Obama/Gates/Police fiasco....

[Winehole23]

Not described in the police report.

Maybe the yelling had a tumultuous quality all by itself.

[ChumpDumper]

Dude was tumulting his ass off. Everyone said so.

[Yonivore]

:lmao Yes, he showed remarkable restraint not pulling a gun on an old man sitting in a house not robbing it.
He was standing in the foyer...who knew if he was a burglar or not?


That wasn't my question.

So a loss of compsure would have been justified to you?
I never said either would be justified. I just think, by all accounts, Sgt. Crowley maintained incredible composure in the face of Gates' relentless verbal assault.


You have read the report. You have read the interviews. All the pertinent information for a prosecution would have been in those.
No, there would be a criminal complaint and witnesses statements to review before I could say for sure.


What was the tumultuous behavior if it was something other than yelling?
I have no idea...I'm satisfied that the other officers on the scene agreed that Gates' behavior rose to the level of disorderly conduct.

[manufan10]

I was in a similar situation like in the case with Mr. Gates. We are currently renting the house that we live in. I'm tired of renting, so I decided to go looking for houses that were for sale. A few blocks down from my house is a house that is for sale. It's been for sale for almost two years. I was curious to see what the house looked like, so my brothers (one of them a cop) and a friend went walking to go look at it one afternoon. We got there and started looking around through the windows. While we were there, the man who owns the house came over. He thought we were burglars, I guess because we were young, and he called the cops. Of course, I was pissed at the guy, because I had serious intentions about buying the house. I was a smart ass with the owner until the cops arrived. I talked with the cops and answered their questions respectfully. I could have been very vocal about it, but I understood what their job was. If I had been more vocal about it, and then been arrested for it, I would have been pissed off. I had a right to be upset.

A lot of this could have been avoided if people would have thought rationally. I think that there is no one right in this situation, like I said earlier. However, if Gates would have handled things a little more rationally, I think the rest of the problems would have been avoided. However, I think the police abused their power by arresting him.

[ChumpDumper]

He was standing in the foyer...who knew if he was a burglar or not? Everyone could have died.



I never said either would be justified. I just think, by all accounts, Sgt. Crowley maintained incredible composure in the face of Gates' relentless verbal assault.So it wasn't incredible, it was simply expected of him. Does he want a cookie?


No, there would be a criminal complaint and witnesses statements to review before I could say for sure.What else could there possibly be that the police intentionally omitted from their report?


I have no idea...I'm satisfied that the other officers on the scene agreed that Gates' behavior rose to the level of disorderly conduct.I'm satisfied that they wanted Gates to be arrested and put in jail, but after reading some court opinions, I'm not so sure any of Gates' reported actions rose to the level of disorderly conduct.



What is “disorderly conduct” anyway?

Here is the Massachusetts statute under which Gates was arrested, Mass. G. L. ch. 272, s. 53:

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.

Here is a recent gloss by a Massachusetts court (adopting Model Penal Code s. 250.2(a)):

A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he: (a) engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior.... ‘Public’ means affecting or likely to affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access; among the places included are highways, transport facilities, schools, prisons, apartment houses, places of business or amusement, or any neighborhood.

Massachusetts courts have rejected MPC s. 250.2(b) as a violation of free speech rights. So this provision is not part of Massachusetts law:

(b) makes unreasonable noise or offensively coarse utterance, gesture or display, or addresses abusive language to any person present.

And here are some squibs:

Arrest under Massachusetts “idle and disorderly person” statute was unlawful under Massachusetts law, where defendant was arrested for yelling, screaming, swearing and generally causing a disturbance but, though the yelling was undoubtedly loud enough to attract the attention of other guests in hotel, it did not rise to level of “riotous commotion” or “public nuisance.” U.S. v. Pasqualino, D.Mass.1991, 768 F.Supp. 13.

And –

Defendant who did not physically resist his arrest arising out of a domestic violence incident could not be convicted of disorderly conduct based solely on his loud and angry tirade, which included profanities, directed at police officers as he was being escorted to police cruiser, even if spectators gathered to watch defendant; defendant did not make any threats or engage in violence, and his speech did not constitute fighting words. Com. v. Mallahan (2008) 72 Mass.App.Ct. 1103, 889 N.E.2d 77, 2008 WL 2404550.

And –

Defendant's conduct, namely, flailing his arms and shouting at police, victim of recent assault, or both, after being told to leave area by police, did not amount to “violent or tumultuous behavior” within scope of disorderly conduct statute, absent any claim that defendant's protestations constituted threat of violence, or any evidence that defendant's flailing arms were anything but physical manifestation of his agitation or that noise and commotion caused by defendant's behavior was extreme. Com. v. Lopiano (2004) 805 N.E.2d 522, 60 Mass.App.Ct. 723.

Here is more from that case:

[Officer] Garrett asked the defendant to exit the vehicle. As the defendant was getting out of the car, he “kept saying no problem here, no problem here, everything is all set, no problem.” The police advised the defendant that he would be summonsed to court for assault and battery, that he was not to be arrested at Carins's [the alleged victim] request, and that he had to leave the motel parking lot. He began to walk away. [Officer] O’Connor testified: “He took a few steps from me, ten steps, turned around, began flailing his arms, yelling that I was violating his civil rights.” He was advised a second time to leave, and the defendant was “yelling at me, you're violating my civil rights, then he began yelling at Ms. Carins, why are you doing this to me, you'll never go through with this.” At that time, he was placed under arrest. It is not disputed that only the defendant's conduct after he left the car forms the basis of the disorderly conduct charge.

http://www.volokh.com/posts/1248465451.shtml

No wonder the charges were dropped.

[ChumpDumper]

Again, disorderly conduct doesn't contain an element of threat...that would be a more serious charge.
Here is a recent gloss by a Massachusetts court (adopting Model Penal Code s. 250.2(a)):

A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he: (a) engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior.... ‘Public’ means affecting or likely to affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access; among the places included are highways, transport facilities, schools, prisons, apartment houses, places of business or amusement, or any neighborhood.

Damn, Yoni is wrong again -- even with his years of law enforcement experience and multiple disorderly conduct arrests.

I'd bet that he's wrong about it in Texas as well.

[Yonivore]

Damn, Yoni is wrong again -- even with his years of law enforcement experience and multiple disorderly conduct arrests.
A couple of things.

The Texas Penal Code, Section 42.01 (Disorderly Conduct), has been amended several times since I was on patrol. Even so, a form of the word threat doesn't appear until paragraph (a)(4) and, even then, it isn't the threat that constitutes the offense, it's when a person "...abuses or threatens a person in a public place in an obviously offensive manner."

I don't recall ever arresting anyone for disorderly conduct that had threatened someone else. Like I said before, that generally elevated the crime to something more serious.

But, you can argue semantics like no one I've seen so, if you want to continue down this rabbit hole, by all means, go ahead.

People can be threatening without making threats and people can make threats without being threatening. Additionally, making threats or being threatening isn't disorderly conduct unless it is done in an "obviously offensive manner."

Finally, Texas and Massachusetts law are different but, in regards to the above, I don't think they differ that much. Not judging by the excerpt you quoted, anyway.

And, while I respect Eugene Volokh's site, he's not the trier of facts in this case but, just looking at the description you posted:


A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he: (a) engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior.... ‘Public’ means affecting or likely to affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access; among the places included are highways, transport facilities, schools, prisons, apartment houses, places of business or amusement, or any neighborhood.
Now, let me break it down for you. The officer made the allegation in his report that Gates had engaged in tumultuous behavior that caused alarm. On the face of it, it appears the elements of the crime were met.

Paraphrasing the above:

A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with the purpose to cause...alarm, he...engages in...tumultuous behavior.

We don't know why the charges were dropped. You haven't seen the criminal complaint. It may never have even been drawn up before the case was dismissed but, just because the officer didn't specifically spell out the offense in the incident report doesn't mean he wouldn't in the criminal complaint.

