Although this controversy is behind us for the most part, there still remains the matter of the esteemed Harvard Professor’s reputation, professionally and as a notable African-American educator, scholar, and distinguished citizen. It was he who raised the issue of “racial profiling” by the Cambridge Police department and Sgt. James Crowley. Is the charge justified or is “Skip” Gates a provocateur who saw an opportunity to play the “race” card in pursuit of his own personal agenda which has even embroiled the President of the United States, his friend and fellow Harvard Alum, Barrack Obama. A lot has been made about the different versions of what really happened on that meeting between Henry Gates and James Crowley, but the professor appeared as a guest on the Gayle King OPRAH Radio Show. Before the interview even got started, Professor Gates laid out his major points of grievance with the Cambridge Police; which are: (1) Racial profiling, and (2) arbitrary capricious acts by rogue police officers. Excerpts from his on-air comments will be weighed against his allegations to determine if there is any validity or merit to what he asserts in the following transcript conversation.
First, it might be prudent to include Sgt. Crowley’s brief account of what occurred on that day. After receiving a 911 call from a neighbor about a break in and burglary at a residence in “Harvard Square” the officers proceed to the address where a Black man was seen in “Plain View.” Sgt. Crowley asks the suspect [Gates] to step outside. The suspect [Gates] refused and asks, “Why; is it because I am a Black man in America…?”
Now, this is Professor Gates’ words: “I refused the officer’s command because I knew that as soon as I stepped outside I knew I could be arrested for breaking and entering. “I knew that without a warrant he [Crowley] or the police couldn’t arrest you inside your house. COMMENT: Why was Gates concerned about being arrested if he didn’t do anything wrong? This seems paranoid and irrational. Gates says that he was offended by Crowley’s bluntness by asking him [so tersely] to step outside, instead of asking him politely and respectfully. COMMENT: Why would “Skip” expect such deferential or special treatment since the police were there to investigate a felony criminal complaint and he was the prime ‘suspect’? He said that he felt that Sgt. Crowley should have addressed him as Professor Gates. COMMENT: Sgt. Crowley didn’t know who he was initially because he hadn’t been identified as of yet; even if the address on his report indicated who the homeowner was. It would seem that the professor was presumptuous, arrogant, and, did I mention irrational?
It seems that “Skip” tripped because Crowley didn’t ask if he was ‘ok,’ or if anybody was holding him hostage, but rather that Crowley just looked at him and told him, “To step outside.” Professor Gates told Sgt. Crowley, “No.” Gayle asked him why he did that and he reiterated his concern that he knew he could be arrested [if he stepped outside], and said that Crowley was “hostile.” Gates said that he could see it (the hostility) in Crowley’s face and hear it in his voice. COMMENT: If a police officer issues a legitimate command and you refuse, it is only reasonable that the officer would be peeved off. Then Gates goes on to say that he was on the phone in the kitchen talking to a lady from Harvard Real Estate about the problem with the lock on the door when he saw the police (Sgt. Crowley??) initially come up to the front door. Gates, recounting again, the command from Sgt. Crowley to step outside, and he says, “All of a sudden I knew that I was in danger.” COMMENT: Why did the Professor harbor such antipathy or is it pathology regarding mistreatment from the police, especially since he hadn’t done anything wrong?
Gates [upon seeing the police at the front door], says, “May I help you?” He mentions that the police told him that they are investigating a 911 Breaking and Entering call, to which he tells them, “That’s alright; “I’m Professor Gates and I live here and I am a Harvard Professor.” COMMENT: Was it necessary to volunteer this information that he was a Harvard Professor? Gayle asked him, and rightly so, if he didn’t get hostile with the police since he says they got hostile with him, Gayle said that she just couldn’t see him just calmly talking to the officers [Sgt. Crowley] since they were acting in the way Gates described. The professor said, “No,” and that he didn’t get “firm” with the police [Sgt. Crowley??] until later on. Gates said that he ‘never’ got hostile with the officers, but that he did get very, very firm. COMMENT: Does this sound like Slick Willie’s play on words? I didn’t get “hostile” but I got loud, belligerent, angry, and my body language suggested that I was pissed off and ready to take a swing at Sgt. Crowley??
