I fail to see how this analysis is different than the media "mind-reading" Mr. Lyons is criticizing. He simply goes back and says Gates should have done X and Y, and Crowley (once we read his mind) was thinking X and Y.

But it misses the point. Yes, let's put mind reading aside. Let's even stipulate that Gates would have done better to hold back his alarm and anger (though here's a fact: professors--even Harvard professors––have emotions and react to situations). The real question is: okay, so what happens WHEN someone yells at a policeman? Are you really saying "all bets are off." Citizens should just be prepared to get arrested? And does that go double for black men (as Juan Williams has been telling us on NPR)? Are these the rules in America?

I'd like to make sure I'm taking away the right lesson.

Paglia, Wingnut now Lyons? Did this really contribute anything to the debate (teachable moment)? Other than generating letters, I don't get why this merited publication.

The 991 call and the police report don't match at all.

It looks like Crowley lied. Did he?

Is anyone going to bother to figure this out?

Sgt Crowley wrote a report to accompany this arrest stating that the 911 caller had identified to him "what appeared to be two black men" breaking into the house. The caller denies having identified the men as "black," and the transcript of her 911 call has her, after prompting from the dispatcher, only allowing that perhaps one of the men appeared "Hispanic."

I think Crowley's report places the caller in the proximity of "black men" for a reason. Read it once, quickly, and the caller identifies "black men." Read it carefully, and she does no such thing.

Crowley, in his report, also fudges his failure to properly identify himself. He states that again and again he "identifies" himself by saying that he is "Sergeant Crowley." Sergeant Crowley, highly experience officer that he is, knows, or should know, that he is required to provide his full name and badge number to citizens. Yet he fails to do so -- and his report is silly excuse making that would make a 13-year-old class-cutter blush: In essence, he says "Gates didn't ask for my identification, he only asked for my name! And my name is Sergeant Crowley!"

Crowley's report is plainly CYA bullshit from top to bottom. Gates's story is far more believable.

But the arrest itself is another issue altogether. Even if Crowley's crap report were to be believed 110%, the arrest was stupid, stupid, stupid. All Crowley needed to do, once it was determined that no break-in had occured, was get in his car, drive it to a Denny's or a Dunkin Donuts, and there would have been no "public disturbance." Voila -- effective policiing!<.i>

how nobody criticizes the Policeman's Union for their support of Crowley even though they didn't have all the facts. But then they weren't an uppity black president forgetting himself.

Gene Lyons should be ashamed of this piece.

nope, the answer simply can't be that we live in a velvet police state where automatic and unquestioning obeisance to 'our' (sic) police is the only option...

nope nope nope

sweet geezus, the cowardly cohort who simply refuse to acknowledge we have the police tail wagging the citizenry dog is simply astounding to behold...

wow wow wubbzy

go back to the glass teat and make sure you do nothing to make the donut eaters unhappy...

disgust disgust disgust

land of the fee, home of the cowardly...

snicker snicker snicker

art guerrilla

aka ann archy

eof

If this is satire, you are doing it all wrong. First, his lawyer was correct. When an officer comes to your house and asks you to step outside, don't step outside. Whatever misunderstanding the officer may have, you lose all 4th Amendment protection to be secure in your home when you step outside. Had he stepped outside and not been able to produce identification or call someone to prove he was the homeowner, the officer would not have allowed him back in the house and likely would have arrested him and taken him to the station.

Had Gates then lost his temper, understandably, the disorderly conduct charge may not have been dropped. Disorderly conduct requires creating a risk of a public disturbance. Yelling at someone, even an officer, in your own home does not rise to a public disturbance.

How odd that you seem to have no problem mind reading for the officer, but disparage Gates for doing the same. But I'll play. If the officer had the New Jersey shooting on his mind, and feared a dangerous burglar was inside the house, he would have called for backup before walking up to the house and knocking on the door. Also, the sight of an elderly man, even black, talking on the phone should have tipped him off to the possibility this was not a break in. Finally, as an officer who teaches racial understanding, the officer should have known that a black person, particularly one old enough to remember the "dark times" might react defensively when confronted by a police officer, and, as he teaches other officers, should have worked to defuse the situation; being considerate to the possibility he was telling the truth and was the homeowner.

But what really galls me about your article is that you act as if talking back to an officer, even in one's own home, is some sort of crime. Gates deserved being dragged out of his own home in handcuffs in front of his neighbors because he got uppity and failed to show proper respect to massa officer.

Of course, you fail to notice that this situation would not look elitist if Gates had been some nobody black person returning to his nobody neighborhood, arrested and humiliated in front of his neighbors, but with no media to explain the officer was wrong, and no President to stand up and say the officer acted stupidly. No, under those circumstances he would have had a hard time explaining to his white neighbors how it was a misunderstanding. He'd have to hire a lawyer to fight the DC charge that would not have been so quickly dismissed, and people like you would still think it was all his fault for sassing a police officer. Otherwise known as telling the officer it was his home, showing him ID and asking him to leave.

Perhaps you should rent a copy of Ragtime. When you get to the part where the well dressed black hero in his fancy car is accosted by those public servants of firemen, and has his car vandalized for being uppity, maybe you should ask yourself, "Did he deserve that?" And if the answer is no, then, really, did Gates?