We can argue the case until the cows come home but, since it was dropped and, likely, there is no criminal complaint by which to judge the elements of the charge as the officer saw them, and since there will be no trial where testimony will attempt to establish the facts...nothing we argue over will be meaningful.

In fact, I think you and I have already spent more time arguing over this than did anyone in Cambridge that night.

I'm done. You can carry on if you wish.


I'd bet that he's wrong about it in Texas as well.
See above but, I don't recall if Section 42.01(a)(1) was a part of the Texas Penal Code then, or not. And, as above, even so...it's not the threat, it's the offensive manner that makes it an element of disorderly conduct.

Making threats, depending on the context and intent, can cause the person making the threat eligible for a whole range of crimes; it's not disorderly conduct, however, unless it is done in an offensive manner, in public.

The general purpose of disorderly conduct charges is not to protect anyone from a threat but to acknowledge a breach of the public peace.

[Yonivore]

Commentary: Obama's rush to judgment on police (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/24/haberfeld.police/index.html?iref=newssearch)

An interesting commentary that I believe critics of the Cambridge Police Sergeant would do good to read and contemplate.


Was it stupid behavior or was it an understandable result of police procedure -- the culture, or rather sub-culture, of this profession. People depend on police in a time of trouble but are quicker than lightning to judge harshly when things go wrong. But the most important question in this case is: Did they go wrong?

One needs to understand that the interaction between a police officer and a suspect is just part of a larger context.

When a neighbor calls the police to report a burglary in progress and a police officer is dispatched to respond, a decision-making process begins for the officer.

Police work is about sub-cultural contexts, about war stories, about suspicion, about unpredictability, about danger and fear for one's life. Police officers make their decisions based not just on a given situation but also based on their prior experience, the experience of those they have worked with and the stories they have heard about incidents that happened in the past.

A call to respond to a burglary in progress generates a series of images that prepare a police officer for an encounter -- a dangerous encounter that can possibly end with a loss of life.

Not long ago one of my students, an officer in the New York Police Department, was killed trying to stop a robbery in progress. Police officers hear about these stories and unlike the members of the public who forget a story, no matter how sensational within a day or two, police officers carry these stories as their secret weapons. This is part of their armor. An officer responding to a burglary in progress arrives at a scene with a heightened sense of danger, anxious and ready to go into fighting mode.

...

Police officers arriving at the scene of a suspected burglary in progress do not put down their armor of suspicion just because somebody proved to them that they are the legitimate occupants of the dwelling.

Police encounters can become deadly when officers assume that, on the surface, everything appears to be in order. It is their sixth sense of suspicion that helps them assess the situation in a way that members of the public would not consider reasonable. It is this precise quality of suspicion that goes beyond a reasonable doubt that sets them apart from the larger public and can be understood only by the members of the force.

A person usually does not break into his own house -- it is true that it can happen, and it apparently did in this case -- but this is not a standard behavior that, once explained to the officer, should mandate an automatic approach to put down your guard.

The officers look at the scene of the event they were called to as their domain, their turf, their territory, where some order has been disturbed and they were called to restore it. A famous police scholar, Egon Bittner, once wrote that we call the police when "something ought not to be happening about which something ought to be done right NOW!"

The professor may have raised his voice, and this would appear now as justifiable under the circumstances. But, when somebody challenges the authority or the domain of a police officer who was just called to restore order, the discretionary process of the officer is not the same as that of a bystander.

...

There are over 19,000 different law enforcement agencies across the United States. Each agency has its own standard operating procedures and rules and regulations, including the ones that would appear relevant to this case. However, there are no national standards that can be applied when officers respond to a call for a burglary in progress.

Only very general standards could be applied and even then the evolving situation would dictate how officers would proceed after confronting the suspicious person. When an individual under suspicion becomes agitated, insults the officer and becomes aggressive, the majority of police departments would allow the officer to make an arrest.

I was not there. Neither was the president nor all the others who are quick to pass judgment. What went on in the officer's head is something that I can only guess but, based on over 30 years of experience in the doing, teaching and studying of the police profession, I would venture to say that race had nothing to do with the behavior displayed and that the sub-culture of police work dictated the action, more than any possible bias or prejudice.

[ChumpDumper]

A couple of things.

The Texas Penal Code, Section 42.01 (Disorderly Conduct), has been amended several times since I was on patrol. Even so, a form of the word threat doesn't appear until paragraph (a)(4) and, even then, it isn't the threat that constitutes the offense, it's when a person "...abuses or threatens a person in a public place in an obviously offensive manner."It's a threat. You said it had nothing to do with threats. You were wrong. Just accept your being wrong about the law.


I don't recall ever arresting anyone for disorderly conduct that had threatened someone else. Like I said before, that generally elevated the crime to something more serious.Generally, you were wrong about disorderly conduct having nothing to do with threats.


But, you can argue semantics like no one I've seen so, if you want to continue down this rabbit hole, by all means, go ahead.You were wrong, nothing semantic about it.


People can be threatening without making threats and people can make threats without being threatening. Additionally, making threats or being threatening isn't disorderly conduct unless it is done in an "obviously offensive manner."You said disorderly conduct had nothing to do with threats. It obviously does. You were wrong.


Finally, Texas and Massachusetts law are different but, in regards to the above, I don't think they differ that much. Not judging by the excerpt you quoted, anyway.Yes, they both can involve threats, which you said they could not. You are wrong in multiple states.


And, while I respect Eugene Volokh's site, he's not the trier of facts in this caseNeither are you -- but unlike you he actually knew what he was talking about


Now, let me break it down for you. The officer made the allegation in his report that Gates had engaged in tumultuous behavior that caused alarm. On the face of it, it appears the elements of the crime were met.What tumultuous behavior? You never described anything but the yelling, which has pretty much been excluded in the abovementioned court cases.


Paraphrasing the above:

A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with the purpose to cause...alarmSo someone yelling "Fire!" when there is a fire is guilty of disorderly behavior
he...engages in...tumultuous behavior.What tumultuous behavior?


We don't know why the charges were dropped. You haven't seen the criminal complaint. It may never have even been drawn up before the case was dismissed but, just because the officer didn't specifically spell out the offense in the incident report doesn't mean he wouldn't in the criminal complaint.So you are saying they left critical elements of the crime out of the police report and every interview they have done since.


We can argue the case until the cows come home but, since it was dropped and, likely, there is no criminal complaint by which to judge the elements of the charge as the officer saw them, and since there will be no trial where testimony will attempt to establish the facts...nothing we argue over will be meaningful.Especially since you didn't even know the laws you supposed to be enforcing.


In fact, I think you and I have already spent more time arguing over this than did anyone in Cambridge that night.You kept making shit up like saying disorderly conduct had nothing to do with threats. It's not difficult to prove your made up bullshit wrong, but putting it in simple enough terms that even you might understand can be time-consuming.


I'm done. You can carry on if you wish.I hope you are done making up shit. That would save us a lot of time.


See above but, I don't recall if Section 42.01(a)(1) was a part of the Texas Penal Code then, or not. And, as above, even so...it's not the threat, it's the offensive manner that makes it an element of disorderly conduct.See above where you said disorderly conduct had nothing to do with threats.
disorderly conduct doesn't contain an element of threatThat was wrong. You were wrong. You were wrong in Texas when you were a deputy and you are wrong now when you are talking about Massachusetts.


Making threats, depending on the context and intent, can cause the person making the threat eligible for a whole range of crimes; it's not disorderly conduct, however, unless it is done in an offensive manner, in public.So you were wrong when you said disorderly conduct had nothing to do with threats.


The general purpose of disorderly conduct charges is not to protect anyone from a threat but to acknowledge a breach of the public peace.You can be charged with disorderly conduct if you make threats.

