No, not the opinion piece, but the first three comments.
For a week I've been watching it be about race, when it was really about police technique and tactics. Everyone seemed obsessed with Gates' race, ignoring the skill level and experience of the investigating officer.
After a year of police fatalities, we should realize that going into an unknown house on a report of forced entry by two suspects, and being confronted by an agitated single person of obvious high educational level would FORCE removal of the person from possible danger from a lurking burglar.
Put yourself in Sgt. Crowley's head: He gets a call, gets there quickly, before he has backup, and finds one person where two were reported.
Where is the other person? Are they in the next room, holding a gun on Gates with the demand that Gates get rid of the cop?
Is Gates acting weird because he's black or because he's under threat of death if he doesn't force the cop out of the house?
Is it good police work to leave Gates alone in the house without protection from a reported pair of burglars? No!
So he asks Gates to step outside, to remove him from possible danger, and to protect any other officer who comes as backup. Gates goes ballistic.
Proper procedure is to enforce the removal of the possible hostage. That's all you need to explain why Crowley demanded Gates come outside.
Gates played jerk, so immersed in his role as abused black man, that he missed the obvious, because for all his supposed erudition, he wasn't a trained police officer.
Let's back off the phony black issue and move back to health care. We're being played like a trout here.
UPDATE: Fascinating that there were only a few people who actually understood the gist of the diary. The rest, as you can see, merely parroted the party line burped out by the MSM: Gates good, cop bad, racism, profiling. Thanks to those who have some understanding of the difficult life of the policeman on the beat and were willing to buck the tide. And no thanks to the rude and derisive children who roam around the site pissing on everything they don't understand.
UPDATE 2: NICE RUNDOWN:
When Professor Gates opened the door, the officer immediately asked him to step outside. Professor Gates remained inside his home and asked the officer why he was there.
[This is a failure to comply. Getting a suspect out of the house is intended to protect both people by removing the chances and risk of there being hidden weapons or accomplices. Police who have to enter a confined place put themselves at greater risk, are more nervous and prone to overreact to sudden moves. Which puts the suspect at risk.]
[Also note that in Gates own words, as opposed to his lawyers it went like this:
"I said ‘Officer, can I help you?’ And he said, ‘Would you step outside onto the porch.’ And the way he said it, I knew he wasn’t canvassing for the police benevolent association. All the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized that I was in danger. And I said to him no, out of instinct. I said, ‘No, I will not.’"
From:http://www.theroot.com/views/skip-gates-speaks?page=0,1
A much clearer refusal to comply.]
The officer indicated that he was responding to a 911 call about a breaking and entering in progress at this address. Professor Gates informed the officer that he lived there and was a faculty member at Harvard University.
[This is entirely meaningless as any suspect can be expected to make a similar claim.]
The officer then asked Professor Gates whether he could prove that he lived there and taught at Harvard. Professor Gates said that he could, and turned to walk into his kitchen, where he had left his wallet. The officer followed him. Professor Gates handed both his Harvard University identification and his valid Massachusetts driver's license to the officer. Both include Professor Gates' photograph, and the license includes his address.
[There is no way for the police to check the validity of these documents immediately so the ID and workplace remain plausible but tentative. Typically the police would retire to a patrol car and use the computer to check the IDs. The police have to assume that the ID and DL may have been picked up during a break-in. His resemblance to the picture on the DL may be coincidental or because he is breaking into a relatives house.]
[Also, in Gates own words, after he handed over the IDs he refused to answer a question.
"So he’s looking at my ID, he asked me another question, which I refused to answer." From above site.
In effect preventing the police from making an initial assessment of the ID's validity]
Professor Gates then asked the police officer if he would give him his name and his badge number. He made this request several times. The officer did not produce any identification nor did he respond to Professor Gates' request for this information. After an additional request by Professor Gates for the officer's name and badge number, the officer then turned and left the kitchen of Professor Gates' home without ever acknowledging who he was or if there were charges against Professor Gates.
[The old ploy of demanding name and badge number doesn't work and is entirely meaningless. It is seen by the police as a delaying tactic. The uniform and badge are legally sufficient ID for the police to demand compliance. Names and badge numbers are shown on reports. The idea that someone could bring a situation to a halt while all the police file by and provide the Names and Badge numbers is ludicrous. That police have to provide them on demand is an urban myth.]
As Professor Gates followed the officer to his own front door, he was astonished to see several police officers gathered on his front porch. Professor Gates asked the officer's colleagues for his name and badge number.
[It didn't work the first or third time so why not be annoying and make the same useless demands again.]
As Professor Gates stepped onto his front porch, the officer who had been inside and who had examined his identification, said to him, "Thank you for accommodating my earlier request," [acknowledging the earlier failure to comply] and then placed Professor Gates under arrest. He was handcuffed on his own front porch.
[Note: failure to step out when asked usually means the police go in, throw you to the floor, cuff you and haul you out. The number of police present demonstrates that they were preparing to do just that. The policeman's delay in dragging Gates out and tolerance for resistance shows a considerable amount of restraint.]
-------------
Sounds to me like the police showed more restraint than the law requires. It remains to be shown how the response would have been different if Gates was white and showed a similar amount of resistance.
What Gates did in failing to step out and answer questions would get most people in most towns thrown to the ground, cuffed and hauled off.
Like it or not if the police show up and ask you to step out you do it. You don't demand badge numbers like a blithering fool. You don't claim racism. If they are racists screaming about racism is just going to annoy them more. If they aren't it won't make any difference. You also don't argue constitutionality or legality of any searches or procedure. Those are issues for your lawyer and the judge to hash out. Police don't do legal or constitutional arguments.
The priorities for police are:
- Control the situation.
- Limit risk to the public and officers.
- Document events.
Questioning, cuffing, detainment, and arrest are not punishment. They are mechanisms to accomplish the above.