Forbidden Donut

I preface this by saying this is opinion. Who knows what actually went down at the guys house. But it seems like the following:

This is just an example of piss poor police work. If you can't reign in your emotions when dealing with people, you should not be a cop. I agree with you Andrew. No crime was being committed, it was being insinuated that the old man was breaking into his own home, so it is understandable that he is upset. All done, reassure the neighbors, leave knowing everything is fine.

The charge of "disorderly conduct" is just further proof that the cop simply didn't like the guy in my opinion. Disorderly conduct is one of the blanket charges in the states used to justify an arrest for practically anything.

Also, I don't care if the guy is Obama's friend or whatever. (Another guy being accused of racism is a friend of Obama? How many are there?) Obama absolutely should not have weighed in on this publicly at all. Like us, he has little to no real information on it, and his reasoning was that the man was at his own home, and middle aged, therefore he should not be handcuffed.

Way to make yourself look like a fucking idiot to every cop in America. The handcuffing is likely procedural before putting the man in a car, and him being on his own property has nothing to do with him breaking the law.

So in this case, both the cop's actions AND Obama's response completely piss me off.

imo this is just an incident of one or both men being dicks. these things happen AUL the time. it shouldn't even be news but of course Obama fucks it up

High Five for Brian.

I have but two things to add, and that's my overall assessment of the police situation in the US being confirmed further, followed by an additional aside.

1. Cop wrongfully detains a dude (proof of this is in the speed of his release. 2 hours? bullshit charge.)
2. Dude pisses and moans with the President behind him. President is retarded. But ...probably... correct. Insofar as this arrest was really dumb. Which is mostly what he said.
3. Cop REFUSES to apologize. As though it could possibly come back to bite him in the ass with the union at his back.
4. Entire committee of police get behind him and say that OBAMA should apologize for making waves.

The police shouldn't get in a pissing match with the President over something this trivial... Just say you're sorry for the mistake, and get on with your lives.

Additionally, it's pretty shitty to ask a guy to come outside to yell at you, and then thank him for complying before arresting him for falling for you trick. It means they were GOING to arrest him. Or at least try a slew of this kind of stuff on him to see what they could get.

"Do you want to hold my gun?"
"OH SHIT YES! AWESOME."
"GET HIM! HE'S GOT MY GUN!"

here is the police report

Report

We arrest people and release them in two hours, for all kinds of crimes.

I think i would have acted the same way as the responding officer. Not say I would have for sure arrest the guy but the police officer was not wrong in any action here.

i honestly think if obama talking about it legitimately upsets you then that's hilarious

he didn't get beat with a nightstick, tazed, or have a broom stick shoved up his ass so what is the problem?

I'm sorry to say that just because it is in the report does not make the police report completely accurate. I have dealt with many police officers (as well as security and loss prevention personnel) who are very adept at writing their reports to place them in the right 100% of the time. It is not hard. I have never faked a report, nor have I ever needed to, nor will I ever need to. But I will say this. If for some reason I was stupid enough to fuck up and then additionally stupid enough to try to cover said fuck up, it would be a simple thing to make the report look peachy-keen to any eyes that were not on scene.

It has been my experience that no one will write themselves into a lecture or possible demotion or suspension. No officer asked to write a supplemental will write themselves or their fellow officer into that position either. Personally I'd like to see some witness statements as supplementals to the police report. Notice how there were 7 bystandards, yet not one of them appears in a supplemental to justify the actions of the officer. Not even the initial complainant. Fishy to me!

Also, Obama talking about it in such a manner upsets me because the man should be, and IS, smarter then that. He's the fucking president. Showing personal bias against police procedures and an arrest he has little to no information for, is... pointless. There is nothing to be gained by it.

The initial complainant is mentioned by name in the police report, and likely has a 911 call associated with it, or otherwise a dispatch call that was probably logged/recorded in a manner outside the immediate scope of that report.

There were 7 bystanders, there were multiple officers from Cambridge AND Harvard University present at the point in time that the "disorderly conduct" arrest occurred. While the Cambridge PD would have cause for the wall of blue silience on the matter, I'm not so sure Harvard's people would be so compelled(if anything, I'd think they'd be under pressure from the top to back the Prof). If the disorderly conduct portion of that report is in error, I think we'll be hearing about it sooner rather than later.