[Yonivore]

Have fun with yourself. I'm done with this thread unless or until the 911 and radio transmission recordings are released.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, you already said you were done after you admitted you were wrong about the laws you claimed to have enforced.

Why don't you stay done? It will keep you from being so wrong so often.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Yes, you already said you were done after you admitted you were wrong about the laws you claimed to have enforced.

I don't know if you can call Target Security Guard "law enforcement." I wonder how many disorderly persons yoni ran across in his standard-issue golf cart.

[sook]

You can never take it too easy with black folk these days, we can wander around pretending the black man doesn't commit 70% of the crimes in our nation and perpetually seek forgiveness for the unlawful acts we subjected them to for hundreds of years but it seems now that every time a mistake is made it is blown wayyy too out of proportion.

If it is ok to give special searches to middle eastern men at airports why isn't it ok to hold afr. americans to the same standard?

[sook]

(sarcasm)

[Wild Cobra]

You can never take it too easy with black folk these days, we can wander around pretending the black man doesn't commit 70% of the crimes in our nation and perpetually seek forgiveness for the unlawful acts we subjected them to for hundreds of years but it seems now that every time a mistake is made it is blown wayyy too out of proportion.
I'm not sure 70% is the right number, but I agree it's more than half the crimes, and what are they? something like 12% the population? Then they wonder why people are cautious around them.

Message to all the black leaders.

Lead your own people into being good citizens before complaining about us white people.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Gates and President Obama made it a race issue.
they sure did.

job well done officer crowley. :tu

[ChumpDumper]

Job stupidly done, Officer Crowley. The charges have been dropped.

[ChumpDumper]

One of you bootlickers needs to give me the legal definition of tumultuous behavior as it applies to this case.

[Yonivore]

One of you bootlickers needs to give me the legal definition of tumultuous behavior as it applies to this case.
Why? Do you have no research skills of your own?

[ChumpDumper]

Why? Do you have no research skills of your own?I looked it up. There was nothing in Gates' behavior that could be successfully prosecuted as disorderly conduct. No wonder the charge was dropped.

[Yonivore]

I looked it up. There was nothing in Gates' behavior that could be successfully prosecuted as disorderly conduct. No wonder the charge was dropped.
Again, you weren't there. And, a police report isn't a criminal complaint.

[ChumpDumper]

Again, you weren't there. And, a police report isn't a criminal complaint.Again, what critical element of a crime could he have done that the police purposely omitted from their report and several interviews?

So far we have an old man standing on his porch yelling.

[Yonivore]

Again, what critical element of a crime could he have done that the police purposely omitted from their report and several interviews?
I don't know. Did any of the interviewers askk?


So far we have an old man standing on his porch yelling.
So far, we have an officer -- supported by his peers at the scene and not contradicted by anyone else at the scene -- stating Professor "Your-Mama" committed the crime of Disorderly Conduct.

Hopefully, so you'll be satisfied, someone will ask the right question some day. For now, I'm satisfied -- based on what I've heard -- it was a legitimate arrest.

I don't see Gates filing a complaint against the officer for false arrest. All he's doing is threatening to sue and using this episode to build some kind of "street cred" so he can finally talk about how The Man is racist.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't know. Did any of the interviewers askk?


So far, we have an officer -- supported by his peers at the scene and not contradicted by anyone else at the scene -- stating Professor "Your-Mama" committed the crime of Disorderly Conduct.So far we have the charges dropped.


Hopefully, so you'll be satisfied, someone will ask the right question some day. For now, I'm satisfied -- based on what I've heard -- it was a legitimate arrest.I'm satisfied it was a stupid arrest and Gates' conduct as the police portrayed it did not meet the criteria for the charge of disorderly conduct.


I don't see Gates filing a complaint against the officer for false arrest.As you proved so fantastically earlier, law enforcement officials can be quite ignorant of the law. I don't know if these officers were quite as ignorant as you are, but it's clear the law would not allow a prosecution for what the police say Gates did.


All he's doing is threatening to sue and using this episode to build some kind of "street cred" so he can finally talk about how The Man is racist.He was already saying that. Now he can say that he was arrested for calling a white cop a racist.

The cops should have just left.

[Yonivore]

So far we have the charges dropped.
Yep. Which as anyone familiar with the criminal justice systems know isn't always related to the validity of the charges.


I'm satisfied it was a stupid arrest and Gates' conduct as the police portrayed it did not meet the criteria for the charge of disorderly conduct.
Okay. You're free to make ill-informed pronouncements just like President Obama. I'll wait until we have more facts and, in the interim, I'll rely on the opinions of professionals who actually witnessed the incident.


As you proved so fantastically earlier, law enforcement officials can be quite ignorant of the law. I don't know if these officers were quite as ignorant as you are, but it's clear the law would not allow a prosecution for what the police say Gates did.
Not recalling a minor subsection of the law that may not have even been there decades ago and, which doesn't really contradict what I said, isn't exactly being ignorant but, whatever floats your boat.


He was already saying that. Now he can say that he was arrested for calling a white cop a racist.
No, he was arrested for disorderly conduct.


The cops should have just left.
What would you be saying if, after the police left, Professor Gates had continued his tirade and carried over to the neighbors house that originally made the 911 call? He's already all but called her a racist in subsequent interviews.

I don't think it's completely out of the realm of possibilities that Mr. Gates, in his highly agitated state, would have viewed the police "just leaving" as another racist affront and looked for some way to take out his righteous indignation.

[ChumpDumper]

Yep. Which as anyone familiar with the criminal justice systems know isn't always related to the validity of the charges.But in this case, it's clear that Gates' actions as reported by the police could not have been successfully prosecuted



Okay. You're free to make ill-informed pronouncements just like President Obama. I'll wait until we have more facts and, in the interim, I'll rely on the opinions of professionals who actually witnessed the incident.I would never expect a police officer to willfully circumscribe his arrest powers.


Not recalling a minor subsection of the law that may not have even been there decades ago and, which doesn't really contradict what I said, isn't exactly being ignorant but, whatever floats your boat.You were completely ignorant of the fact that threats are included in disorderly conduct. You cannot deny that.



No, he was arrested for disorderly conduct.What disorderly conduct? That's all they say he did.



What would you be saying if, after the police left, Professor Gates had continued his tirade and carried over to the neighbors house that originally made the 911 call? He's already all but called her a racist in subsequent interviews.Why are you making shit up again? You're afraid he was going to kill everyone. No one on the scene said anything of the sort. Quit making shit up.


I don't think it's completely out of the realm of possibilities that Mr. Gates, in his highly agitated state, would have viewed the police "just leaving" as another racist affront and looked for some way to take out his righteous indignation.Yes, by killing everyone in the neighborhood, right?

And old man was standing on his porch yelling that a cop was racist. He got arrested for it.

[Yonivore]

But in this case, it's clear that Gates' actions as reported by the police could not have been successfully prosecuted
No, I don't think that's clear.


I would never expect a police officer to willfully circumscribe his arrest powers.
They do it all the time. Verbal and written warnings and choosing not to arrest for officer discretion type offenses (such as disorderly conduct) happens all the time.


You were completely ignorant of the fact that threats are included in disorderly conduct. You cannot deny that.
Well, we obviously disagree on the wording of the section. Being threatening isn't a threat and one can make a threat without being threatening. Besides, you're leaving out the qualifying element...that one must be threatening in public and in an offensive manner. It's actually those elements that make it disorderly conduct. All that aside, I'm willing to own up that after a couple of decades, I had forgotten the word "threatening" appeared in the 4th subsection of the statute. But, given it has been amended several times since I was on the street, you should probably verify that it was there before accusing me of being ignorant.


What disorderly conduct? That's all they say he did.
I haven't seen the criminal complaint. Have you? Were you present?


Why are you making shit up again?
It's a hypothetical. Just curious...because, police have made the mistake of just leaving a raving lunatic on his front porch screaming only to have to return to a worse incident.


