Skip to main content

View Diary: Gates and Crowley: Of Course It’s Racial (87 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Falsifying a police report is a serious crime. (5+ / 0-)

    If what you are saying is true then Crowley would've had no need to invent fantasies in his report.
    The police report and the assertions of the lady who made the call are very different.
    Someone lied.
    The released tapes makes it clear who the liar is.

    Hopefully the media can now move to health care now.

    •  There was no lieing in the report. (0+ / 0-)

      Whalen was at the scene and briefly talked to Crowley as he passed her on his way to the house. She was on the sidewalk. That was what her lawyer said tonight.

      I think Crowley just made an inoocent mistake in his report that whalen said "two black men". I believe he and his police dept has already admitted that.

      He either rushed his report and made a sloppy error or he remembered that part incorrectly.

      •  He either rushed his report and made a (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rincewind, GN1927, miss SPED

        sloppy error or he remembered that part incorrectly.

        And yet we're supposed to just move on from this and trust him to enforce our laws and protect our citizens?  Yeah right!

        His sloppy errors and bad memory put a distinguished, law abiding man in handcuffs and in jail!!!  Some people do not take these violations of our freedom lightly!!

        Sloppy errors or bad memory.  You've just introduced the best two reasons this guy should NOT be enforcing the law or have a gun or any position of authority over anyone else in the community.

        Epic.  Fail.  

        You have the right to free speech... As long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it! -The Clash

        by DemandTruth on Mon Jul 27, 2009 at 09:47:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What impresses me about Crowley regarding this (0+ / 0-)

          is that he has already admitted that it was a mistake. He was concerned about Whalen not that his detractors would try to use that against him.

          Most people will understand how that could have happened though. Its not a  big deal.

      •  of course, that leaves hanging the question (4+ / 0-)

        of where the ID of "2 black men" came from.  It didn't come from the dispatcher.  It didn't come from Whalen.  So ... where?  

        •  I alreeady said it was a mistake (0+ / 0-)

          that Crowley made in his report. He thought he remembered her saying that but she didnt.

          And it comes from the fact that he knew then, at the time he wrote his report, that is was two black men.

          Why cant people understand this? lol

          •  you say "mistake," I say "possible cover-up" (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            miss SPED

            Esp. since he didn't merely make a mistake about when he learned the info, but inserted a specific detail that in fact he never learned, before or subsequently, about the "backpacks."
             

            •  What would be the purpose of the cover up (0+ / 0-)

              I get that an officer may add details to a report to justify something, but what would be added by including "black man with backpacks"?  What does that add to justify Crowley's actions, given that dispatch believed that there were two men in the house at the time of the 911 call?

              •  Gates yelled at him for unfairly picking (0+ / 0-)

                on a black man; adding after the fact that he had been told to look for black men would provide him a defense to the accusation of racial profiling.  

                The bit about backpacks is just weird, frankly.  I didn't cite it as an element of the cover up per se, but as reason to doubt that the officer is just innocently misremembering when and from whom he learned certain pieces of information.

                Mind you, I'm not saying I know he's lying, as some people have--there's no grounds for certainty about that.  But after yesterday's news, I do think there's more reason to be skeptical.

      •  Nope. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        GN1927

        Not what the lawyer has said.
        http://amfix.blogs.cnn.com/
        Specifically,

        "Let me be clear: She never had a conversation with Sgt. Crowley at the scene," Murphy told CNN by phone.

        •  That report is incorrect. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Darmok

          Whalen was at the scene on the sidewalk. I heard Murphy say so herself. I saw those words come out of her mouth. That sentence in that CNN story is misleading.

          Either CNN got it wrong, or Murphy meant THAT conversation, or she meant that she woudlnt consider it a conversation that it was just a couple words in passing as Crowley passed her going to the hosue.

          Youll see. Im sure there will eb another story today (by CNN and others) clarfying that.

          Whalen was there on the sidewalk, thats where she made the call from.

        •  it does appear that murphy's final version (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          miss SPED

          of events is that Whalen did speak to Crowley at the scene, but only to ID herself as the caller--not to say anything else.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site