As to the officers filing the report without civilian testimony to back it up, generally speaking, they only take statements from civilians when no law-enforcement personnel were present to witness it themselves first hand. they may document who else was present for follow up purposes, but the officers testimony is the primary source they're going to look to first.



Would it help to know that he is friends with the Harvard Professor in question?

So it's his friend's word against the cops.

---------------------

Likewise with the disorderly conduct charge, keep in mind that sometimes it isn't used to punish people persay, but it is rather used to prevent them from doing harm to themselves or others.

It just gives the Officer a legal tool by which to momentarily take away their freedom to make choices on their own until they've cooled off/sobered up/whatever else. Basically cuff them, forcibly remove them from the situation, let them stew in it for a little while, drop the charge and let them go on their merry way.

this is the problem with america's police force, when even the "good cops" won't tell on the "bad cops"

Fuck DA Police.

The only appropriate response to a group of people whose sole job is protecting the interests of the rich.

FUCK EM

God I hate you.

And lawl Daemon, your post shows many of the differences between the American and Canadian justice systems that would make me un-easy to be a civilian dealing with a cop in the states.



Its incredibly unfortunate that if the good cops tell on the bad cops, they essentially commit career suicide.

Clearly they failed in this case.

http://boston.bizjournals.com/boston/stori.../24/daily3.html

In 2006, the average salary for "full professors" (Which I'm sure this guys is) at Harvard was $168,700 / year. Which I'm doubtful on that number including any expense account benefits they have access to for conducting research or going to/attending speaking engagements or conventions/seminars in their particular field of study. And then of course there are streams of income to consider for particular well known academics, such as getting paid to be a speaker at a conference/seminar, residuals from books/articles they have published and so on. I'm sure you'd find Professor Gates is probably clearing considerably better than $200K/year once all things get considered. This is no poor oppressed black man we're talking about.

Likewise, Professor Gates evidently falls under the "powerful" category as well, since media reports indicate he is good friends with the current Governor of Massachusetts as well as the President of the United States and who knows how many other high powered politicians.

How did the police fail to protect the highest levels of power's interests? Black man wrongly jailed? Check. Police authority reinforced by media coverage of event? Check. Black president siding with the Black professor, causing division within the population over who is "right"? Check.

Guys, it worked out just like it's suppose to when something like this happens within our system. Sides are taken and any debate to be had about the real issues, like what the fuck is a police officer doing arresting someone on their own property after resolving the call he received, gets pushed to the side and instead it becomes about race and what the black man did to be arrested. I say fuck that, no one should be arrested for expressing themselves to another person, even a cop.

I have nothing against any individual police officer, but hate the institution they use to wield power because it is set up to allow officers individual judiciary power.

All I'm trying to say is these institutions, like law enforcement, erode our freedom to be individuals and indoctrinate people into roles to perpetuate a system erected to keep the rich and poor at the proportions most adventitious to the rich.

Edit: Forgot this part- FUCK THE POLICE

Maybe I've been biased by overplay of the race card where blacks are concerned. I've personally seen that card so overplayed that I'm very inclined to side with the Police Officer in this case.

The Hispanic and Black Police officers that arrived on scene shortly after Officer Crowley did were there and able to overhear much of the exchange in the Professor's house and all of what happened outside where the Disorderly conduct charge occurred. They backed Officer Crowley's call on that, but then we have the "blue wall of silence" counter-claim on that one.

This was a no-win for Cops from the moment Officer Crowley(who is White) was the first responder, because he was a white man responding to an incident involving a black man with a racial prejudice bone to pick.

It probably would have been a non-news item if the Hispanic and/or Black Officer had been the first responder as I doubt the Professor would have played the race card against either one of them.

Racism can very much be a two way thing. Maybe you've never encountered it(because you are in one of those overwhelmingly white areas), maybe you've simply never noticed it, or when you saw it, you didn't know what you actually saw because you weren't there to see it from start to finish.

Much like there are a lot of (white) people who feel they are entitled to special dispensations where customer service is concerned and get belligerent when they don't get it, there are plenty of black people who are just as bad, only when they don't get what they (unreasonably) expect they immediately accuse the offending party of being racist and turn it into a race issue.

