<p>There is no objective evidence supporting the officer. There is the plain statement of the witness that she did NOT say what the police report claims she said.</p>
<p>So then if she did not say the men were black at any time. How did it get into the report? Crowley either got this from some OTHER witness and misrepresented it, failing to mention the mystery witness in the process, or he just put it in the report to make it seem reasonable to give Gates a hard time.</p>
<p>There is no other witness, and we know it. Crowley just needed to have two black males in his report so that he covered arresting one black male. Had Skip Gates been white, this discussion would not even exist.</p>
<p>Of course, because in that case the arrogance and hypocrisy of the professor would not be hidden by a false outrage over imaginary racial profiling.</p>
<p>There’s a comment earlier that the driver isn’t black. If this is true, why would a witness say that there were two black people trying to break in. The initial call indicates that one might be Hispanic which sounds closer to what she saw and is claiming.</p>
<p>The alleged perp’s race had to come from somewhere, and the witness categorically states it did not come from her. You wish to dismiss the insertion of race here as just this mistake. If it were merely a mistake, then why not say “two Hispanic” men, since the Hispanic race was mentioned in the call. We all KNOW the reason. It is exactly as I have described all along.</p>
<p>The tape only has the officer talking, and there is no real sequence showing any interaction at all between himself and Gates. So this claim that it matches the officer’s account is certifiable hogwash, and every single one of you knows this. We see here a case of massive dishonesty, even in the face of the fact that the witness denies a most critical aspect of the police report, simply because dishonesty is absolutely required in order to get past the problem of race here.</p>
<p>I really cannot imagine how you reached that conclusion, given the length and complexity of this discussion and the abundant evidence presented.</p>
<p>Of course you can’t imagine this. There is a great deal more that you cannot imagine either. Such is the way of the world. I reached it by looking at the report and reading between the lines. I sensed the truth from Gate’s reaction, and from the bogusness of some of the report’s statements. There are at least two, possibly three more lies in the report.</p>
<p>Come now, insulting him does not compensate for the fact that the officer lied in his report. Yes the officer lied that is a fact, which greatly casts doubt on the veracity of other parts of his testimony. I heard the tape and the lady never mentioned black men, and from what I gathered did not speak with Officer Crowley.
At worst the officer was being a racist pig, at best he was abusing his power. Either way it shows Gates was not in the wrong and the officer was. This was directed toward MBA.</p>
<p>Obviously, the police report contains things that did not happen, i.e. talking to Whalen and knowing 2 men were black. It should raise questions about the truthfulness of the report as Drosselmeier has stated.</p>
<p>Notice here how even in the face of a most disturbing problem, the level of committment to the cop and against Gates is never even questioned. This is what has happened to millions of black men throughout the history of this cursed nation. It is why crime and bitterness are what they are in the black community. We know, from experience, that even in the face of the truth, America will still stand in dishonor. So, many of us, just don’t care.</p>
<p>There’s no hard evidence against Crawley at this time. So far the tape supports him more than Dr. Gates, and for all the hot emotion it’s wiser to watch evidence rather than make assumptions.</p>