Gates in Cuffs: Scenes from 'Post-Racial' America
Two guys I don't recognize trying to force the front door of the neighbor's house? You bet I'd be suspicious.
Would I call the cops? If I were a good neighbor myself, a conscientious neighbor, I probably would. At least I'd like to think I would. After all, somebody's breaking into that house -- I can't just sit there and do nothing, can I?
And I'd like to think I'd make the call no matter how dark or light the intruders' skin tone happens to be. But I don't know that. I can't be sure that's how I'd react.
Especially when I don't happen to know that one of the two dark-skinned guys trying to force the front door of my neighbor's house is: my neighbor!
"Everybody should know his neighbors" -- that's nice, as a theory. As a goal. In the real world, everybody doesn't know his neighbors. I've lived in the same house, on the same block, for nearly two decades; I can recognize exactly three of my neighbors. One of them died last winter. I didn't find out about it until this spring.
So much for knowing.
So the call to the Cambridge cops? No problem.
* * *
Call comes in to the Cambridge cops -- break-in in progress? You bet I'd send out a squad. Maybe two, just to be on the safe side.
You can't have people forcing their way into other people's houses, can you?
And I'd like to think that the dispatcher makes exactly the same decision regardless of what he or she might have been told about the intruders' skin color. Your job is to protect the community; the last thing you're thinking -- at this point, anyway -- is that one of these guys trying to force the front door actually lives in the house.
So the cops going out to investigate? No problem.
* * *
Just back from an out-of-town trip -- an out-of-country trip, in fact -- and I'm tired from all the traveling and happy to be home but my front door doesn't work and I try to force it and it still doesn't work, so I go around to the back door and finally get into the house and now there are cops at the front door and they want to know who I am and what I'm doing there. Am I ticked off? You bet I'm ticked off.
And I'd like to think that in the middle of my being ticked off, I might stop for just a moment and consider the possibility that the Cambridge cops are merely doing their job, and that the sight of two unknown men -- two unknown men of any color -- trying to force a front door might have seemed worth investigating.
Even as I'd like to think that in the middle of doing their jobs, the Cambridge cops might have stopped for just a moment to consider the possibility that this guy is exactly who he says he is, exactly who his I.D. cards say he is, and that he's entitled to be exactly where he is --
-- and what's more, that this might not be the first time in the guy's life that he's had to explain who he is and why he is where he is, simply because of the color of his skin --
-- and that maybe you cut him some slack.
You apologize for the misunderstanding. You give the guy your name and your badge number, even if the guy isn't asking politely anymore. Then you apologize again, and then you leave. End of story.
You don't put him in cuffs and arrest him for disorderly conduct.
Big problem.
* * *
And you know it in your gut, don't you? You just know that, if all the players -- the neighbors, the "intruders," the cops -- had been white, or if they'd all been black, the whole story would have played out differently.
Instead of "stupidly."
Rick Horowitz is a syndicated columnist. You can write to him at rickhoro@execpc.com.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Right. Cooler heads on either side would have headed this off and defused it.
But, it's not an equal thing. Not a thing where both sides did something wrong.
Because one guy is being paid to handle situations like this. He has been trained on how to do it. Taxpayer dollars are paying for him to handle it well. So, taxpayers should have a say in how he deals with it.
The other guy was not on the job. Taxpayers weren't paying him to handle it well. He hadn't been trained on how to handle this type of situation correctly. And the rest of us don't have much say in whether or not he handled it well because we're not paying him to handle it well.
Also, one guy had a gun and the other one didn't. One had the power to arrest and the other one didn't. There is a big power imbalance here.
And with power comes the ability to misuse that power. But there should be a check on that power to keep it under control. That's what people are asking for- some check on unbridled police power. Someone to make sure they aren't abusing that power. Some accountability.
Disorderly conduct may have a broad definition in a public place, but what is "disorderly conduct" for an American, in his home, being asked to prove that he is not a criminal when no crime has been committed or even complained of?
