Monday, July 27, 2009

A HATEFUL AND UNTRUTHFUL INDICTMENT OF AMERICAN POLICE OFFICERS

If you browse the internet, you will find hundreds of takes on the Professor Gates arrest. A surprisingly large number continue to condemn Sgt. Crowley and the Cambridge police while defending Gates and praising President Obama’s "Acted Stupidly" declaration.

Not only that, but now the Gates arrest is no longer just a racial profiling case, it is also a case of class warfare. Crowley is now accused of being a working class cop who put the screws to a member of the upper class. Gates’ black colleagues say that racial profiling is a class warfare weapon that is responsible for 70% of American prison inmates being black and Hispanic.

Crowley’s critics maintain that Gates could not have been charged with disorderly conduct because he was inside his house or on his property and that is why the charge was dropped. Wrong! The charge was dropped because the City of Cambridge wanted to be seen as politically correct since Gates was a prominent black Harvard scholar.

One of the most hateful and untruthful indictments of American police officers that I have ever read was made in response to the Gates arrest by Lawrence O’Donnell in a TIME.com column, part of which follows:

VIEWPOINT: THE STUPIDITY OF THE GATES ARREST
By Lawrence O’Donnell, Jr.

TIME.com
Jul. 25, 2009

"Here is what the absurdist, typically stilted police language of Sergeant James Crowley's official report on his arrest of Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates really means:

Gates: You're not the boss of me!

Crowley: I am the boss of you.

Gates: You are not the boss of me!

Crowley: I'll show you. You're under arrest.

There is no crime described in Crowley's official version of the way Gates behaved. Crowley says explicitly that he arrested Gates for yelling. Nothing else, not a single threatening movement, just yelling. On the steps of his own home. Yelling is not a crime. Yelling does not meet the definition of disorderly conduct in Massachusetts. Not a single shouted word or action that Crowley has attributed to Gates amounts to disorderly conduct. That is why the charges had to be dropped.

In classically phony police talk, Crowley refers to "[Gates'] continued tumultuous behavior." When cops write that way, you know they have nothing. What is tumultuous behavior? Here's what it isn't: he brandished a knife in a threatening manner, he punched and kicked, he clenched his fist in a threatening manner, he threw a wrench or, in the Gates house, maybe a book. If the subject does any of those things, cops always write it out with precision. When they've got nothing, they use phrases that mean nothing. Phrases like tumultuous behavior.

Unless you confess to a crime, or threaten to commit a crime, there is nothing you can say to a cop that makes it legal for him to arrest you. You can tell him he is stupid, you can tell him he is ugly, you can call him racist, you can say anything you might feel like saying about his mother. He has taken an oath to listen to all of that and ignore it. That is the real teachable moment here — cops are paid to be professionals, but even the best of them are human and can make stupid mistakes.

We have an uncomfortable choice with Sergeant Crowley. Either he doesn't know what disorderly conduct is or Crowley simply decided to show Gates who's boss the only way he knew how at the time — by whipping out his handcuffs and abusing his power to arrest. Police make the latter choice in this country every day, knowing that the charges are going to have to be dropped."

So who is this cop hater? Lawrence O'Donnell, Jr. is an actor and MSNBC Political Analyst and the author of Deadly Force: The True Story of How a Badge Can Become a License to Kill. He calls himself a "practical European socialist." His frequent interviews on TV are notable for his angry outbursts at those with whom he disagrees. Martin E. Marty, professor of religious history at the University of Chicago, said of O'Donnell's caustic comments, "criticism is one thing; hate-speech and untruths are another."

O’Donnell is being disingenuous when he writes that Gates' conduct "does not meet the definition of disorderly conduct in Massachusetts." While the state does not have a specific disorderly conduct offense, Massachusetts judges recognize that offense under section 250.2 of the Model Penal Code. Here is an analysis from TPM Media:

"…… this is the section (in the original police report) that directly recounts the arrest:

‘As I descended the stairs to the sidewalk, Gates continued to yell at me, accusing me of racial bias and continued to tell me that I had not heard the last of him. Due to the tumultuous manner Gates had exhibited in his residence as well as his continued tumultuous behavior outside the residence, in view of the public, I warned Gates that he was becoming disorderly. Gates ignored my warning and continued to yell, which drew the attention of both the police officers and citizens, who appeared surprised and alarmed by Gates’s outburst. For a second time I warned Gates to calm down while I withdrew my department issued handcuffs from their carrying case. Gates again ignored my warning and continued to yell at me. It was at this time that I informed Gates that he was under arrest.’

Now it makes sense to ask if the arrest of Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. matches the criteria of the Model Penal Code section 250.2: (1), and it seems to me that the most significant sub-section is 250.2: (1)(b)... makes unreasonable noise or offensively coarse utterance, gesture or display, or addresses abusive language to any person present...

If you believe the police report, then Professor Gates probably satisfied the criteria of Model Penal Code section 250.2: (1) by shouting insults at the cop from his front porch, and even though the front porch itself is not a public place, it was sufficiently close to the public sidewalk and street so that "persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access" were affected.

…… Professor Gates' house is unfenced and adjacent to Ware Street in Cambridge…… It also is possible that behavior occurring on purely private property may be shown to affect or be likely to affect persons in an adjacent or nearby 'place to which the public or a substantial group has access,' Model Penal Code section 250.2, such that a disorderly conduct charge would be appropriate."

O’Donnell goes on to insist that people have a right to call cops any derogatory names they want. It’s true that people don’t have to be nice to police officers, but when they continue to badmouth cops within sight and sound of the public, they have crossed the line from constitutionally protected speech to disorderly conduct.

Worst of all, O’Donnell also accuses the police in this country of abusing their power to arrest every day, "knowing that the charges are going to have to be dropped." He implies that making false arrests on purpose is a common practice. That’s simply not true and he damn well knows it!

This controversy is far from over because people on each side have planted their feet firmly in concrete. (That, obviously, includes me.) Although the courts have ruled that cops must tolerate some verbal abuse, those who don't like the police need to realize there is a limit to the amount of shit that an officer has to take. Gates clearly exceeded that limit. As for the cops, they don’t help their cause by making wisecracks about "attitude adjustment" or the one that goes, "you might beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride."

There are many reasons why people might not like cops. After all, they regulate human behavior and no one likes to have their behavior regulated. But for society's sake, hatred of the police cannot be tolerated! As for O’Donnell, his hatred of the police also comes across loud and clear in the title of his book, "Deadly Force: The True Story of How a Badge Can Become a License to Kill."

No comments: