Racial Profiling? Really?

[Mike 01Hawk]

Lengthy radio interview with Sargent Jim Crowley
http://audio.weei.com/m/25432556/stg-james-crowley-cambridge-police.htm

[FOTD]

For decades upon decades, we have heard the likes of the NRA say that a man's home is his castle and that he has a right to shoot an intruder.

[TUalum0982]

USA Today is reporting that Sgt Crowley (the white officer involved) "is an expert in profiling and was hand picked by a black police commissioner to teach recruits about avoiding racial profiling."

The article goes on to state that Cambridge police commissioner Robert Haas said the decorated officer "followed procedure and is a stellar member of this dept".

Everything I have read depicts this officer as a class act.  Why this guy would lie about the situation that transpired is beyond me.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, I think the professor could have handled things differently and pulled the race card from the beginning.  IMO, if he had shown his picture ID that had his address on it, and cooperated in the first place, this never would have happened.

[tulsa_fan]

I agree, a lot more information is coming out in favor of the officer and reflecting poorly on Mr. Gates.  I was also every disappointed to hear Obama's comments last night as well. . . to say, i don't know all the details, and then say the police department acted stupidly . . . really disappointing.   First, he admited he didn't know all the details and really is this a presidential issue ? ? ? 

[rwarn17588]

Regardless of whether Gates was acting like a grump or not, it shows really poor judgment to arrest a noncriminal in his own house simply because he was yelling or being rude to you. I think the description of "stupid" most certainly applies here.

I'm starting to think that the ultra-vague charge of disorderly conduct shouldn't even be on the books anymore. Even a police chief that I talked to said that such a charge is horsesh-t, and he strongly discouraged his officers from ever using it.

[custosnox]

if what I intepret from the officers statement is correct, then Gates was being more then just a "grump" or being "rude".  He was causing a very large scene.  While arresting him on disorderly charges might have been a bit much, sometimes the situation might call for an overnighter to end the conflict.

[rwarn17588]

if what I intepret from the officers statement is correct, then Gates was being more then just a "grump" or being "rude".  He was causing a very large scene.  While arresting him on disorderly charges might have been a bit much, sometimes the situation might call for an overnighter to end the conflict.

Baloney.

Causing a scene in your own house? Are you kidding? Do you honestly think there's good cause to arrest, say, a couple that's having a loud argument in their own home? Because that's where you're going.

Again, I find very little justification for this arrest, other than Gates p*ssed off the cop for some reason. That sure as hell isn't a good enough reason to arrest and charge anyone. And it's pretty damned telling about the viability of the charges that they were dropped.

[custosnox]

From what I got of the story, Gates followed the officer to his car (or at least onto the porch), continuing to disturb the peace.  So at this point, they were no longer IN his home, which is what your argument is based on. 

Also, if this hadn't become a media extravaganza, the charges most likely would not have been dropped, though the judge most likely would have deemed it time served, since it is a minor charge.

[rwarn17588]

From what I got of the story, Gates followed the officer to his car (or at least onto the porch), continuing to disturb the peace.  So at this point, they were no longer IN his home, which is what your argument is based on. 

Also, if this hadn't become a media extravaganza, the charges most likely would not have been dropped, though the judge most likely would have deemed it time served, since it is a minor charge.

But "disturbing the peace" is entirely subjective -- especially when it occurs on your own property. Gates was probably no louder than the guy driving by with a 500-watt subwoofer. Arguments happen in and on private property all the time with no repercussions.

I very much doubt the charges would have stuck, regardless. Disorderly conduct charges seldom do, mainly because they're on extremely shaky ground legally.

As the chief told me, disorderly conduct charges are little more than a highly dubious tool used by cops who are p*ssed at someone else. That's a lousy reason to arrest someone.

[custosnox]

But "disturbing the peace" is entirely subjective -- especially when it occurs on your own property. Gates was probably no louder than the guy driving by with a 500-watt subwoofer. Arguments happen in and on private property all the time with no repercussions.

I very much doubt the charges would have stuck, regardless. Disorderly conduct charges seldom do, mainly because they're on extremely shaky ground legally.

As the chief told me, disorderly conduct charges are little more than a highly dubious tool used by cops who are p*ssed at someone else. That's a lousy reason to arrest someone.

First off, I did say already that I think that the charge, from what I know of the situation, that making the arrest was a bit more then the situation called for.  However, I was not there, nor have enough information on the situation to make a viable opinion on it. 

I'm not sure what department your cheif friend is over, but to claim that a law is nothing more then a tool for the police to use for a personal vendetta apparantly has a problem with his officers using it as such, but does not mean that is how the law stands across the nation.  It exists as law for those who are causing a disturbance, as it seems to have been the situation here.

[patric]

I'm not sure what department your cheif friend is over, but to claim that a law is nothing more then a tool for the police to use for a personal vendetta apparantly has a problem with his officers using it as such, but does not mean that is how the law stands across the nation.  It exists as law for those who are causing a disturbance, as it seems to have been the situation here.

It, like "public drunk", "resisting arrest", and "interfering" may have legitimate uses in certain circumstances, but their frequency of abuse outweigh those to the point where it is considered a red flag when an officer has a high number of such arrests.
I dont know if such is the case here, but I understand it is a concern:

George DeAngelis, a former assistant chief in the El Paso Police Department with 28 years experience, said many police departments have come up with systems for monitoring officers -- not just the public complaints lodged against them but also the types of arrests they make.

Management and supervisors need to watch officers who make high numbers of arrests for certain types of arrests, such as public intoxicaiton, resisting arrest and assault on a peace officer, he said.

"Officers who have a high incidence of being assaulted or being resisted," DeAngelis said. "That could be an indication of the contempt-of-cop situations in which they are reacting emotionally instead of rationally.

"When an officer has a record of those kinds of arrests, they really need to look at what's going on in his personal life"
(Expert: Officer displayed 'contempt of cop' reaction.  newspapertree.com)

[custosnox]

The laws exist to protect, unfortunatly they are too often abused to harrass.  To say they don't have a ligitiment excuse would be absurd, and we don't know if this use was truelly ligitiment or not. Hopefully time will tell the details. 

[patric]

Drew Diamond: I used to be the police chief, and I say Tulsa must confront and eliminate racially biased policing; here's how to start

The ongoing efforts to confront and eliminate racially biased policing in Tulsa are often impeded by the inability of our elected officials to understand police behavior.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/columnists/drew-diamond-i-used-to-be-the-police-chief-and/article_86828359-1a93-5d83-adb9-b7c1743105bb.html

[Conan71]

Drew Diamond: I used to be the police chief, and I say Tulsa must confront and eliminate racially biased policing; here's how to start

The ongoing efforts to confront and eliminate racially biased policing in Tulsa are often impeded by the inability of our elected officials to understand police behavior.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/columnists/drew-diamond-i-used-to-be-the-police-chief-and/article_86828359-1a93-5d83-adb9-b7c1743105bb.html

That would be Drew "We don't have a gang problem" Diamond, former police chief of Tulsa.

[patric]

That would be Drew "We don't have a gang problem" Diamond, former police chief of Tulsa.

I remember the tactic of starving perpetrators of the oxygen of publicity (sort of like what New Zealand is doing with mass shooters) but Diamond might also have been the last Tulsa Police chief to put the welfare of the citizens before that of the union.