just tell Diamond that he's right. It will save you many many posts, and lots of frustration. It's too late for BVS and Anitram, bless their souls....but it's not too late for you. Run. Run while you still can. And don't look back.....don't you looooook back.

To be fair, I'm also worried about yolland crossing over and joining us in mental-land.

 

[No spoken words]

To be fair, I'm also worried about yolland crossing over and joining us in mental-land.

Yolland possesses powers that you and I can only dream of.

Sometimes, in my head, I picture most of you lot sitting in a circle arguing, and then Yolland just sort of materializes out of nowhere, but, like, floating above you all. Above the fray, if you will, dispensing knowledge, wisdom and subtle smackdowns in the necessary dosages.

I am really glad that I shared that, if by glad I mean horrified.

 

[diamond]

 

[Jive Turkey]

Jive Turkey, do yourself a favor and just tell Diamond that he's right. It will save you many many posts, and lots of frustration. It's too late for BVS and Anitram, bless their souls....but it's not too late for you. Run. Run while you still can. And don't look back.....don't you looooook back.

 

[diamond]

look to me as a
defender of truth,
a decipherer of butchered,
hijacked languages;
an oasis of
pure knowledge
-in the parched
desert of chaos.