<p>
</p>
<p>Which is about the only time we hear about it. </p>
<p>
Or when they kill somebody.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not always even then.</p>
<p>There is no reason we would hear about cops asking for ID from a couple reportedly having sex in an open car and then let go whatever their race. And, the boyfriend who is white was asked for his ID first. No-one but him brought up prostitution, btw. He also repeatedly brings up the fact that he is a celebrity chef.</p>
<p>Are there really people who think that police don’t disproportionately hassle black people? I can understand wanting to know the details of each incident–I’m like that myself–but can it really be that the whole idea that police do this is all a big misunderstanding? I find it difficult to accept.</p>
<p>Aren’t those two different questions? Most of this incident is on tape. And, it doesn’t help her at all. The headline helps her., though.</p>
<p>Neighbor could go the megaphone route instead.
“Get a room!”</p>
<p>Yes, Hunt, there really are. They’ll say, “Well, I know this ONE guy…” or “There was this ONE time I…” I am a white person married into a black family. I can’t think of any but the 90-year-old family friend who HASN’T shared at least one encounter with some branch of law enforcement in which they were profiled, questioned for no reason, stopped, etc. It happens to friends who are fairly high-profile as well. It doesn’t seem to matter-they all have a “—while black” story.</p>
<p>Ok, so I listened to the audio of the event, and what I hear is the police officer repeatedly lying, and the actress insisting on her rights. The police officer says he has a right to see her ID. He doesn’t. The police officer says there is “probable cause”, presumably “probable cause” that she was committing a crime. There is no probable cause. The police officer is trying to intimidate her by lying about the law. Good for her for resisting. </p>
<p>That officer is a snotty, overbearing jerk. Instead of just discovering that there is no crime, and leaving, like he ought to, he keeps insisting on her ID. He knows there is no crime here. He has no reason to demand her ID, and no legal justification to see it. He is just exercising his authority because he thinks he can. I hope he gets slammed, as he should.</p>
<p>To give more perspective, the so-called witness who reported a man carrying a rifle, maybe an AR-15, in Walmart later recanted … because he wasn’t a “witness” but a guy who called the police. The difference is a phone call requires nothing but actually making a statement and putting your name to it requires responsibility for what you say. That guy got a man killed … except the police acted like morons, like well-armed morons, who didn’t use common sense to determine whether a human being was actually a threat with a real weapon before killing him. So when The Daily Mail or other online rag refers to “witnesses” saying x and y were having sex, ask yourself if they’d say that on the record. Ask if they’d sign a statement to the police saying this. You’d find they’d say, “well, I thought I saw something and maybe it kind of looked like they were having sex but I’m not really sure and I really wish you wouldn’t write that down because I’m not sure what I saw”. That’s why a phone caller is not a “witness” and why that isn’t probable cause. </p>
<p>Let’s say someone calls the police and says he heard you beating a child in your house. Police come to door. You answer. They say they have a report and would like to come in to see if everything’s all right. You ask them to explain. They tell you someone says they heard x. You tell them everything’s fine and if they want to come in they’ll need to get a warrant. So the police grab you, handcuff you in front of your kids and take you and drag you away because you resisted … because someone called them as a prank or because they heard a video playing or they were mad at you for letting your dog crap in their yard or they simply made a mistake about which house they heard. If you aren’t a minority, this would be a lawsuit because you need a bleeping warrant. It’s the Fourth Amendment. The proper police response is to be polite, to notice if anything looks or sounds amiss and then to say “thank you for your time” and leave. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve read about stuff like this happening. Someone has a grudge and makes a fake 911 call about a shot being heard in the person’s home. They call it “SWAT-ting” I think. Could get innocent people killed.</p>
<p>That reminds me, and soooo OT, I’m sorry, but talking about “pranks” I read about this weirdo yesterday (couldn’t find the original story in some LA paper but I googled Kathy Rowe and this came up)
<a href=“Kathy Rowe pleads not guilty to charges she solicited forcible rape and sodomy | Daily Mail Online”>Kathy Rowe pleads not guilty to charges she solicited forcible rape and sodomy | Daily Mail Online;
<p><a href=“'Django Unchained' Actress -- Cops: After Car Sex She Pulls Race, Fame Card (POLICE AUDIO)”>'Django Unchained' Actress -- Cops: After Car Sex She Pulls Race, Fame Card (POLICE AUDIO);
<p>Hmmm. I see a woman going nuts and cussing out the cops and police being respectful, while slightly exasperated. Interesting.</p>
<p>But Flossy, you consistently see all these incidents in the same way. That’s interesting, too.</p>
<p>No, not all of them. There are certainly real incidents of racism. These two, I’m not seeing it. That’s true…</p>
<p>The way people see things IS interesting.
I think it’s interesting that Hunt sees racism in this thread, but not in the thread about Race in College Admissions thread.</p>
<p>scholarme, if you look at my l-o-o-o-n-g history of posting on various Race in College Admissions threads, you would find that my views on that are, as always, nuanced. This often creates problems.</p>
<p>Irrelevant, scholarme. The issue here is, was the actress treated differently because of her race and her boyfriend’s race? </p>
<p>But that is not the issue in the case of affirmative action. Everyone agrees that in cases of preferential admissions to colleges based on race, the college is treating people differently depending on their race. That’s the whole point. We might disagree about whether affirmative action is justified, but we don’t disagree that if a college says it is using affirmative action in its admissions decisions, otherwise identical students are treated differently based on race.</p>
<p>Is this really a racial incident? The police responded because of a call. They did not independently target the woman because of her race. If Lergnom is correct (which is likely) that the police should not have asked for ID, the error was made on both people. </p>
<p>What is interesting is the difference in the response to the police. The white person gave the id as requested and complied with the (inappropriate) instruction of the police. The African American refused and then cried, etc. Is this evidence that white people usually comply with police instructions, but African American tell the police to take a hike? </p>
<p>They targeted the woman because of her race if they asked her for ID, when a white woman would have been free to go. That’s her allegation, and it sounds probable to me. They thought she was a hooker because she was black; a similarly dressed blonde woman would have been regarded as the girlfriend of the guy.</p>
<p>Well, that’s not what happened. They asked both people for ID after a report of car sex on the street with an open door. One showed ID and one went into a tizzy and was detained until identified. Suspected prostitution never came up, incidentally.</p>