Under these circumstances I don't think arguing with the officers, even getting nasty, is disorderly. He should not have been arrested.
cassdawn:.
Wanna bet?
In '76, in a public park, I refused to show identification to county deputies on their demand. "I'm not showing you anything", was my reply. As a matter of fact, I spoke with one of them as though he were a worm. He got real polite when he recognized me, even called me "Mr. @@@@@". He went on to say "They are allowing people to hang glide in Hines Park now", as if some "they" has power to legalize our actions.
I never did produce identification for this guy, who arrested me a few weeks prior for "possession of a hang glider". That lawsuit against the county for false arrest may have reminded him that some citizens are willing to regulate their militia, and pressing the I.D. issue with me was inherently the detainment of one such citizen.
Bumpy
Once again: I did not say he should have been arrested. He should not have been arrested. Frankly, if he was really that out of hand - if I were the cop I would have waited for him to put his hands on me. My point was that he was arrested because he engaged a cop in a power struggle and not because of his race.
I'm sure your anectdote seems clear to you but it seems a bit muddled to me. From what I'm getting out of it though - he arrested you once for having a hang glider and you filed a lawsuit so the next time he didn't arrest you? That really goes more toward proving my point than not. The first time he arrested you it was for nearly nothing and while you took steps to insure it didn't happen again it still happened the first time. You didn't mention - did you mouth off the first time?
Thanks Cassdawn, for replying, sorry for my lack of clarity. I agree with "you don't talk back to the cops" as a rule, and was trying to point out the exception that applies when the only lawbreaker present is a cop. Some facts in order:
Called patrol office and checked for park rules against hang gliding. None.
On day of "arrest", I was approached by officers, one of whom asked "Is this your kite?", Me:"Yes".
He:"You're under arrest." Me:"What for?"
He:"Disorderly conduct." Me:"How am I being disorderly?"
He:"Sky kites in the park are disorderly
Off to jail. Bail was twice the fine. Returned and asked to see the park rules. "We don't have copies for the public." is what I got.
Lawyer talked to county. County drops charges, returns bail. Suit dropped.
Later in another park, a few of us were tossing a Frisby when up pulls a cruiser. We all knew the routine: you queue up, IDs in hand; cops check IDs; cops leave. We've done it before.
Not this time. After "I'm not showing you anything", had he pressed the issue, my next question "What is the legal cause for this detainment?" would have cornered him. He didn't go there. Notably, they were done with IDs mid-queue.
When a cop's actions are unlawful, the authority of the uniform and badge vanishes. I wish that could be said for the gun and cuffs.
Bumpy
Well, if it's any consolation, how to handle the wrong policeman is a skill that is needed internationally.
What I love is Gates' description of his own manner as "firm" in that radio interview. Another phrase that stuck in my mind from an African American acquaintance about a policeman was "then he was getting real professional, know what I mean?" Basically we all know that when one guy is getting "firm" and the other is being "professional", the scene is like something out of a schoolyard. If one of the parties didn't have lethal force on his side, it'd be funny. But he does, and so it isn't.
The way the officer seems to have tricked Gates into taking one step outside the threshold and then slapping the cuffs on him is just childish, and I don't care what Gates was saying (or not) about him (or his female relatives).
As a former police officer and coming from a family of police officers, let me tell you what happened.
Have you ever been talked down to or berated? I have. You can't really do anything about it. You want to punch the dude in the face, but you can't so we just live with it, and we learn tolerance.
Now what if you had some vague laws on your side like "Disturbing the peace" and "Disorderly conduct," that allowed you to punish that person that was giving you crap, would you take advantage of that?
Here is the thing, cops do this crap all the time. They don't have to deal with the same ego challenges that we do on a normal basis, because if you don't call them "sir" on their bad day, you could get arrested.
This guy should have never been arrested, because he did not break the law. Cops will arrest you, because they don't like your attitude, and that is a screwed up situation. With their empowerment they feel privileged, so they don't have to cope with people as people, the good and the bad attitudes. Even though the rest of us do on a daily basis.