Yes, by killing everyone in the neighborhood, right?
No middle ground with you, is there?


And old man was standing on his porch yelling that a cop was racist. He got arrested for it.
He got arrested for disorderly conduct.

[manufan10]

Examples of Disorderly Conduct
Disorderly conduct offenses vary widely by state. Here are some of the most common acts that are considered disorderly conduct offenses:
Public drunkenness
Inciting a riot
disturbance of the peace
loitering in certain areas
fighting / physical altercations
obstructing traffic
use of extremely obscene or abusive language
loud or unreasonable noise
Given the wide range of behaviors that could constitute disorderly conduct, a person may be arrested for this crime without proper cause. Virtually any socially offensive or disruptive conduct may be prosecuted as disorderly conduct.


A first-time offender's disorderly conduct sentence is typically very light. This sentence may be even be suspended if certain conditions are met.

http://www.criminal-law-lawyer-source.com/terms/disorderly-conduct.html

Many types of obnoxious or unruly conduct may fit the definition of disorderly conduct, as such statutes are often used as "catch-all" crimes. Police may use a disorderly conduct charge to keep the peace when a person is behaving in a disruptive manner, but presents no serious public danger.

http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/a-z/disorderly_conduct.html

Disorderly conduct may take the form of directly disturbing the peace, as when one intentionally disrupts a public meeting or awakens a sleeping community. Less directly, it includes fighting in a public place, although it does not apply to one who defends himself on being attacked. Most jurisdictions penalize displays of public drunkenness. Some maintain vagrancy statutes that penalize persons found to be idle and without visible means of support. These may include prostitutes, beggars, gamblers, or alcoholics.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/165739/disorderly-conduct

b) Directs at another person in a public place obscene, derisive, or offensive words which are likely to provoke a violent reaction on the part of an ordinary person;

""Public place'' means any place to which the public or a substantial group has access. The term includes, but is not limited to, public ways, sidewalks, schools, hospitals, government offices or facilities, and the lobbies or hallways of apartment buildings, dormitories, hotels or motels.



I wasn't there, so I don't know how loud the yelling was. According to what I've looked up, it is reasonable for the officer to arrest Gates. Did he have to? Of course not, but reviewing what disorderly conduct is, which is what Gates was charged with, it can be seen that the officer did have a choice to arrest him or not. I still believe that both of them acted stupidly. Gates is a moron for not being happy that the officers were there to benefit HIM. Crowley could have used better judgement and continue to his car instead of stopping each time Gates called him out. However, many of us act the same way when confronted in front of coworkers/friends. We don't want to be seen as weak so we do something about it. We try and act tough. It happened. It's done, now let's move on.

[ChumpDumper]

Sorry, I already posted the Massachusetts statute and relevant case law. Yelling at the police wasn't going to cut it.

I do agree both parties acted stupidly.

[manufan10]

CHAPTER 272. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY, MORALITY, DECENCY AND GOOD ORDER

Chapter 272: Section 53. Penalty for certain offenses

Section 53. 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.

Yelling doesn't cut it, yet we don't know the language that Gates used. If he used any vulgar language while yelling it COULD be warranted for an arrest. We don't know the FULL details of what went down.

[manufan10]

Lewd: obscene or indecent .
a. low, ignorant, or vulgar.
b. base, vile, or wicked, esp. of a person.
c. bad, worthless, or poor, esp. of a thing.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lewd

[ChumpDumper]

You can search the thread for my post, at least part of that code has been struck down by the state courts.

It wasn't going to cut it. They should have just left.

[ChumpDumper]

Lewd: obscene or indecent .
a. low, ignorant, or vulgar.
b. base, vile, or wicked, esp. of a person.
c. bad, worthless, or poor, esp. of a thing.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lewdSeriously, that's not working.

[ChumpDumper]

The post about Massachusetts' disorderly conduct law is one page back.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3587574&postcount=506

[manufan10]

The post about Massachusetts' disorderly conduct law is one page back.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3587574&postcount=506

Yeah, I already found it. Just reading it over.

[ploto]

However, many of us act the same way when confronted in front of coworkers/ friends. We don't want to be seen as weak so we do something about it. We try and act tough.
But police officers are supposed to know how to deal with this in a better manner. The cop could just walk away realizing that the guy was pissed about being accused of breaking into his own residence and been done with it. The fact that he did not shows that he- the cop- was responding emotionally and not rationally- what people have accused Gates of doing. The behavior is more understandable from the citizen than from the cop who is trained to deal with upset people. If you fault Gates for his behavior, you have to fault the cop, as well, and in my view, even moreso because it is the cop's job to deal with tense situations and he should have handled it better.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

To every idiot bringing up "he should've just walked away", he did. You must not have read the police report. Professor jackass decided to make things worse. And to the idiots championing the charge drop, most first time offenders of this charge are normally dropped. I posted that here, but that's no surprise that it wasn't read.

[ploto]

To every idiot bringing up "he should've just walked away", he did.

Walk away, keep walking, get in his car, and drive off.

[manufan10]

But police officers are supposed to know how to deal with this in a better manner. The cop could just walk away realizing that the guy was pissed about being accused of breaking into his own residence and been done with it. The fact that he did not shows that he- the cop- was responding emotionally and not rationally- what people have accused Gates of doing. The behavior is more understandable from the citizen than from the cop who is trained to deal with upset people. If you fault Gates for his behavior, you have to fault the cop, as well, and in my view, even moreso because it is the cop's job to deal with tense situations and he should have handled it better.

I have said that the cop is also at fault. But come on, just because he's a cop doesn't make him any less human.

[ChumpDumper]

To every idiot bringing up "he should've just walked away", he did. You must not have read the police report. Professor jackass decided to make things worse.Actually he made them the same, just on his porch where he could supposedly be arrested.
And to the idiots championing the charge drop, most first time offenders of this charge are normally dropped. I posted that here, but that's no surprise that it wasn't read.There was no way in hell he could have been convicted given the facts provided by the police. I posted that here, but that's no surprise that you didn't read it.

[Pistons < Spurs]

Cambridge police: Race not mentioned in 911 call

"Contrary to published reports that a 'white woman' called 911 and reported seeing 'two black men' trying to gain entry into Mr. Gates home, the woman, who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent, told the 911 operator that she observed 'two men' at the home," Murphy's statement read.

Haas said Whalen, after questioning by the dispatcher during the 911 call, speculated that one of the men — who turned out to be Gates and a black car service driver — may have been Hispanic.

"It was very clear that she wasn't sure what the men's race was," Haas said in an interview with The Boston Globe Sunday night.

The 911 tapes have not yet been made public, but Haas has said he expected some version of the tapes to be released within the next few days.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090727/ap_on_re_us/us_harvard_scholar_caller

[rjv]

i don't think this thread is the sort of discourse hegel had in mind when speaking of a dialogue that would move history forward.

it has been 21 pages of obama bashing versus obama defending.

[Crookshanks]

i don't think this thread is the sort of discourse hegel had in mind when speaking of a dialogue that would move history forward.

it has been 21 pages of obama bashing versus obama defending.
And one of the main reasons this thread is so long is because Chump keeps saying over and over and over and over and over that the cop should've just left.

We get where you're coming from Chump - now can you just shut up and stop posting the same crap repeatedly? I'm beginning to wonder if you're suffering from OCD.

[ploto]

Contrary to published reports that a 'white woman' called 911 and reported seeing 'two black men' trying to gain entry into Mr. Gates home, the woman, who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent, told the 911 operator that she observed 'two men' at the home," Murphy's statement read.

Haas said Whalen, after questioning by the dispatcher during the 911 call, speculated that one of the men — who turned out to be Gates and a black car service driver — may have been Hispanic.