Chicken Little and the sky is falling come to mind. While in stationed Southern California I saw more than enough of the "You aren't doing _____ because I'm black!" Happen when I knew full well I wouldn't have been able to get the person they were accosting to do that for me either, and I'm white.

Like this?

Canada Criminal Code, Part 5 section 175

How are you siding with the police officer? What side does he represent?

He used an excessive amount of authority in a situation which appeared to resolve itself within minutes of him being on the scene. But no, THIS UNRULY NEGRO, he had the audacity to yell at these police officers so they, in-turn, escalated the situation that needed no further intervention from the police. The black guy in his home bitching about "fucking whitie pigs keepin the black man down" to a cop should never be arrested, no matter the vocab used.

I use the term "unruly negro" only because that is how the police report portrays his actions. The officer seems completely bewildered about a situation where a black man in an affluent area, within his home, might take offense to a white officer acting authoritative while investigating the black man as the possible suspect. No, truly us whites will never understand the black race, they couldn't possibly be people, with all the conditions being a person entails.

Fixed.

Of course, that same fix also demonstrates why "race relations" will probably never be a true meeting of equals until well after the currently living generations of people are dead.

I get your fix but as you pointed out, I was highlighting the problem.

The officer would have understood an uppity white mom being pissy about being the possible suspect; the black guy being pissy though just doesn't fit the same reasoning.

Well the white mom would have grounds to be pissy if the reported person breaking in was male(of any race) and she's getting investigated, and considering the comparative lack of female burglars in general(they do exist, but are rarer)...

The more comparable one would be a White Male Homeowner getting investigated as the suspect when it was reported that a white male was seen trying to break into his house.

And I seem to recall one of the (white male) talking heads making a comment about his experience accidentally setting off the burglar alarm at his house prompting a police visit where he was then asked by the Police to prove his identity... And the police then asked if they could come inside to check things out to make sure everything was OK(making sure he wasn't actually in duress with an armed burglar in the house), even after he apologized for the false alarm.

If it had been this professor, I'd expect him to be screaming at the officers for having shown up as he would have already reported it as being a false alarm. Would have accused the responding officer of racial profiling when asking for proof of ID(which he actually did do in this case), and then would have accused the Officers of wanting to "check things out" so they could search it for contraband simply because he's black.

There sure are a lot of 58 year old black men that rob houses. That bold part is where this guy probably got uppity in this story. He didn't set off any alarms so he may not have been expecting to met a police officer that day.



Sure just take the police officers' word for it.

and some comedy from that city's finest:
http://gawker.com/5322447/cambridge-cops-u...y-plate-why+tee

Quite possibly so, all the same, everything seen so far, including his comments after the arrest point to him having almost immediately jumped to "racial profiling" upon that Officer arriving on scene.



Alternately, "A black man said a white guy is a racist, therefore the white guy must be racist."



Reading the comments on that one:



or another friend that happened across it:



And google finds 3 hits for that name currently, most notably:
http://www.cambridgema.gov/CPD/News/newsDe...m?story_id=1672


Such a hotbed of racisim in the Cambridge PD.

i have black friends i can't be racist

I guess I don't understand how you can be disturbing the peace when you are in your own home.

He was standing outside of his front door at the point he was arrested for disorderly conduct. So presumably, he was on his porch rather than inside the house. It is splitting hairs, but it is what it is.

"I have black friends who gave me a derogatory nickname that has stuck with me."

Is the one I think you're looking for in this case.

And for someone serving in that kind of capacity(counseling), a nick name like that could actually serve as reasonably effective ice breaker with the people you're working with as you can "tell the story" about why that's your (nick)name. Helps provide credibility for you when dealing with those kids, as its a "Yes, I've been there and lived through it myself" kind of thing.

Confused and bewildered by your posts.

Better not compare a white woman to a black man when discussing breaking into houses in rich neighborhoods. If I was a white chick I know now where to make the loot. No one would suspect a thing, least of all deamon.

If you're a woman (of any race) audacious enough to break into a house with infant/child in tow, more power to you.

The odds of that one occurring(and be an illegal break-in) are rather small. The low likelihood of it occurring is why it makes a poor comparison, it is not likely you will ever hear of such a thing happening(and if it does happen, you undoubtedly WILL hear about it).