I don't know if this was racially motivated. I do know the cop probably would have slapped cuffs on me, a white person, because I gave him lip, and he would have been wrong again. That doesn't mean the guy wasn't a racist he could be that to.
That sounds like the real world.
And it exists in some form everywhere. Rile the cop, you will pay in some form. Here in Austria, you will pay an on-the-spot fine. There's always something he can do you for. But I have the impression that wrongful arrests and wrongful use of handcuffs are somewhat less common here than in the US. I don't think that that has anything to do with the education level of the cops (almost certainly worse here on average), Austria haveing a generally less authoritarian tradition (laughable idea) or the disciplinary and legal consequences being stricter here (I'm sure US police forces shell out a good few dollars in compensation for this kind of crap) or indeed Austrians being nicer people than Americans (no way).
What I'd speculate is simply the higher levels of violence in US cities. Cops must be more on edge, feel more threatened faster and more easily get into a situation where they are not just teaching the client who's the boss, in a controlled way, but where their anger and fear is real and they are therefore going through a genuinely aggressive response - even if this still follows some rules like get the guy out of his house before hitting him.
If that's the case, no amount of extra training or screening will solve the problem. Only a less socially tense society with less guns would do the trick.
Very clear story presentation and the author is absolutely right. The cop abused his power and he did anything BUT de-escalate the situation. Two guys got mad about the way they were being spoken to, but one of them drug the other off to jail after having gone into the guy's house without a warrant and without permission. That would creep anybody out. It's threatening. It's intimidating. It escalated things. And Crowley escalated things further by not clearly and immediately giving his name and badge number. The Cambridge police department should give up on the blue wall stuff. The President of the United States is loved and admired by a lot more of the country than they are and if it comes down to who do you trust, Gates and Obama win.
Your right, the whole issue is the arrest.
And here's where the profiling comes into play.
Police report says cop had "some"reason to believe Gates was in his own house after being shown two form of ID. The fact that he continued to question him means he still had some doubt. Why did he have this doubt, Gates surely didn't look like a burglar with his slacks, polo shirt and cane.
The doubt was because he was Black and the cop could not rationalize his being a homeowner in that neighborhood.
That's what sent Gates over the top.
From there the officer is all wrong, it is not against the law to yell at a cop.
No way the officer felt threatened.
The only reason to arrest him was that he made the cop mad. This is not against the law.
What is so cool about everyone who thinks like the blogger here is that they don't know what they are talking about. First, the ID didn't even have Henry Louis Gates Jr.'s address on it. Second, pretend you are the officer. The guy comes out after you when you are leaving, after having shouted at you loudly for a while you were trying to sort out things and completely following proper procedure, he continues to shout at you. A crowd starts to gather. Maybe things will get out of hand.
Rick Horowitz has no idea of what he is talking about. White people get busted for the same sort of thing. When was the last time you said to a cop something like "Your mama!"--and meant it? Go do it white guy! Go harass a cop white guy and do it over the top. And tell us how it turns out.
And to inform yourself: look up the 22 minute audio interview that appears on WEEI radio website where the cop tells his side of the story. Unless you are happy in your ignorance.
There's a lot I agree with here - particularly the idea that a white person yelling at a cop is going to find him / her self in cuffs as well.
And while it is definitely worthwhile to listen to the cops POV (just finished watching an interview with him on television) - you seem to be suggesting that the cop's version is to be automatically presumed true. Why?
Oh, and where did you get the information that the ID didn't have his address on it - I haven't seen that anywhere.
First, he showed a drivers license too. Second, it was Harvard Faculty Housing and it was a Harvard Faculty ID. Third, the cop asked him to come out three times by his own report. A little education. Cops ask you to step out side because they can't arrest you in your home without a warrant. Because the law recognizes your home as sacrosanct, as something special and privileged, something inviolate without extreme cause. So when a cops says, step out here and talk to me, don't. It means he is going to arrest you. By the way, how did he get into Dr. Gates's home. Did he knock? Did he walk in? My understand is that he walked in. Was he in uniform? Did he identify himself. Did he say I am Sargent Crowley and we have a report of a burglary in progress? Not according to his own statement. I guess finally "go harass a cop who has broken into your home?" Or perhaps, how many white guys do you know that this kind of thing happens to? I can name three black people in my life that have experienced similar encounters with the cops. Can you think of any white people who have similar run ins with the cops?