"It was very clear that she wasn't sure what the men's race was," Haas said in an interview with The Boston Globe Sunday night.
If this is indeed true, then the cop is in hot water because in the police report he clearly claims:

"She went on to tell me that she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch of ___ Ware Street."

If you notice the other officer in his report never says anything about race. He wrote that the woman told him she saw a man wedging his shoulder into the door as is to pry it open.

[sam1617]

If this is indeed true, then the cop is in hot water because in the police report he clearly claims:

"She went on to tell me that she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch of ___ Ware Street."

If you notice the other officer in his report never says anything about race. He wrote that the woman told him she saw a man wedging his shoulder into the door as is to pry it open.

Is it possible that she told him when he got to the scene? Since, you know, 911 calls don't get routed directly to the officer, and that would be the first chance for them to speak...

[ploto]

Is it possible that she told him when he got to the scene?

Not likely when she already told 911 of which there is recording that she did not know and thought one might be Hispanic. It is unlikely she suddenly decided they were black. The other officer makes no mention of her claiming a race to him. The only person claiming the suspects were two black men is the one cop. It will be interesting to see if we ever hear from this woman and whether or not she says she told anyone they were black.

[Winehole23]

i don't think this thread is the sort of discourse hegel had in mind when speaking of a dialogue that would move history forward.To bad no one offers odds on this *not* happening. :lol


it has been 21 pages of obama bashing versus obama defending.Are you sure you read all the way through? I have a hard time seeing support for this in the thread.

IMO the emphasis on Obama, for and against, has been minor. And most of those taking up cudgels for Gates have remarked on the inappropriateness of the President's remarks.

Most of the focus has been on whether the arrest was proper. The thread has been tedious, repetitive, petty, spiteful and trite at times -- there are a lot of things to dislike it for -- but singling out Obama bashing/apology as its central controversy, seems plainly mistaken to me.

There were a couple of posters who bashed Obama, and I do recall a couple of unpersuasive attempts to delink Mr. Obama's judgment about the stupidity of the arrest and his short discussion about racial profiling. But this dispute never really took off IMO.

[rjv]

To bad no one offers odds on this *not* happening. :lol

Are you sure you read all the way through? I have a hard time seeing support for this in the thread.

IMO the emphasis on Obama, for and against, has been minor. And most of those taking up cudgels for Gates have remarked on the inappropriateness of the President's remarks.

Most of the focus has been on whether the arrest was proper. The thread has been tedious, repetitive, petty, spiteful and trite at times -- there are a lot of things to dislike it for -- but singling out Obama bashing/apology as its central controversy, seems plainly mistaken to me.

There were a couple of posters who bashed Obama, and I do recall a couple of unpersuasive attempts to delink Mr. Obama's judgment about the stupidity of the arrest and his short discussion about racial profiling. But this dispute never really took off IMO.

i have read most of the posts and the general tone is what i somewhat sardonically stated it was. but perhaps that is because some of the more adamant posts seem to be guided by an agenda or a proclivity towards bashing obama.

[Winehole23]

i have read most of the posts and the general tone is what i somewhat sardonically stated it was. but perhaps that is because some of the more adamant posts seem to be guided by an agenda or a proclivity towards bashing obama.The odds of this approach one in any given *politics* thread. It's a traditional pastime for whoever's out of power.

[rjv]

The odds of this approach one in any given *politics* thread. It's a traditional pastime for whoever's out of power.

actually i think it has become the flavor of debate in all political theater.

but i digress. i'll try to get back to the intent of the thread at least.

[ChumpDumper]

And one of the main reasons this thread is so long is because Chump keeps saying over and over and over and over and over that the cop should've just left.

We get where you're coming from Chump - now can you just shut up and stop posting the same crap repeatedly? I'm beginning to wonder if you're suffering from OCD.If you don't like it, don't read it. You post the same crap about Obama over and over again -- so you are a hypocrite as well as an idiot.

No one has given any good reason for the police to stay and arrest and transport and book and jail Gates. Yoni has tried to make up a story that the abject terror inflicted on the police and onlookers by and old man yelling from his porch made it a great arrest worthy of medals and bonuses. God knows how many lives they saved by arresting an old man yelling from his porch.

[ChumpDumper]

Cambridge police: Race not mentioned in 911 call

"Contrary to published reports that a 'white woman' called 911 and reported seeing 'two black men' trying to gain entry into Mr. Gates home, the woman, who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent, told the 911 operator that she observed 'two men' at the home," Murphy's statement read.

Haas said Whalen, after questioning by the dispatcher during the 911 call, speculated that one of the men — who turned out to be Gates and a black car service driver — may have been Hispanic.

"It was very clear that she wasn't sure what the men's race was," Haas said in an interview with The Boston Globe Sunday night.

The 911 tapes have not yet been made public, but Haas has said he expected some version of the tapes to be released within the next few days.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090727/ap_on_re_us/us_harvard_scholar_callerHow could race not be mentioned in the 911 call when she said she thought one may have been Hispanic during the 911 call?

[Wild Cobra]

I say we all Dump Chump and put him on IGNORE!

/thread

[Pistons < Spurs]

911 Call (http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/27/gates.arrest/index.html#cnnSTCVideo)

Police Radio Transmission (http://wbztv.com/video/[email protected])

[101A]

From an article about the call:


The two men turned out to be Gates, who was unable to open his front door, and his driver, who assisted Gates in opening the door and left.

[ploto]

So we have indeed heard the 911 call and also from the woman's attorney that she never once said these were black men- so anyone have any questions about the accuracy of the cop's report now?

[clambake]

So we have indeed heard the 911 call and also from the woman's attorney that she never once said these were black men- so anyone have any questions about the accuracy of the cop's report now?


it doesn't matter.

[Yonivore]

Seems to me the only stupid (or racist) people involved in this incident are Professor Gates and President Obama.

Gates; stupid for not alerting a neighbor he would be breaking into his own house. Stupid for meeting the officer at the door with immediate accusations of racial profiling. Stupid for accusing the well-meaning neighbor of being a racist. Stupid for continuing to be an asshole throughout the incident. Stupid for not shutting the fuck up on the two occasions he was advised before being arrested. Stupid for thinking anything in this whole affair puts him in a positive light or that it can be a springboard for further his career. Stupid for giving the country a chance to dig up his extremist, racist past for public inspection.

Obama; stupid for yet again, illuminating one of his extremist, racist, or idiot associations from his past.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Seems to me the only stupid (or racist) people involved in this incident are Professor Gates and President Obama.

Gates; stupid for not alerting a neighbor he would be breaking into his own house. Stupid for meeting the officer at the door with immediate accusations of racial profiling. Stupid for accusing the well-meaning neighbor of being a racist. Stupid for continuing to be an asshole throughout the incident. Stupid for not shutting the fuck up on the two occasions he was advised before being arrested. Stupid for thinking anything in this whole affair puts him in a positive light or that it can be a springboard for further his career. Stupid for giving the country a chance to dig up his extremist, racist past for public inspection.

Obama; stupid for yet again, illuminating one of his extremist, racist, or idiot associations from his past.

and yet this already yesterday's news..:lmao

[clambake]

not as stupid as the arrest.

[George Gervin's Afro]

stupid is as stupid does..

[Yonivore]

and yet this already yesterday's news..:lmao
That it's hung on this long is testament to Obama's stupidity. I don't think it's going to die that easily either.

[Yonivore]

not as stupid as the arrest.
How so? The Police are generally being vindicated and held in a good light, over this incident. Obama and Gates, not so much.

Under what twisted logic is the arrest more stupid than Gates' behavior or Obama's ill-informed defense of yet another racist, extremist, activist buddy?

[George Gervin's Afro]

How so? The Police are generally being vindicated and held in a good light, over this incident. Obama and Gates, not so much.

Under what twisted logic is the arrest more stupid than Gates' behavior or Obama's ill-informed defense of yet another racist, extremist, activist buddy?

