Cambridge Police Unit Demands Apology From Obama

[HAL 9000 96]

Even IF true- his authority ends for that call out upon ID verification. His version is just as 'attitude-laced' as was the prof's. Two 'wrongs' do not make a right and certainly... attitude is not legally punishable.

I think Rosana hit it spot on -

No it did not end when the ID was confirmed.I read the report and our professor never stopped arguing and screaming bloody murder insulting officers who were just answering the call that they were dispatched to

And they could just as well, in a spot on fashion, apologized for the disturbance (as most even-headed cops would do) and left. The 'investigation' was for B&E. It was resolved. End of story.

[nowhereman 1]

I totally disagree... if a police officer enters a residence without probable cause & arrests someone (in this case for disorderly conduct) then the charge would be dismissed & the police department may be subject to a lawsuit. It has not been proven that the police officer entered without probable cause but based on the facts he may have been in the wrong.

I neighbor reported the incident. Thus, the probably cause. Nothing else to it.

I hate to pull the education card but I actually have degrees in criminal justice & criminology, so I have more than a laymans insight on this. Yes the cop had cause to be there but as soon as the professor proved he was the owner the police officer should have said thank you & have a nice day. Again I suspect the professor used some choice words, thus infuriating the officer and leading to the arrest. Cooler heads (in both cases) should have prevailed.

[HAL 9000 96]

No it did not end when the ID was confirmed.I read the report and our professor never stopped arguing and screaming bloody murder insulting officers who were just answering the call that they were dispatched to.I work in law enforcement I can tell you that those words are being thrown around a lot when people do not have a better argument.

Stop black drug dealer on the block and the first thing that will come out his mouth will be"oh you are harassing me just because I am black!"

Stop latino crackhead that is kneeling next to someone elses car it will be because they are latino.

Deal with drunk or high white dude he will call you wetback and say things like "why don't you go back to your country?"

Our professor with his degree should of had more common sense than that.If he nicely explained what happened and showed his ID I am very confident that the officers would tell him to have a safe night and they would leave.

So maybe next time time when there is a burglary call at the professors house and officers arrive and see a black man in his house maybe they should just say nevermind instead of subjecting themselves to justifying why they are doing their job.

Sorry but since I get to see the incidents like that first hand and it happens a lot - it just irks the hell out of me to see how some people think.

You must be the expert then.

One thing is having the police do their job and another is to overstep authority- clearly the case here.

Like has been stated for the umpteenth time- attitude is not illegal.

Hal just cause you keep repeating that dosnt make it true, what grounds do you have to go on??? They had a legal reason if there account of the story is true. Its his word against the cops word and you and I dont really know what happened. I think you have been blinded by that Harvard badge and willing to give him a free ride. Sad.

So all arrests are done so appropriately and according to legal precedent? Of course not. Hence, your rejection of the null is pointless.

Like I said- ...

End of story.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yes the cop had cause to be there but as soon as the professor proved he was the owner the police officer should have said thank you & have a nice day. Again I suspect the professor used some choice words, thus infuriating the officer and leading to the arrest. Cooler heads (in both cases) should have prevailed.

Yep.

[HAL 9000 96]

Arresting someone without a legal reason to do so is pretty stupid in any logical book.

How is disorderly conduct not a legal reason?

Disorderly conduct is what you would call an offense. You might want to read the police report.

The legal reason ended when the ID was confirmed. Period. Trying to make orange juice out of apples is not cool.

Uh yeah thats what they arrested him on. Period. There was a legal reason therefore making what you said wrong. According to the police he was being unruly and rude.

I totally disagree... if a police officer enters a residence without probable cause & arrests someone (in this case for disorderly conduct) then the charge would be dismissed & the police department may be subject to a lawsuit. It has not been proven that the police officer entered without probable cause but based on the facts he may have been in the wrong.

It is potentially a violation of the professor's civil rights- be he a jerk or not.

[Heracles 417]

I'll save you some time and say that I'm well aware that there is a big disparity in terms of the demographic makeup of prison populations. The difference is that I am actually interested in the reasons behind this, whereas you insist on using it merely as a springboard for racist rants.

When you actually start reading what people write and understand arguments written in plain language, then we will have something to discuss. But you don't, so there isn't.

So you are basically discrediting the facts (reality). The key to solving any problem is to accept the problem in the first place. Whereas, your at the denial stage. Must be someone else or circumstance to blame. You really need to read up on culture and their individual differences.

Even going by your approach. No historical event or circumstance justifies something like a drive-by shooting in 2009. You know that wouldn't fly in the UK or any other developed and civilized country.

[Heracles 417]

I totally disagree... if a police officer enters a residence without probable cause & arrests someone (in this case for disorderly conduct) then the charge would be dismissed & the police department may be subject to a lawsuit. It has not been proven that the police officer entered without probable cause but based on the facts he may have been in the wrong.

I neighbor reported the incident. Thus, the probably cause. Nothing else to it.

I hate to pull the education card but I actually have degrees in criminal justice & criminology, so I have more than a laymans insight on this. Yes the cop had cause to be there but as soon as the professor proved he was the owner the police officer should have said thank you & have a nice day. Again I suspect the professor used some choice words, thus infuriating the officer and leading to the arrest. Cooler heads (in both cases) should have prevailed.

What are you talking about. His first and second comment from the get go to the police officer was one of aggression, only getting worse. Don't act as if he showed his ID and they tackled him to the ground.