Umm... the Sergeant was in his home at this point. Clearly there was some evidence just around the house that showed that this was the Professor Gates' house and that he was not a burglar! So your assertion that the I.D. didn't have his name on it is just plain silly!!! And when the officer got the ID according to the police report you know what he did? Not only did he contact the University Police he requested their presence on the scene. Why did the University Police need to come to Professor Gates' house? And people were coming to look because they were curious!!!! is it Professor Gates' fault that he has curious neighbors?
but no crime was done here just because he raise is voice is not a crime when you are in your own home cop was wrong
I think there are solid points raised here. One should not yell or become belligerent with police. However, the human condition doesn't always allow us to remain calm and cool. I think the larger point that may be overlooked is...peopl
Hey Rick -
Great logic - except you got the story wrong - maybe you should try something called 'google'.
Or maybe the episode went like this:
Cop trying to do his job. Trying to verify that Gates was who he said he was, sort of important as it is PART OF HIS JOB. But Gate says 'no' and that he is 'being a racist' and 'this is what happens to black america' and cop tries to calm him, but gates, as you said, off a plane from China and in superior mental state is now CERTAIN that he is a victim of race and not just a cop trying to do his job continues to yell now raising his voice noticing that there are a lot of people outside the house.
Jet lag makes for very sound judgement.
And a Harvard professor would never ever ever think that he was better than a cop..
And you my friend are what we in Cambridge call an a**hat.
The problem is that Gates, is not a victim nor does he see himself as a victim in his normal life. His wife is white, his kids are half white and his own DNA is 56% white...so white men, cops, people do not upset him or scare him....So why would this Harvard Professor get so upset for no reason? Gosh, maybe there was a reason???? Gates is also about 5' 7" and must walk with a cane because one leg is shorter than the other. I think the Cop ran into an intellectual buzz saw of a man and wanted to show him who was BOSS!
Dude, the cop took the ID and called more cops. Do you understand the madness there?
My understanding is that the ID was only a Harvard U. ID and did not have the address on it. So he called the Harvard police. He had proof that Gates belonged on Harvard property but not necessarily that particular piece of property. It was at this point that Gates produced a driver's license.
Amen to all of that. Disclaimer: Old white woman here.
The sad truth is that our policemen are no longer public SERVANTS. Servants. Servants. Let the word sink in. Policemen used to be servants. They used to be polite. They used to help.
This is the problem and no one wants to look it square in the face: Police departments give hiring priority to veterans of the armed services. Our police departments are increasingly militarized by men who have been in foreign wars where they treat civilians as the enemy.
Doesn't someone, somewhere keep track of these things? Why does no one want to know if this cop is a former M.P.???!!! Why don't we know how many cops accused of brutality are former military???
Why. Isn't this news???
Tulka2,
That's not true. I've been a police officer for the last six years. Most police officers are not former military police officers. Furthermore, police departments are requiring college degrees as a minimum requirement. Today’s police officers are more educated and better trained than the “public servants” that you wrote about in your comments.
I currently hold three college degrees, including an MBA. I choose to be a police officer and public servant. Please do some research before you post a comment.
In all fairness that isn't exactly what she said. Nor do your statements contradict what she said. She said departments give priority to veterans and that departments are being militiarized. Now, I'm not playing semantics with you but if only one former MP is hired and that one plays a prominent position on the force then yes, the entire force can be militiarized by one person. In a more realistic view of it though, I doubt it is just ex-military - look at our lexicon; we are having a WAR on drugs, a WAR on crime etc.
Also, you refute her by saying that police departments are requiring college degrees - I don't see how a college degree is mutually exclusive from being in the military.