Jesus Yoni you contradicted your own argument..

[Yonivore]

Jesus Yoni you contradicted your own argument..
Really? do explain.

[Def Rowe]

I say we all Dump Chump and put him on IGNORE!

/thread

Haha, because he takes you guys to school on a daily basis.:wow

[George Gervin's Afro]

Really? do explain.

why do i even bother.. you state that obama came out the worse because the police were sort of vindicated generally speaking...so if the police weren't fully vindicated how can Obama come out worse in the situation generally speaking?

[Yonivore]

why do i even bother.. you state that obama came out the worse because the police were sort of vindicated generally speaking...so if the police weren't fully vindicated how can Obama come out worse in the situation generally speaking?
Well, generally vindicated from the perspective that a) the arrest wasn't racially motivated and b) the arrest appears to be a matter of officer discretion. Those types of arrests happen every day. That people disagree with the arrest doesn't make it illegitimate and, certainly, not stupid.

I couldn't say fully vindicated because there's still the argument that the arrest was unnecessary. But, again, unnecessary doesn't equal stupid...not nearly as much as making ill-informed pronouncements about the officer's actions equals stupidity.

[clambake]

in this case, unnecessary=stupid.

[Yonivore]

in this case, unnecessary=stupid.
Why? Please explain.

[clambake]

i've tried to explain it to you, yoni. i've told you that you can't see past your black fear on any subject regarding race. that scar will likely last you a lifetime. i don't think you have the strength to move past that moment........but i'm hoping for you, buddy.

[Yonivore]

i've tried to explain it to you, yoni. i've told you that you can't see past your black fear on any subject regarding race. that scar will likely last you a lifetime. i don't think you have the strength to move past that moment........but i'm hoping for you, buddy.
No, you haven't explained why the arrest was stupid.

[clambake]

it's self-evident.

[Yonivore]

it's self-evident.
So, you can't explain it...you're just saying it because you want to bash the police. I get it.

[clambake]

So, you can't explain it...you're just saying it because you want to bash the police. I get it.

i like the police.

you just can't see how that event in your life has jaded your reasoning.

[clambake]

and our time is up...........would you like to schedule another appointment?

[Yonivore]

i like the police.

you just can't see how that event in your life has jaded your reasoning.
So, now you're accusing me of being a racist on this issue? Prejudice against assholes, absolutely. Racist? :lmao

[Yonivore]

and our time is up...........would you like to schedule another appointment?
Can't answer, huh? No, no need to discuss further, I'm not really interested in your opinion anyway. Just wanted to out you as a idiot spouting some baseless nonsense.

Accomplished.

[clambake]

someone needs more appointments.

next time, i want you to tell me exactly how that event made you feel.

[clambake]

why don't you just PM me, and avoid the shame?

[ploto]

I like to look at how people use language, as we know that words bring with them images, as well as dictionary definitions.

Another thing I noticed: If you listen to the 911 call, the woman clearly states that she saw two suitcases. Then, the dispatcher also uses the word suitcases. But if you read the police report, the officer states that the woman said the men had backpacks. I find the difference revealing because a suitcase is not the same as a backpack, and the perception of who might carry a backpack is different from that of who might have a suitcase. Of course, we know it turned out to be suitcases from his trip and the woman was right and not the cop who said backpacks.

[ChumpDumper]

911 Call (http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/27/gates.arrest/index.html#cnnSTCVideo)

Police Radio Transmission (http://wbztv.com/video/[email protected])So there is absolutely nothing there to justifiy Gates' arrest.

It was a stupid arrest.


So we have indeed heard the 911 call and also from the woman's attorney that she never once said these were black men- so anyone have any questions about the accuracy of the cop's report now?No shit. Where they hell did that come from? Either someone along the line of communication took it upon him/herself to declare the alleged suspects as black men -- which may as well be called a form of profiling; at the very least extremely prejudicial -- or the police completely fucked up or lied on their report.

Which is it, Yoni?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

ok. let me get this straight. all these guys are meeting up thursday, i believe. that man that nominated an overweight surgeon general is inviting people over for beers in the midst of a healthcare "debate". will he smoke as well?

it's not if you win or lose. it's how you look doing it.
:tu

[Yonivore]

So there is absolutely nothing there to justifiy Gates' arrest.

It was a stupid arrest.
Those aren't the totality of the facts.


No shit. Where they hell did that come from? Either someone along the line of communication took it upon him/herself to declare the alleged suspects as black men -- which may as well be called a form of profiling; at the very least extremely prejudicial -- or the police completely fucked up or lied on their report.

Which is it, Yoni?
You obviously ignored Chief Haas's explanation.

[ChumpDumper]

Those aren't the totality of the facts.Pretty much. If there was anything else that would have justified the arrest, it would have already been said.


You obviously ignored Chief Haas's explanation.It was a nice bit of ass-covering, but it explains nothing. "Maybe one Hispanic man" turned into "two black men" and "suitcases" turned into "backpacks."

It's magic!

[Yonivore]

Pretty much. If there was anything else that would have justified the arrest, it would have already been said.
Why? And, by whom?


It was a nice bit of ass-covering, but it explains nothing. "Maybe one Hispanic man" turned into "two black men" and "suitcases" turned into "backpacks."

It's magic!
Maybe, after the police arrived and talked to her, it did. Again, you don't have enough facts to make that declaration and simply dismissing Chief Haas as ass-covering doesn't explain the media's lack of curiosity over that alleged discrepancy.

I think the story has morphed into one about Obama's idiocy and Gates' own racism. No one seriously argues, any longer, that the police arrest is relevant to anything here. Most reasonable people have settled on the presumptions the arrest was either justified or not and no one, except you (even Obama has abandoned the declaration), is arguing that it was stupid.

[clambake]

it was stupid.

the officer acted the same way you would have.

[ChumpDumper]

Why?To justify the arrest.
And, by whom?The police.



Maybe, after the police arrived and talked to her, it did. Again, you don't have enough facts to make that declaration and simply dismissing Chief Haas as ass-covering doesn't explain the media's lack of curiosity over that alleged discrepancy.Maybe you just made shit up again.

Nah, there's no maybe about that.


I think the story has morphed into one about Obama's idiocy and Gates' own racism. No one seriously argues, any longer, that the police arrest is relevant to anything here. Most reasonable people have settled on the presumptions the arrest was either justified or not and no one, except you (even Obama has abandoned the declaration), is arguing that it was stupid.I already posted links to policemen saying it was stupid.

You are trying to morph it into something else because you have nothing to support any of your contentions.

Gates was arrested for yelling from his porch, therefore it was a stupid arrest.

You have done nothing to refute this simple statement. You have only made up shit that exists nowhere but your lying mind.

[Yonivore]

I'm comfortable standing in opposition to President Obama, Professor Gates, some former auxiliary officer, the NLOA, ChumpDumper, and Clambake and with the Cambridge Police Department and others at the scene, on this matter.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, you are very comfortable in your ignorance. That is clear.

[Yonivore]

Yes, you are very comfortable in your ignorance. That is clear.
Just how big is your hay barn?

[ChumpDumper]

Just how big is your hay barn?An old man was arrested for yelling from his porch. There was no legal justification for the arrest, so it was a stupid arrest.

You have done nothing to prove otherwise. You have instead made up shit and proved your ignorance of the law and unquenchable desire to make this a racial issue.

[Yonivore]

An old man was arrested for yelling from his porch. There was no legal justification for the arrest, so it was a stupid arrest.
And, you're basing this on an incomplete record of the facts from the scene and the opinions of others who weren't anywhere near the scene. I on the other hand am basing my opinion on an incomplete record of the facts from the scene and the reported statements of witnesses and officers who were at the scene; as well as the statements of those officers' peers and supervisors.


You have done nothing to prove otherwise. You have instead made up shit and proved your ignorance of the law and unquenchable desire to make this a racial issue.
You're under the mistaken impression the Cambridge Police Department has either volunteered or been asked to explain the elements of the arrest. The haven't.

[ChumpDumper]

And, you're basing this on an incomplete record of the facts from the scene and the opinions of others who weren't anywhere near the scene. I on the other hand am basing my opinion on an incomplete record of the facts from the scene and the reported statements of witnesses and officers who were at the scene; as well as the statements of those officers' peers and supervisors.So based on the facts of the case, you can't justify the arrest.

Neither could they.


You're under the mistaken impression the Cambridge Police Department has either volunteered or been asked to explain the elements of the arrest. The haven't.They have been asked to explain what happened. They have been asked why Gates was arrested. The reason they arrested him was an old man was yelling from his porch. There was nothing else he did. That was it. No one there said he did anything else when they were asked what happened.

[Yonivore]

So based on the facts of the case, you can't justify the arrest.

Neither could they.
See, this is where your grasp of the English language fails you. Based on the facts as you and I know them, neither of us can support our claim. I, however, have the added benefit of supporting statements from those that were there. You do not.


They have been asked to explain what happened. They have been asked why Gates was arrested. The reason they arrested him was an old man was yelling from his porch. There was nothing else he did. That was it. No one there said he did anything else when they were asked what happened.
That's obviously your characterization of what was asked and answered, with some editorializing thrown in at the end.

[ChumpDumper]

See, this is where your grasp of the English language fails you. Based on the facts as you and I know them, neither of us can support our claim.I can and have supported my claim. Given the facts of the case, there was no law broken.
I, however, have the added benefit of supporting statements from those that were there. You do not.None of their statements justify the arrest.


That's obviously your characterization of what was asked and answered, with some editorializing thrown in at the end.All parties have had every opportunity to say Gates did something that actually warranted arrest.

None did so.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

gates resisted arrest.

[DarrinS]

EcvUhu5mqJM

[ChumpDumper]

gates resisted arrest.So where is the resisting arrest charge?

And what was he being arrested for in the first place that he could resist?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

EcvUhu5mqJM

:tu

You did a fine job, Officer Crowley.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

So where is the resisting arrest charge?

And what was he being arrested for in the first place that he could resist?
.
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/download/2009/0720/20120754.pdf

[ChumpDumper]

It was a stupid arrest, Officer Crowley.

[ChumpDumper]

.
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/download/2009/0720/20120754.pdfRight, yelling at the cops from his porch.

Which is not disorderly conduct under Massachusetts law.

It was a stupid arrest.

[Yonivore]

It was a stupid arrest, Officer Crowley.
I'm pretty sure Sgt. Crowley couldn't care less you hold this position.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm pretty sure Sgt. Crowley couldn't care less you hold this position.I'm pretty sure he couldn't care less about any of us or our held positions. So what?

[Yonivore]

Finally, an opinion that seems to accurately portray the realities of this whole sorry, sordid affair.

Cambridge Police Profiling Still A Grim Reality for Harvard Faculty Assholes (http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2009/07/cambridge-police-profiling-still-a-grim-reality-for-harvard-faculty-assholes.html)


Guest Opinion
by Professor John Evans Evans-John
Harvard School of Harvard Faculty Asshole Studies
Harvard University

When I first learned of the arrest of my colleague Professor Henry Louis "Skip" Gates after he stood up to the fascist jackboots of a declasse, ill-educated Cambridge police officer, I was of course angered -- but scarcely shocked. L'Affaire Gates simply aired, in public, the dirty 100-thread-count table linen of an American culture where Harvard faculty assholes still face a daily struggle against profiling, abuse, and insolence.

It will come as no surprise that Skip's arrest was the talk of the Douchebag Room at the Harvard Faculty Club last Friday. I and a group of colleagues had assembled for our weekly lunch; I opted for their competently-prepared Ahi Tuna Tartare and an amusing glass of '05 Hospices de Beaune Premier Cru Cuvee Cyrot-Chaudron. I had noticed that the Frantz Fanon Memorial Booth -- Skip's long-reserved lunch spot -- was uncharacteristically empty, and asked our waiter Sergio for an explanation.

"Professor Skeep, he no is come today," said Sergio. "I tink he is in the jail."

Our table exchanged knowing glances, for we knew immediately that Skip was only the latest victim of a system that singles out the Harvard faculty asshole for stigmatization and unequal justice. It is a system that all of us knew too well, and provided an opportunity for an open conversation about our shared experiences as Harvard faculty assholes in America while waiting for Sergio to bring the dessert cart.

One after one came the cascade of stark stories: the rolled eyes of our department secretaries. The Spanish language mockery of our office janitors. The foul gestures of drunken strap-hanging Red Sox lumpenproles aboard the Red Line. The frequent police stops on the highway to Cape Ann and Martha's Vineyard for "Volvoing While Asshole." And then there are the insulting media stereotypes, where we are routinely caricatured as pompous, effete, self-important, irrelevant elitists. All, I might add, by a motley collection of lowbrow inferiors, few of whom have ever published in a peer-reviewed journal. Let alone edit one.

Sometimes it even comes at the hand of self-styled "peers" from D-list state ampersand institutions. One colleague recounted the tale of his restroom confrontation with a Texas A&M professor at a national academic conference last year. After relieving themselves at adjacent urinals, my colleague noticed the oaf leaving hastily for the plenary session and decided to gently point out his hygienic forgetfulness. "A Harvard man washes his hands after urinating," he said. "And an Aggie don't piss all over his hands, asshole," came the reply.

A female colleague from the English department recalled a recent incident along the Charles River jogging path during her regular morning run. A confused passer-by rudely interrupted her progress and requested directions, as if my colleague were some sort of lowly campus guide or untenured adjunct. "Where is the library at?" she demanded. Naturally, my colleague took the opportunity to correct her, noting that "at Harvard we do not end our sentences in prepositions."

"Okay, where is the library at, asshole?" barked the interloper. Needless to say, my colleague's daily morning runs have since been replaced with tear-filled visits to the Faculty Asshole Self Esteem Counseling Center.

For untold hundreds of Harvard faculty assholes such indignities are, sadly, still part and parcel of being "The Other." As Associate Director of the School of Harvard Faculty Asshole Studies, I have worked to institute policies to insure that Harvard maintains a nurturing environment for all assholes in our community, be they faculty, students, or alumni. Some progress has been made, such as Harvard's mandatory sensitivity and deference training program for all incoming freshassholes. But such internal programs do little to address the impertinence and discrimination we still face outside campus. Some have suggested that we involve the Cambridge Police Department in an educational outreach program, but in my experience the CPD is among the worst offenders.

Case in point: last winter I was slated to deliver the keynote address for an intradepartmental asshole colloquium at Lowell House. Running late, I temporarily parked along Plympton. As I emerged from my Audi, I discovered that I had captured the unwelcome attention of a CPD officer. "Hey Buddy, is that your car?" he barked.

"Why? Because I'm a Harvard faculty asshole in America?" I cleverly retorted.

"No asshole, because this is a snow route and you can't double park here," he sneered, concocting a flimsy excuse for his continued harassment. "You have to move it now."

"That's Professor Asshole to you, you fascist townie," I explained, tossing him the Audi's remote-start key. "Need a valet? Call your mother at the brothel."

It doesn't take an experienced asshole rights activist to tell you what happened next: my Audi was on its way to impound while I rode to the Cambridge Police Station in the unheated vinyl rear seat of Bull Conner's squad car. To add insult to injury, the desk officer refused my request for a dignified background bookshelf for my booking photos.

Thankfully the Constitution still allows even Harvard Assholes a bare modicum of human rights, so I used my allotted phone call to alert the Dean and the Faculty Grievance Committee to my plight. In those 35 excruciating minutes I wasted away waiting in that stark cell, I wrote the opening chapter of "Letters From a Cambridge Jail," my forthcoming scholarly magnum opus on the grim legacy of Asshole oppression in America.