Now Gates says that Sgt. Crowley asked him if he could prove that he was a Harvard Professor, but he didn’t ask Gates if he could prove that he lived at there. Gates said that he said ‘yes’ to the question about proving he worked at Harvard. Gates walks away from the front door to retrieve his wallet with his driver’s license and Harvard ID on the kitchen island and Sgt. Crowley enters the house behind him. Gates mentions that Crowley is inside the house and didn’t ask his permission. Gates says that he handed Sgt. Crowley both pieces of ID and notices a certain expression on the officer’s face, and says that he is trying to “unpack a narrative” [in his mind??]. Professor goes on to tell Gayle, “This is where ‘racial profiling’ comes in because Crowley was so sure he had a “catch” and that all of a sudden, he (Crowley) [because of his disappointment to find that Gates was who he said he was??] had to “unwrap” that story. As Sgt. Crowley starts to ask gates another (??) question, Gates interrupts him with, “Enough!” Gayle asked Gates what Sgt. Crowley was asking, but he said that Crowley started to ask about… but that he interrupted him and said, “That’s enough! “This is my house, you have my ID’s, and I want your name and your badge number.”
Professor Gates said, “This is when everything turned.” He said to Sgt. Crowley, “I am filing a complaint and I want your name and your badge number.” Gayle asked him why he was filing a complaint-why did he say that he wanted Crowley’s name and badge number. She added, “There had to be something between the two of you.” Gates said, “It all started on that front porch.” Gates said that he shouldn’t have been treated that way; and what about his security? Professor Gates goes on to say, “If he (Sgt. Crowley) is investigating a 911 call, I am the innocent person and he needed to greet me with ‘respect;’ not presume that I am a “Perp” as they say on television. “And I wanted to file a report so that their police instructions (Investigative Procedures) would be “transformed.” He continues, “Just because a Black man answers the door and you [the police] are responding to a 911 call or charge, treat him or her, in the case of an African-American woman, with respect; don’t go presuming anything else- “Protect me!” Gayle asked him, “You would say that you were not treated with respect in that moment?” Gates said, “Not at all.” Then he said, “It got worse.” He continues, “I kept saying, ‘Sir, I want your name and badge number; saying it over and over again.’” Gates said that Crowley just stared or rather glared at me; and mentioned that Sgt. Crowley turned his back and just walked out of the house. Gates, following after him, said, “Are you not answering me because I am a Black man and you are a White police officer?”
After listening to this confessional dialogue by Professor Henry Louis Gates jr., Sgt. Crowley and the Cambridge Police department just might not be the villains they have been initially portrayed to have been. Indeed, Jesus said in Matthew 12: 37, “For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned [“judged”]. Although President Obama has called this incident a “teachable” moment, it appears that what is revealed is not consistent with the facts as first reported. For one thing, Professor Gates is not a Psychologist, Criminal Law Professor, nor is he knowledgeable in Criminal Investigative procedures. It seems that a “reasonable” person might conclude that the professor’s expectations and unfounded fear of arrest was predicated upon presumptions that are not rational because lacking any other criteria, he was a suspect in a Burglary and Criminal Trespass investigation and the police were legally authorized to be there. His complaint about police misconduct is, under the circumstances, not based upon any “Rule of Law” and is without merit. It is unlikely that he remained calm with the police but instead became belligerent with Sgt. Crowley that his verbal tirade escalated to such an extent to nearly incite some sort of potential physical altercation or confrontation with the police on the front porch; all in full view of the public. This disturbance and unwarranted misconduct complaint threat against police officers could indeed, at least in the technical sense, lead to a “Disorderly Conduct” charge and arrest.
Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
August 8, 2009
pbks@hotmail.com