But mostly I'm replying to you to ask where I can find the information that PDs are requiring college degrees and today's POs are more educated. I am serious - I'm not goading you; I just want to be pointed to some hard facts and/or stats. What I would be most curious about actually is what specific training is done with former military.
Police are being militarized, not by the men but by the federal government, a clear violation of Posse Comitatus Act. All of these joint military/police DUI checkpoints are illegal and designed to incrementally usher in martial law, just in case the economy collapses from all of this banker bailout theft. Yes, you work for Wall Street, as do our politicians. Sir, please research the corporate banker takeover that you are unwillingly a part of as a police stormtrooper, terrorizing the very public you have sworn to protect.
If you think I'm lying, follow the link to these documentaries showing how across the country, police departments are being trained in drills to kicked down law abiding citizens doors and seizing weapons. You sir are a pawn in the banker takeover. Wake up and stand with the people. Please view:
http://inf
I'm with you all the way up to the last paragraph.
I am not one of these whackos I see parading around saying there is no racism. Or, even worse, there is "reverse racism", reverse prejudice maybe - is anyone ever going to figure out that racism and prejudice aren't the same?? I digress.
Nonetheless, I don't see this as a racial issue. In fact, I think it may have been more of a racial issue for Professor Gates then for the officer. Here's the issue, you don't talk back to the cops, they will make you pay for that. You don't yell at them. Yes, we all have the right to ask for a badge number but you don't get to exercise that right for cripes sakes!! Are you crazy? You say "yes sir" / "no sir".
Police have been racially profiling for years and continue to do so. The whole system is unfairly biased against blacks and latinos in particular. I just don't believe this is an example of that. This is what happens when you engage an officer in a power struggle. It isn't right, it just isn't racist.
Well said.
Freedom of speech. I expect that it is going to wind up be a particularly expensive abrogation of Professor Gates freedom of speech. He was at home. You act as though we are to automatically defer to police. That is complete and absolute nonsense. The City of New York has paid a small mint over the years because the police here continue to abrogate the rights of citizens. The taxpayers of New York don't seem to mind, or maybe they don't know. I imagine that we pay more per capita for police services than just about any other city dwellers in this nation.
I didn't say it was right. This story is about whether Gates was treated differently because he was black. My point is not it's a good thing that we have to defer to the police. My point is that it is universal and not racist.
Anyone I know that has mouthed off to a cop *ever* has paid in some way for doing so. For that matter I know of one person, extraordinarily white male, who got arrested for "disturbing the peace" because he went up to a police officer to report being punched in the face. He points the guy out and while his hand is up pointing at the guy the cop takes his arm behind his back and proceeds to cuff him.
A conversation about whether the police en masse act as protectors and public servants is certainly a worthwhile discussion; it just isn't the one at hand.
Big problem indeed. Thankfully as a nation we are more equipped to deal with these problems than ever before.
When the police are called to a potential crime they are trained to go into high alert - because they don't want to be killed and they do not want to kill anyone either-protect and serve remember? Why is it profiling? Maybe from now on when the call comes in the 911 operator needs to ask "What race is the criminal?" That way dispatch can match cop to perpetrator. We never have to worry again about racial profiling. The officer took an oath to protect and serve-period. If I were a cop I might start thinking twice about answering calls to people not of the same color skin as I have because I would never want to be accused of "profiling". Sure Gates got pissed. That was not the time to get belligerant-cops rule. When they ask you to do something - do it-nicely and politely. In this day and age more criminals have guns than cops - and putting him in handcuffs till he calmed down would probably been a much better solution. I do not believe he should have been arrested-that was going too far and cops have the right to be lenient. But apologize -no- he did his job-I might have handled it a little differently but apologize - hell no. Everything in this country is racial these days-now the President is saying that too - I think those 20 years of Jeremiah Wright sermons did rub off on Mr. Obama
The President did not say the situation was racial. Quit putting words in the President's mouth. He said the police acted "stupidly", which they did. You do not handcuff and arrest a man in his own home, no matter if he's yelling at you. The officer should have left after identity was established.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