The other comment of his, "you don't know who you are messing with" I am is a direct threat to the police. AKA I dare you to do something. The police were doing their job. Gates was the one who blew it out of proportion.

Edited July 24, 2009 by haza

[_Simpson_ 250]

No it did not end when the ID was confirmed.I read the report and our professor never stopped arguing and screaming bloody murder insulting officers who were just answering the call that they were dispatched to.I work in law enforcement I can tell you that those words are being thrown around a lot when people do not have a better argument.

Stop black drug dealer on the block and the first thing that will come out his mouth will be"oh you are harassing me just because I am black!"

Stop latino crackhead that is kneeling next to someone elses car it will be because they are latino.

Deal with drunk or high white dude he will call you wetback and say things like "why don't you go back to your country?"

Our professor with his degree should of had more common sense than that.If he nicely explained what happened and showed his ID I am very confident that the officers would tell him to have a safe night and they would leave.

So maybe next time time when there is a burglary call at the professors house and officers arrive and see a black man in his house maybe they should just say nevermind instead of subjecting themselves to justifying why they are doing their job.

Sorry but since I get to see the incidents like that first hand and it happens a lot - it just irks the hell out of me to see how some people think.

You must be the expert then.

One thing is having the police do their job and another is to overstep authority- clearly the case here.

Like has been stated for the umpteenth time- attitude is not illegal.

Hal just cause you keep repeating that dosnt make it true, what grounds do you have to go on??? They had a legal reason if there account of the story is true. Its his word against the cops word and you and I dont really know what happened. I think you have been blinded by that Harvard badge and willing to give him a free ride. Sad.

So all arrests are done so appropriately and according to legal precedent? Of course not. Hence, your rejection of the null is pointless.

Like I said- ...

End of story.

of course there not and thats why I made it a point to say that IF the cops account of the story is correct they had legal reason.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'll save you some time and say that I'm well aware that there is a big disparity in terms of the demographic makeup of prison populations. The difference is that I am actually interested in the reasons behind this, whereas you insist on using it merely as a springboard for racist rants.

When you actually start reading what people write and understand arguments written in plain language, then we will have something to discuss. But you don't, so there isn't.

So you are basically discrediting the facts (reality). The key to solving any problem is to accept the problem in the first place. Whereas, your at the denial stage. Must be someone else or circumstance to blame. You really need to read up on culture and their individual differences.

Even going by your approach. No historical event or circumstance justifies something like a drive-by shooting in 2009. You know that wouldn't fly in the UK or any other developed and civilized country.

So when I said that I am well aware of the ethnic disparity in relation to crime - you read "I deny that this is the case".

Its just another in a long line of ####### moments, but really the only thing to do with that is to

With you, it doesn't matter what anyone writes, you'll find a way to completely and utterly misinterpret it for your own ends, or else completely fabricate a person's opinion based on your gut.

It takes a real special talent to do that, and not in a good way.

Edited July 24, 2009 by Private Pike

[_Simpson_ 250]

I totally disagree... if a police officer enters a residence without probable cause & arrests someone (in this case for disorderly conduct) then the charge would be dismissed & the police department may be subject to a lawsuit. It has not been proven that the police officer entered without probable cause but based on the facts he may have been in the wrong.

I neighbor reported the incident. Thus, the probably cause. Nothing else to it.

I hate to pull the education card but I actually have degrees in criminal justice & criminology, so I have more than a laymans insight on this. Yes the cop had cause to be there but as soon as the professor proved he was the owner the police officer should have said thank you & have a nice day. Again I suspect the professor used some choice words, thus infuriating the officer and leading to the arrest. Cooler heads (in both cases) should have prevailed.

It doesnt take a degree to figure this one out.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Wow. I never knew we had so many lawyers and legal experts on VJ.

I love how everyone has to throw their two cents in and act like a know-it-all on every single damn subject that's posted.

[Heracles 417]

So when I said that I am well aware of the ethnic disparity in relation to crime - you read "I deny that this is the case".

Its just another in a long line of ####### moments, but really the only thing to do with that is to

With you, it doesn't matter what anyone writes, you'll find a way to completely and utterly misinterpret it for your own ends, or else completely fabricate a person's opinion based on your gut.

It takes a real special talent to do that, and not in a good way.

I read between your bullcrap. Not the first time you have been caught out on your dutch door approach.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Wow. I never knew we had so many lawyers and legal experts on VJ.

I love how everyone has to throw their two cents in and act like a know-it-all on every single damn subject that's posted.

I love how so many on here want to roll eyes and criticize others without trying to add something to the debate.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So when I said that I am well aware of the ethnic disparity in relation to crime - you read "I deny that this is the case".

Its just another in a long line of ####### moments, but really the only thing to do with that is to

With you, it doesn't matter what anyone writes, you'll find a way to completely and utterly misinterpret it for your own ends, or else completely fabricate a person's opinion based on your gut.

It takes a real special talent to do that, and not in a good way.

I read between your bullcrap. Not the first time you have been caught out on your dutch door approach.

It was an explicit, unambiguous statement - there are no lines to read between.

[My Name Is Nobody 3]

####### is the president of the US doing commenting on a nickel dime disturbance call. On top of that, in a national press conference in prime time on healthcare! Can you say a "set up question" to comment on a racial issue.

Obamas true colors are showing. His mask is slipping. He is one childish immature person. He will hang himself before 2012.