Did Gates use his race as an excuse ?

One of my readers must have really wanted to know how I felt about SGT Crowley and Professor Gates. I attempted to response in the comment section and my response was too long. So this is my comment to a reader's comment in an earlier post:

This is is high profile interaction between a police and a citizen. A police responded to a break in in progress. Upon arriving at the scene officer was told the person breaking in actually lived in the home.

Next, the police officer did not call back up. It was obvious that the officer did not feel threaten in the presence of Gates. It was reported in news acccounts that the suspect was a bespectacled old man who walked with a cane. The officer was packing a deadly weapon, for Pete's sake!!!!!

The police officer requested the suspect to prove he lived in the home. The suspect requested how and the officers requested driver license, or something to verify the address and the person. The suspect provided his work I.D. which the suspect worked for the University on the ground.

End of story.

except..suspect did not quietly work with officer. Suspect began to verbalize his discontent with the action of the police.

At one point the suspect requested the officer's identification. Officer requested suspect to exit his home. Suspect still expressing his discontent exited his home and was told to quiet down. Suspect still on his property expressing his discontent was arrested after failing to shut the F up.

Suspect could not be charged with breaking into his own home so the officer reached into his bag of tricks and decide to charge the suspect with disorderly conduct. But, he had to get tGates to come out of the house to get a public disturbance of loud mouth ranting.

Massachusetts bars disorderly conduct through Section 53 of Chapter 272 of its general laws, the chapter devoted to crimes against chastity, morality, decency and good order. Specifically, it states that:

Common night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female, common railers and brawlers, persons who with offensive and disorderly acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite sex, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, idle and disorderly persons, disturbers of the peace, keepers of noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent exposure may be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than six months, or by a fine of not more than two hundred dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

Now, Officer with a charge on suspect other than the breaking an entering, can freely deprive the suspect of his right to freely enjoy his own property.

In depriving the suspect of this right the police is authority to cuff the suspect and haul the bewildered suspect to the jail house.

Suspect can now challenge his arrest for disorderly conduct as being unlawful and charge as a pretense to arrest a loud mouth black man.

However, the alleged charge of disorderly conduct was dropped.


The charge was dropped, the probable cause did not rise to the level to convince the prosecutor to warrant going forward with the charges based on the information in the affidavit.


Now, I was not there, but I have read the affidavit. I am allowed to form an opinion and let me tell you that is what every person who was not there is doing. However, the legal person who made the decision to go forward dropped the charges.


Let me add this to my opinion, if you enter my house and I begin to scream yell and tell you to get the hell out of my house. I suggest you do so, especially if I did not invite you into my house in the first place.

TRESPASSING..and don't let me have a gun and tell you to get off my property. Oh boy.

The suspect did not have to be a warm and courteous guest just because the uninvited guest was a POLICE OFFICER.

A POLICE OFFICER once on your property by your personal invitation or because of alleged criminal activity is doing one thing..and it is not for hot tea and chit chat..it is to found evidence to support the reason why the call was made or to find other probable cause to justify arrest.

Crowley wanted to arrest Gates and guess what Crowley arrested Gates!!!


I have had good and bad interactions with police. I have a criminal justice degree. There is nothing that will convince me that the police officer did not entice Gates outside his home so that he could have a probable cause to arrest.

Nothing, except if Gates pull out a gun on the officer.

Arrest is not the same as being found guilty of a crime. Crowley was hoping the charge would stick and the charged was dismissed

And because the charge failed, Crowley will be either sued or lose his job allegedly using pretense of disorderly conduct to cuff and arrest Gates. Crowley is doing everything in his power to SAVE HIS JOB and not get sued.

Save job and not get sued.

Now that I have dealt with the facts of the case as I know them , let me move on to putting their (police) lives on the line everyday.

Get a hold of yourself. Police officers are allowed to carry a deadly weapon because of their job. It does not mean that they put their lives on the line everyday. Now, if you were talking about a soldier that goes off to war and at combat daily that's putting his or her life on the line. But back to the police officer.

Police officers are expected to response to situations different than ordinary citizens. Why, because it is in their job description, not because me as a African-American person does not want a police officer arbitrarily and capriciously messing with me !!! Nor do I want them talking to me like a criminal when I having committed a crime !!!

They (police) have a higher standard when interacting with the public.

Let me repeat a higher standard. Don't send me a Sgt Crowley when I am getting ready to jump off a tall building..send me someone that knows his or her job description and with that higher standard, okay.