Now white female w/out child is another matter, but that isn't what he specified.

Low odds is also why the like-like comparison was largely restricted to men in my usage.

Chances of a white male living in a residence and being present when someone reports a white male attempting to break into said residence? Reasonably good.

Same story for black male living in a residence and being present when someone reports a black male attempting to break into said residence(as happened with the Professor).

Chances of a white female living in a residence and being present when someone reports a white female attempting to break into her residence? Not so good, unless the white female "burglar" is the resident in question.

Comparable story for black females and burglars.

There are enough male burglars out there that chances of "like race meeting like race" in such a scenario is likely. Female burglars are rare enough that chances of them having a "like race meeting like race" event is unlikely.

IE it is far more likely the police would get a report of a white or black male burglar attempting to break into a house and arrive on scene to find a woman present in the house. She's not going to "meet the profile" that the reporting party gave them, not making her a likely suspect. They may ask for her ID regardless, but she's going to be low on the suspect list.

You clearly understand what I'm saying which is why I don't understand how you don't get that the officer's actions aren't acceptable:


The fuck kind of country am I living in where people think the police should have this power?

Edit: To be clear, it's not about race, though race is a major factor in police abusing their given authority. The main issue in this story should be this man's opinion being silenced. I believe race was the catalyst in this situation highlighting the power differentials in play, though this catalyst seems, at least at this point, introduced by the professor.

Those statutes have existed in various forms for well over 100 years in most states, some predating the United States itself. (The US has no federal Civil Disturbance laws, they're done at the state level in the US). That being said, in the United States they've been struck down, altered, or otherwise had charges/convictions struck down on first Amendment Grounds. A large number of them were also altered in the 1960's and 1970's because of Civil Liberty concerns & abuses (such as some of the Jim Crowe laws) as well.

Civil Disturbance charges are the most frequent ones made from what I've seen, they're also the most frequently dropped before going to court. (which would be in line with some of its intended use -- keeping people from getting into deeper trouble rather than punishing them)

Of course, due to its very broad and subjective nature, it also is the most abused(which accounts for a number of those charges also being dropped).

But keep in mind, it is (what are now) the Civil Disturbance laws that allowed the police to lock up "Billy the town drunk" over night before he could start those bar room brawls. In order for him to get locked up in there(arrested), he has to be charged with something first, and that would be the tool they've used historically to do that. That also is a major factor why "drunk in public" is present in practically every civil disturbance law you can find. Everything else can vary wildly, Canada's Civil disturbance law is considerably more broad than the American versions for the most part(as it has to conform to the 1st Amendment among others).

i was referring to the fact that you were giving examples of friends of the officer saying he wasn't racist (some of the reasoning including his proximity to the african american community)

which is really, really funny because it's pretty similar to the argument that someone can't be racist if they have friends that are <insert race here>




i have no what the hell you're talking about at this point

tl;dr race is a social construction

I think the license plate is funny and I see nothing wrong with it. I also think it has nothing at all to do with the incident in question.

Wow, I've been busy with work the past couple of days and haven't had a chance to read the forums... and yet with so many words in this thread, very little of note has been said.

I don't know why you pointed out that charge to me daemon. I wasn't saying blanket charges don't exist here. I was referring to your "catch and release" philosophy on policing.

I really think you need to realize that the legal ability to arrest someone does not mean you SHOULD arrest someone. This case is simply a perfect example.

As for the whole racism thing, I still highly doubt racism had anything to do with his motivation for arrest.

As for zoidberg... lawl.

2 things.

1. This arrest was a DC/CoC arrest. Disorderly Conduct as Contempt of Cop. The only racist element was the neighbors calling it in as "two black men". Without that factor, this might be profiling, but the Prof. didn't know that. So if I were him, I might think "profiling" too.

2. I'm consistently impressed by how easy it is to rile up police on the internet. I often wonder if this translates to their interactions with individuals in real life.

/"wonder"

Mass. Disorderly Conduct Law


You'll immediately notice how it's actually farther reaching than the Canadian law you cited.

Don't cuss outside, you can get arrested, and all the pursuant bullshit that comes with it.

