<p>I just read an account of a fatal shooting by a deputy tailing a car that drove a bit erratically. The deputy didn’t identify himself until it was too late. Shot the guy four times. They guy was driving a bunch of other young adults home from a swimming trip and was unarmed. Offhand, I’d guess that it’s pretty hard to hide a weapon in swimming trunks.</p>
<p>The police officer is under paid administrative leave during the investigation but it appears to me to be an unneccesary killing.</p>
<p>^^^
How does this pertain to the Gates case? What is your point?</p>
<p>Question:
My brother-in-law was brutally attacked in a grocery store parking lot by three black males wearing hoodies and sagging pants. He was just putting his groceries in the car and they attacked him, not even trying to rob him.
He was called a racist because he said he is leery of black youths who appear as these thugs did when he is out.
Yet Gates and other blacks can have preconceived ideas about whites and white police because of their past experiences. Gates has a chip on his shoulder because he was mistaken for a worker???<br>
What is the difference?</p>
<p>"Meaning – you have to wonder why a cop would commit such an easily disproven statement to writing). "</p>
<p>He may not have been deliberately lying. He may have honestly thought that he was told to look for 2 black men breaking in.</p>
<p>I’ve read research taht has indicated that when a crime is staged with a white perperator and black victim, onlookers identify the perp as being black and the victim as being white. </p>
<p>An example that shows how police may make inferences about the perp – which may or may not be true. </p>
<p>"When I was a third-year law student at the U.S.C. Law Center, I and my then-fianc</p>
<p>"My brother-in-law was brutally attacked in a grocery store parking lot by three black males wearing hoodies and sagging pants. He was just putting his groceries in the car and they attacked him, not even trying to rob him.
He was called a racist because he said he is leery of black youths who appear as these thugs did when he is out.
Yet Gates and other blacks can have preconceived ideas about whites and white police because of their past experiences. Gates has a chip on his shoulder because he was mistaken for a worker???
What is the difference? "</p>
<p>There is no difference. Part of what allows us to survive is that we make inferences and judgments based on our past experience. Our past experiences may cause us to behave in racist, sexist, etc. ways. Relying on our past experiences may – depending on the situation – save our lives or lead us to do things that aren’t in our or others’ best interest.</p>
<p>Both the police officer and Gates brought to that situation their own backgrounds. Probably when people are not stressed or tired, they are more able to sift through possibilities, not just jump to conclusions.</p>
<p>Being leery of youths (or adults) of any race who look like thugs is wise behavior. Being leery of, for instance, only black youth who look like thugs or being leery of or hating all black people would be unwise and racist.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I have a problem with police behavior - especially a bogus arrest to intimidate or shut you up. Or shooting you. For some reason, they have to be right. Or they have to win. Or they don’t want complaints on their behavior.</p>
<p>The second article (post 967) states:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It seems to me a few of after the fact findings were mixed in with the summary of the 911 call. It’s clear that the caller did not identify the men as black in her call, but that identifier was added after it was known that the two men were indeed black. It could be a simple case of a hastily prepared report.</p>
<p>Good point, Northstarmom, in post #984. Someone apparently added the “two black males” to the report of the 911 call, at some stage, but I don’t think we know yet who or when. It’s even possible that the information given to the officer who first came to Professor Gates’ home included “two black males.” There is probably a recording of the call to the officer?</p>
<p>
I don’t think so – he claimed that when he arrived at the scene, he spoke directly to Whalen, who made the all – and he claimed that SHE said that there were “two black men” (or “what appeared to be”). Either she changed her story between the time she made the 911 call and the time the cop arrived (unlikely) – or he made up that detail after the fact to justify the way he approached Gates. </p>
<p>I think he saw Gates inside and demanded that he come out – and after Gates refused to come out, that the cop forced his way in over Gate’s objections. Gates got ticked off and was demanding ID from the cop, and the cop was ticked off and demanding ID from Gates – and then exactly like Marcia Clark called it – everything he did or said was meant to provide cover for the fact that he crossed Gates’ threshold without permission.</p>
<p>I get that from the big gaping omission in the police report (the failure to explain how he got into the house).</p>
<p>Maybe watch the interview the officer gave. He said in the interview that he didn’t know if the woman had even mentioned race in the original 911 call. When he arrived at the house, he expected the woman to be in the house and asked the dispatcher (who still had the woman on the phone) to ask her to come out on the porch. The dispatcher told him the woman was already outside – on the sidewalk. At that point in time, the woman called out to the policeman, identified herself, and gave him the details of two men putting a shoulder to the front door and going in.</p>
<p>Notice that the woman’s lawyer, in her statement yesterday made specific reference only to what the woman knew at the time of the 911 call:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Now, here is the question I have. The woman called 911 as she walked down the sidewalk and was still on the sidewalk in front of the house when the police arrived and was the first person at the scene to talk to Crowley. The woman saw the driver enter the house with Gates. Did she see the driver leave? If not, where was the driver? Still in the house? Gates said that it was the same driver he always used. Why has the driver not been identified? Curious.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>What other aspects of the report were hastily prepared?</p>
<p>
That was Crawley. He arrived first, talked to Whalen, then went directly to the Gates house – according to his report.</p>
<p>“I get that from the big gaping omission in the police report (the failure to explain how he got into the house).”</p>
<p>I asked this question much earlier in the thread and didn’t see any responses. Did Crowley have permission to enter the house? Gates’ account doesn’t show that he gave permission. The Police Report seems to have left any mention of asking for permission out. That would seem like something fairly important to put into the report.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Hard for me to imagine that a report would be prepared hastily by a cop who had arrested a Harvard professor who was accusing the cop of racism. I’d think that the cop would put a lot of time and thought into that particular report.</p>
<p>“Gates said that it was the same driver he always used. Why has the driver not been identified? Curious.”</p>
<p>Perhaps Gates didn’t want his driver dragged into this mess. I don’t see a need for the police to question the driver as there was no crime.</p>
<p>Today’s NY Times article is remarkably fair and even-handed (shocking, I know.) It reports that the caller told officer Crowley that she thought there were two black men attempting to break into the house when she met him on the sidewalk. He also explains that he asked Professor Gates to step outside because he was alone and wanted to get home to his family.</p>
<p>
How else would he have gotten in? If he had physically pushed his way in, that would have been huge news, and rightly so.</p>
<p>Calmom:</p>
<p>All of the questions you are asking are covered in the detailed interview Crowley gave, linked above. He did not want to go into a house alone with reports of two intruders who might shoot him, until he had sized up the situation. Gates came to the door and opened it, but would not come outside. After a brief exchange at the door (during which Crowley determined that Gates was an unlikely breaking and entering suspect and had already radio’d the dispatcher saying that he thought he was talking to the rightful occupant of the house), Crowley followed Gates to the kitchen where Gates produced his Harvard ID.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>He could have just walked in without permission when Gates went into the kitchen to get his ID. If he had pushed his way in, then Gates would have mentioned that. If he had asked permission and received it, then it would be in the police report so that the officer could claim justification for entering the house. The thing that makes the most sense to me is that the Officer just followed him in when he went to get his ID.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Was he still in the house, though? The woman witness never mentioned seeing him leave in the short period of time between her 911 call and when Crawley arrived from two blocks away. She told Crowley she saw two men entire the house. Crawley believed there were two men in the house. Where was the driver? Does the driver’s presence in the house explain Gates’ jumpiness, telling the policeman that it was none of his business who else was in the house?</p>