Crowley did something wrong and I would fo further to suggest Crowley did several things wrong.

Finally, if Gates wants to use the black as excuse after Crowley enticed him outside to justify an arrest, go for it. I don't care if Gates acted like a 2 year old. As a taxpayer, I am not paying Gates to rise to a higher standard, on his own property. If it's black as an excuse to call out the behavior of the offense behavior, than use the black as excuse moment.

But..let me say.. but..I would expect Crowley to act better than a 9 year old because his manhood was challenged during the black as an excuse moment. And that is what the taxpayers are paying Crowley to do in his role as a POLICE OFFICER.

Never try to compare the action of a citizen to a police officer. It is never the same. The Even when an officer is out of uniform his conduct is to be without reproach, a higher standard than the fallen down drunk. The police officer is to never forget what he or she represents in the public sphere. Those who uphold the law at all cost.

Higher standards.

As you expressed yourself you have been harassed by the police. Gates decided to stand up for himself in his home.this is not the same right one has on the street. A man or woman is king or queen of their domain, barring all others including the police.

The police are agents of coercive force and if they are commanded to take you down, so be it. Does it mean you have to fear them? No, it just means know your rights and stand down and assess the situation.

Gates does not represent you or me. Gates represent himself and he is fighting for himself. Hopefully, you and every other person watching will learn something from the incident when a police shows up at your door.

Do you have to let them in? Do you have to say sir or no sir I beg your pardon?

Some folks are not willing to take the public scrutiny and settle behind closed doors. Gates is doing this in the public arena and for that I thank him.

Racial profiling is only about data collection. If you think it is about stopping bad cops from behaving badly you really don't understand the code of blue.

Thanks for your comment and keep on reading.

This ain't about Nappy Hair

Don Imus gets a hand slap. Imus show will be suspended for two weeks. That's enough time for Sharpton and Jackson to cut some deals. In the meantime, the young women of Rutgers, whose got their backs?

Imus made his remark the day after the Rutgers team, which includes eight black women, lost the NCAA women's championship game to Tennessee. He was speaking with producer Bernard McGuirk and said "that's some rough girls from Rutgers. Man, they got tattoos ..."

"Some hardcore hos," McGuirk said.

"That's some nappy-headed hos there, I'm going to tell you that," Imus
said.

It appears Bernard MGuirk was the instigator in the hoes episode. Imus not to be outdone, attached the nappiness to the players. So if the sistas are not hoes or nappy-headed, where is the lawsuit?

Now I understand the National Organization for Women has gotten into the mix. Now you don't upset raced white women. Cause if momma not happy....

Imus could be in real danger if the outcry causes advertisers to shy away from him, said Tom Taylor, editor of the trade publication Inside Radio. The National Organization for Women is also seeking Imus' ouster.

NOW is a political organization. They got a form letter for you to send to the spokesperson, a woman, Karen Mateo, Communications VP of CBS Radio which owns WFAN, and to MSNBC television which airs and promotes the show:

I thought I had heard everything from the "shock jocks," but the statements made about the Rutgers players by Don Imus and Bernard McGuirk after the NCAA championship game hit a new low.

My disgust at the statements of Imus and McGuirk are exceeded only by my outrage that nothing has been done beyond a weak "apology" and a promise to watch the show more closely.

The Rutgers team worked hard and played hard, rising to compete in the national women's collegiate basketball championship.

These players deserve better from us, and from you, than hateful and insulting remarks.

Racism and sexism have no place on the air.

I ask you to take immediate action to remove both Don Imus and Bernard McGuirk from any role that permits them to continue spewing hatred and bigotry over the airwaves.

Are they fighting for the sistas? Or are you trying to get some free time for the sister, Hillary? You do know that NOW is a political action committee that endorsed Hillary? Pay attention !!! Ronald L. Martin was paying attention.

In bold print, I highlighted the important stuff. Now read in what order they have racial stuff. I mean (r)ace does come before (s)ex. But that's not how it reads on the website. Check it out, I'm not making this stuff up as I go along. We've been down this road before.

Anita Hill was tricked up when she was sexually harassed on TV. It was really about abortion rights for raced white women, and they did not trust Clarence Thomas for being on their side. But that sexual harassment stuff worked better in getting a whole lot of raced white women elected into Congress in 1992. But, it ain't going to work this time for Hilliary.

So don't let NOW bring in the noise about Hilliary unless the group is bringing in some compensationn for these young women at Rutgers. I don't think any of those women are running for any political office. We saw how Anita Hill was lied on and left out to dry.