*FUCK! ASS!*

"You lawlin' me boyh?"[attachment=37:emot_cop.gif]

LOL, ok, that was good. /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" />

Also Andrew, as bad as this may sound, and as much as I regret having to place cops in this pile...

I think the "riled up" issue applies to anyone who usually has some way of exercising their authority over someone. On the internet, said people have no way to exert said authority during completely lawful discussions/arguments/flame wars. This causes them to have to fall back to other ways to deal with the individual, which are often sorely lacking, causing frustration/anger. Obviously this doesn't apply to all such authoritative figures, but I'd bet much on it being a large factor for many.

As they say; when your only tool is a hammer, every problem is a nail.

I don't include myself in this category (yet, and hopefully never) thankfully. I just find it impossible to argue with those who think the fundamental principals behind policing or other aspects of society are wrong, yet do not provide reasonable alternatives to the situation. Its not that I am always inclined to disagree, but until some sort of solution is at least being proposed, the whole conversation is moot.

De-couple income from seizures.
Boom, 30% of the problems would go away. The motivation to sit around in a hole in the wall side of the street at the bottom of a hill in a 35 vanishes into thin air. The motivation to seize not only a pot dealers drugs, but his car, money, pets, girlfriend, is lessened.

It would make it easier to root out crooked cops since it wouldn't negatively effect the whole station to out them.

There are alternatives, but the problem faced with addressing these alternatives is people know what they have now. Who would want to change their situation? Until a greater number of people can answer that question in the affirmative, you don't get change. However, as you will see in the up coming years this issue will be raised more frequently due to increases in the people that aren't helped by society. You see this happen in every economic depression. As unemployment continues to rise, citizens will turn toward communities for support when state and federal support fails. These communities build capital independent of the system employed by the state. When capital in these communities reaches an imposing enough amount to threaten the current system to distribute capital, those empowered by the current system must take action to subdue those in these communities (think crack rock in the 80's). The solution to this is educating people before a natural progression of events take place.

Let me add to my previous proposition that I'd like it to be much more difficult for police to initiate contact.
Any questions not pertaining to the crime at hand? Everything is thrown out. Don't like it? Do your job right.
Want to come into my house? Get a warrant before you even ask, and warrants require some civilian report. You can't generate them internally.

Keep going with that theme across the board and you can eliminate any opportunity for corruption. Reduces the number of cops who become cops to exercise their authority, and increases the number of cops who become cops to serve and protect.

If you're having fun being a cop, you're probably doing something immoral.

"one looking kinda hispanic" was the one thing of race mentioned by the caller

911 call

Saw that on the news yesterday. Curious then that the responding officers' report states that the 911 call specified black. Could be construed as a falsified report.

Probably would need the actual dispatch tapes for that one, it's possible the dispatcher changed it.

It's also possible she decided they were black between the time she got off the phone and talked to the officer so he was told(by her) they were black when he got there.

The "other tape" that may exist, which I'd be interested in is the one of the Professor evidently calling the Cambridge Police department. Depending on the number he dialed, it may very well have been recorded too.

or it could just be he didn't remember everything perfect and it didn't change the outcome of anything

Then it's awfully curious of you to bring it up, isn't it?

i really only do it to correct you when you think you are right. thats all.

well thank you for wasting everyone's time

You fight that good fight, champ.

I really shouldn't go back and read these things. But that is HILARIOUS. Yes... the poor downtrodden White Male Police Officer. Truly the only one in this situation who was WRONGED by the powerful black man with all the authority...

There's absolutely no reason to believe a police officer in Mass. might be a racist.
For these afflicted with a short attention span:~Officer Justin Barrett, 36, Boston PD, District B-3

Of note:
It's definitely those uppity black folks who are racists. I mean, it's just ludicrous to think that one of US, a powerful white male, might just have some predetermined racial bias. This is the most egregious form of racism seen in this country today. Black people, overplaying the race card, crying wolf, playing chicken "the-sky-is-falling" little games with the mainstream MSM media!

/mockery is a *great* way for me to start the second half of my afternoon.

I'm really going to need you to start using sarcasm tags... I'm having a hard time telling whether your post was all sarcastic or if only part of it was sarcastic.

//The internet, tough on sarcasm since 1969

I bolded the clues.

At least I'm not making these things into word searches...


/The guy is legendary.