<p>So, just to be clear, you think the police officer would have behaved the same way if this had been a white couple? That certainly seems to be what you are suggesting.</p>
<p>I think there’s a big difference with getting photographed with your skirt blown upwards versus having sex in public.</p>
<p>Yup. And, I think if she had shown her ID they would have gone off to get coffee and had a good laugh about the sleazeballs in the Silver Mercedes. Another day in LA.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Some of the police department senior managers said this. I remember listening to one police officer say he was told to avoid interfering with the crowd because it was an ethic parade/festival and they did want the police to appear to be intimidating a minority for things such as excessive drinking and post smoking. The excessive and open drinking was later associated with the groping of women, etc. </p>
<p>If I recall correctly, Sgt Parker told the BF something like, “we always check IDs so that the people who complain can’t say we didn’t do anything.” Although I think that was a totally lame thing to say, it certainly makes it sound like checking in this case wasn’t out of the ordinary, or because the couple was mixed-race. </p>
<p>What is your point LasMa? Not all flashers are arrested? Duh. I’ve been flashed a few times and never bothered to report it. Most of them were white guys. One was black. The last one was Hispanic. Who cares? </p>
<p>Ferguson police took a day off and stood around watching people loot stores. Shopkeepers were displeased. It sounds like people don’t understand that cops ride around all day answering calls and dealing with little dramas involving people of all races. Most of them are not newsworthy. But, they happen.</p>
<p>Flossy, I already stated my point, but I’ll try again. You said “Where do you live?” meaning that people displaying their privates only happens in sketchy neighborhoods. My point is that that’s untrue, but one’s odds of being harassed by the police are considerably lower if one is white and well connected. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oddly enough, nowhere on that tape did I hear the cop ask if they were having sex, kissing, making out or anything that might be construed as an investigation. Maybe I missed it. </p>
<p>"So, the police are not allowed to question or detain interracial couples? People act like a white couple having public sex would be ignored. Where do you live? Being detained by the cops for refusing to cooperate in an investigation is not being victimized. And, he cooperated.’</p>
<p>So, you have completely missed my point, again. “Where do you live?” means, “Where do you live that public sex would be acceptable?” But, whatever. This is an ex-con turned celebrity chef with a Mercedes and a fancy London drama school educated actress with a daddy on call and a featured role on a TV show. We are not talking underprivileged people. The cop told them he was responding to a report of lewd conduct. She denied it. He asked for ID. I think they consider running a background check investigating. No-one is going to check them for evidence of recent sex. Good grief. And, I don’t think an arrest was ever anticipated.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think you may need to refresh your memory on this one. The police’s defense (if you are speaking of NYC in 2000) was that there weren’t enough of them, not that they were giving space.</p>
<p>And the cops were, it seems, “giving space” to men who attacked women right in front of them.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/14/nyregion/inquiry-focuses-on-officers-responses-to-violence-in-park-after-parade.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm”>http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/14/nyregion/inquiry-focuses-on-officers-responses-to-violence-in-park-after-parade.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm</a></p>
<p>If you meant Philly, well punching a woman in the face isn’t giving space, really. <a href=“City Settles Lawsuit With Woman Hit By Cop During Puerto Rican Day Parade - CBS Philadelphia”>http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/05/12/city-settles-lawsuit-with-woman-hit-by-cop-during-puerto-rican-day-parade/</a></p>
<p>
Wasn’t it already determined that he was checking things out and had no intention of doing anything because there was nothing to be done at that point? The officer was checking things out, saw no problem and asked for ID to show he was responding. Admirable? Not really. But not racist. she wasn’t singled out for her color, she had been pointed out as the individual human being doing something that bothered other people. If there had been two couples in the vicinity and the officer selected the black woman, I would be right with you on racism. But she certainly appeared to be the only one fitting the call. So this is what being treated like the individual you are looks like. You get to take the consequences of your own actions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Although I don’t particularly care for this police officer’s style, he certainly did get LOTS of information out of the BF that the BF was under no obligation to give. His age, where he lives, what he does for a living, whether he is on parole or probation, where he was headed that afternoon and at what time, what Watts does for a living, and more than I can’t remember. I’d say he did a pretty good job of sizing up the situation and learning a lot about at least one of the alleged perpetrators.</p>
<p>“one’s odds of being harassed by the police are considerably lower if one is white and well connected.”</p>
<p>This is probably true but irrelevant. One’s odds of being mistaken for a hooker are considerably lower if one does not engage in sex acts in cars. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know. I’d think an investigation might involve asking them (not just her…both of them) if they were the ones doing whatever someone called 911 about. Maybe even saying “don’t do it again” or something. But all I hear is a demand for ID.</p>
<p>He explained that he was responding to a citizens complaint of public lewdness. She said nobody was being lewd and the occupants of the building were probably racists. “Don’t do it again?” Police don’t say that to criminals. That would be weird. And pointless.</p>
<p>I think Ms. Watts made it pretty clear to him that all she was doing was “showing affection.” He wasn’t going to get anything else out of her.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It was the NYC parade I was referring to. I don’t think the link established that any cops were ignoring women being assaulted (there were just allegations), but it is clear if there had been any they would have been disciplined by the police department. My comment was based on a TV interview with a police officer who said they had been told to stay back from the crowd because it was an ethnic crowd. I am sure the police would not admit that but I can understand them doing so rather than risking being accused of racism by picking on minorities. If the NYC police had attempted to stop the excessive drinking and drug use, I suspect the next day’s newspapers would have criticized the police for being racists and there would be claims if it was a white parade none of this would have happened. </p>
<p>BTW, how 4000 cops can be an inadequate number is beyond me, but I guess if the crowd is large enough …</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What I still don’t understand is why the cop didn’t use the 20 minutes or whatever when he was chillin’ with the guy to ask HIM what they were doing. Nor, as I mentioned earlier, did he seem to be interested at all in using the opportunity to gently remind him (in a bro-to-bro) way, of course, how uncool public sex is. Why would that be??</p>
<p>Everybody knows that. He’s talking to a 42-year old ex-convict who just got off probation. I don’t think he needs reminding that that criminal acts are uncool. In fact, he’s probably quietly freaking out and annoyed with DW. </p>