Eventually my arrest record was expunged and I agreed to meet the loathsome arresting officer at President Faust's office for a conciliatory off-record "beer chat." As the University Counsel had predicted, the lure of free limitless alcohol proved irresistible to the simpleminded Irishman, and he was soon happily signing confessions of guilt and abject apologies. Still, even after he was fired, I was left to pick up the pieces of my shattered psyche.

As I recounted the details of that unpleasant encounter to my colleagues, a few wondered aloud if we were not better served by changing the system gradually. Then our eyes turned to the stately historic portraits of the Harvard faculty assholes who came before us, hanging in silent judgment on the Douchebag Room walls; Schlessinger, Galbraith, Leary, Cornel West, Alan Dershowitz, Theodore Kaczynski. Would these great assholes have accepted complicit silence in the face of crude police insolence? How will we be remembered by future generations of Harvard faculty assholes who will battle future generations of Cambridge police and parking enforcement officials? Where is Sergio with the damned dessert cart?

Some suggest that the election of President Obama proves that America's prejudice against Harvard assholes is a quaint relic of the past. But for those of us who live with it every day, the evidence shows the opposite. And it isn't just Harvard assholes suffering the cold, rude hand of uppity townie privilege. Other, if less endowed, asshole faculties suffer similar oppression; in the southern Lacrosse fields of Duke, in the west coast arugula farms of Stanford, at Northwestern, where ever Northwestern is.

No, we must not be silent. That is why I have used a portion of my class action windfall against the Cambridge Police department to produce a shocking new documentary film, "Asshole Like Me," detailing the courageous plight of the tenured Sphincter-American community. It premiers this Friday at the Science Center. Get your tickets now -- with free beer on tap, demand will be high!
I dare say, Professor Gates would probably look down his nose at ChumpDumper (as he would me, as well) and treat us equally bad. ChumpDumper reminds me of the animal rights activist that thinks the bears won't eat him because he's on their side. Chump, if you're not black and you're not Harvard Alum, I doubt Gates would even acknowledge your existence; much less, your support.

[clambake]

:lol yoni trying to catch up to this morning.

[ChumpDumper]

I dare say, Professor Gates would probably look down his nose at ChumpDumper (as he would me, as well) and treat us equally bad.It's not against the law and no reason to be thrown in jail.
ChumpDumper reminds me of the animal rights activist that thinks the bears won't eat him because he's on their side.Yoni reminds me of an ignorant guy who lies all the time.
Chump, if you're not black and you're not Harvard Alum, I doubt Gates would even acknowledge your existence; much less, your support.He doesn't have my support. I support his right to not be arrested for yelling from his porch. His arrest was stupid.

[Yonivore]

It's not against the law and no reason to be thrown in jail.
Ironically, the vast majority of Americans seem less concerned with whether or not Gates' arrest was stupid simply because his initial claims of racism have been quickly supplanted by the obvious fact he's an asshole that provoked his way into the back of a police car.

Frankly, I don't think many people care if the arrest was right or wrong...they're simply satisfied Gates got to smell the inside of a Cambridge holding cell for 4 hours.


Yoni reminds me of an ignorant guy who lies all the time.
That's called projection, Chump.


He doesn't have my support. I support his right to not be arrested for yelling from his porch. His arrest was stupid.
All assholes appreciate that, I'm sure.

[clambake]

we know why you're thrilled with the arrest.

[Yonivore]

we know why you're thrilled with the arrest.
I've never said I was thrilled with the arrest. I even allowed the arrest may have been unnecessary. I merely argue there is nothing to support the police acted stupidly and much more to support the police acted appropriately and don't deserve the criticism directed at them by Obama, Chump, or you.

You and ChumpDumper are attempting, it seems, to turn straw man arguing into an art form. Might I suggest, less is more, when using poor debate techniques.

[clambake]

we know why you're thrilled with the arrest.

[Yonivore]

we know why you're thrilled with the arrest.
I'm not sure what it's called when a person persists, over a long period of time, unsuccessfully, to bait someone into responding to a nonsensical provocation. Probably something you should address with your mental health care provider.

[Spurminator]

This is all so fucking stupid.

[ploto]

Maybe, after the police arrived and talked to her, it did.

Her attorney made a statement that the woman never once referered to them as black men.

[ploto]

The idea that rolling out a black cop will prove the cop did nothing wrong is misguided because in the end, it turned into a power struggle between a cop and a citizen and the cop will support the other cop.

[Yonivore]

Her attorney made a statement that the woman never once referered to them as black men.


The woman, identified in a police report on file in Cambridge District Court as 40-year-old Lucia Whalen, saw the backs of both men and did not know their race when she called 911, said Wendy J. Murphy, a Boston lawyer from New England School of Law. Whalen phoned police, Murphy said, because she was aware of recent break-ins in the area.
"...when she called 911..." being the operative wording there. I don't believe the lawyer spoke to what Ms. Whalen might have observed, and relayed to arriving officers, after placing the 911 call does it?

[clambake]

Her attorney made a statement that the woman never once referered to them as black men.

none of this matters to yoni. we know why he's thrilled with this arrest.

[Yonivore]

The idea that rolling out a black cop will prove the cop did nothing wrong is misguided because in the end, it turned into a power struggle between a cop and a citizen and the cop will support the other cop.
You don't know cops that well. If there's a chance the facts are going to show the officer acted inappropriately, I doubt they'd be 100% behind him...they'd be more muted in their support.

It's apparent, to me at least, the entire Cambridge Police Department believes the officers at the scene acted appropriately.

[Marcus Bryant]

Of course, a Negro was involved.

[Yonivore]

Of course, a Negro was involved.
And, at least two African-American officers have stood behind Sgt. Crowley. I don't think Gates' race had anything to do with why he was arrested, do you?

[Marcus Bryant]

LOL. Of course, since a Negro was involved, Yanni takes the cops' side.

[ChumpDumper]

Ironically, the vast majority of Americans seem less concerned with whether or not Gates' arrest was stupid simply because his initial claims of racism have been quickly supplanted by the obvious fact he's an asshole that provoked his way into the back of a police car.Ironically, he did nothing at all to warrant being put in the back of a police car. It's entirely possible the police were working under the old "you can beat the rap but you can't beat the ride" policy of citizen submission, but that just proves the arrest was unnecessary and stupid.


Frankly, I don't think many people care if the arrest was right or wrong...they're simply satisfied Gates got to smell the inside of a Cambridge holding cell for 4 hours.Yes, an old black man got a little too uppity for you when he sassed a cop on his own porch and needed to be silenced. I know you applaud the outright suppression of unpopular political speech.


That's called projection, Chump.That's called an accurate description of you, an ignorant liar.


All assholes appreciate that, I'm sure.I am only concerned with what is right. This arrest was wrong and stupid. No one has given any proof Gates did anything to warrant being arrested for disorderly conduct.

[ploto]

You don't know cops that well.

I am related to a cop.

[Yonivore]

I am related to a cop.
So?

[clambake]

i feel really bad for the 911 caller.

all her suffering because a cop wanted everyone to think that she claimed 2 black men with backpacks were breaking into a house.

why would this cop do that?

[ploto]

"I noticed two suitcases so I'm not sure if these are two individuals who actually work there, I mean who live there..."

She even offered the possibility that the men lived there.

[101A]

The beer summit is today.

Each man gets to drink his favorite:

Racist Cop: Blue Moon

Elitist Faculty Asshole: Red Stripe

POTUS: Bud Light (coincidentally the very most popular beer sold in this country; can politicians NEVER not look at a poll?)

[Marcus Bryant]

The staged reconciliation photo op complete with beer. Pure Americana.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

it's not if you win or lose. it's how you look doing it.

plain and simple.

[resistanze]

Clowns.