My neat little belief system was rocked today.

GatesGate blew up into a whole ‘nother thing.

Hurry while it’s still there and listen to an audio segment at WTKK-AM in Boston where Wendy Murphy, who is the lawyer for Lucia Whalen, was interviewed. Also contained in the segment is Whalen’s 911 call that got the ball rolling toward the confrontation between Gates and Crowley.

All along we have been led to believe that Whalen identified the men as black. Today Murphy categorically denied that charge on Whalen’s behalf. Half of that denial was proved by the 911 tape, where Whalen guesses that one may be Hispanic and she has no idea what race the other person is.

The other half is palpably believable based on the first half. If Whalen did not know the race of the suspects when she made the 911 call, how could she know their race by the time Sgt. Crowley arrived?

Well, to be fair, she would have seen the driver leave and may have gotten a better look at Gates. So, she may have known.

However, Murphy flatly denies that Crowley did more than acknowledge Whalen’s cell-phone wave and tell her to stay back and wait for the other officers. In other words, Whalen never spoke with Crowley at all.

Well, then, perhaps she was interviewed by other officers. The narrative of the police report reads as though Whalen gave the race to Crowley directly, and did so before he entered the home. The police commissioner explained that the police report is nothing more than a narrative which may jumble some facts but which is essentially accurate.

This raises the question: could the report be used as evidence in a trial? If so, isn’t the accuracy of the report rather important? If Whalen give that information to another officer at another time, that is relevant. If it was another witness entirely who gave that information, that is relevant. No other witnesses were named in the document.

When you listen to the audio of the incident, which consists primarily of statements between Crowley and dispatch, nowhere are the suspects identified as black. The 911 call does not mention black. Whalen denies ever mentioning the word black. No other witnesses were listed on the report.

Which leads us to here:

Who the hell mentioned black?

The commissioner’s defense of the report raises more questions than it answers.

This “moving on” idea is going to have to wait just a little bit…

It is true that I believe that I do not need to know more about Henry Louis Gates and Jim Crowley in order to understand the essential elements of the incident which led to Crowley arresting Gates.

However, such ignorance would do me no good in coming to understand why so many educated black people are certain that there was a racial element to this encounter on the part of the police, and it would do me no good in understanding why so many people who know Professor Gates insist that he could not have provoked his own arrest.

In other words, it’s time for me to take the time to get to know more about this man.

Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was born in 1950 in Piedmont, WV. He studied at Yale and Cambridge before being offered a post in the Afro-American Studies department at Yale in 1975, at the age of 25.

After being denied tenure at Yale, Gates spent time at Cornell and Duke before settling in at Harvard, where he has been since 1991.

In 1988 Gates published “The Signifying Monkey”, a study of the origins of afro-American culture. It was considered an important work.

Gates has expressed the opinion that you do not have to be of a culture to be an expert in that culture. He believes that a white person, for example, can be an expert in black culture.

In 1997 Time magazine listed Gates as one of the 25 Most Influential Americans.

The above doesn’t tell me much about the man. I’ve watched what video I can find and listened to what audio I can find, to try to get a better feel for the person. He’s been a guest more than once on the Tavis Smiley show. That tells me a lot. It tells me that this man is prominent and that he is well spoken. Tavis doesn’t wast air time on jugglers and clowns, much like Charlie Rose. I respect that about him. It’s the reason I was honored to be a citizen guest on his program twice. Truly honored.

I get the impression that there are people who simply believe it is quite impossible for Gates to have gotten himself arrested. They know a man who is highly educated, cultured, worldly as well as world renowned, well liked and well respected among his peers, a positive influence for many.

And, after all, he was in his own house.

So, to many, this entire thing seems to be “Alice In Wonderland” absurd. Up is down and down is up.

One thing I can tell you about Professor Gates: He knows black from white. He has spent the better part of a lifetime studying differences between black and white society, black and white culture, black and white experiences and belief systems.

The man knows black from white.

And by both his account and the account of the officer, his immediate response to being asked to step outside was to say this: “No I will not! Why? Because I’m a black man in America?”

And I wonder this: would any of those who know and love and respect the professor, would any of you have expected him to behave that way?

I hope that, honestly, the answer is “No.” This man is simply too well educated to put himself in the position of being belligerent with the police, especially without provocation.

In other words, the man seems to have had a bad moment.

To differing degrees, the accounts agree that Gates kept on having that bad moment, right up until the moment he was cuffed.

So, it seems to me he might have been slightly incoherent, and who could blame him? He was no doubt exhausted from his long trip, and was probably disoriented to see an officer standing at his door.

But Gates has said he had an immediate reaction to the presence of the officer, and that he feared being arrested. My question: why? All the officer did was walk up to the door and ask the man to step outside. Based on this, the hairs on Gates’ neck stand up and he fears arrest?

Why?

And so, I maintain that the path to truly understanding this incident goes through the answer to that question.

One thing I know pretty well by now: This incident is not the “outrage” it was initially portrayed to be.

It may be another kind of outrage, and it is critically important how things move forward from here.

Adrian Walker is a black columnist at the Boston Globe. I’d never read any of his columns until this morning, when I went to Boston.com looking for any updates on GatesGate.

Walker tried to sound reasonable, tried to come across as looking for balance.

Well, he fell flat on his face.

The title of his column, published on Friday, was encouraging: “Hey, Let’s Talk”.

But he didn’t really want to talk, he wanted to lecture.

He wrote this, which I think is a neat little summary of the problem:

If you’ve ever wondered why a national conversation on race is so hard to pull off, this week has furnished an answer. It’s just too hard for everyone to get past their preconceived ideas of what’s going through everyone else’s head.

Then he wrote:

I don’t know Gates well, but I know him well enough to categorically reject the caricature of him as an arrogant, entitled elitist whose big mouth was the only problem here.

Crowley I don’t know at all. Those who do vouch for his professionalism. He hasn’t done himself any favors by refusing to apologize or to acknowledge that he arrested someone who hadn’t done anything remotely criminal. If he really believes he didn’t do anything wrong, he’s clueless. Note that I did not say racist; I said clueless.

Do I believe race was part of this? Of course it was.

I don’t believe for one second that Alan Dershowitz, in the same situation, would have ended up with a mug shot. First, his neighbor probably wouldn’t have called the police, even if she didn’t recognize him. Second, Crowley probably would have gone away.

So add Walker to the list of those who know that Sgt. Crowley’s behavior toward Professor Gates was influenced by Gates’ blackness. And add him to the list of those who know that this is not about Professor Gates’ behavior, nor about the professor’s conditioning.

Gee, Adrian, thanks for being willing to talk about it.

I make the opposite assertion: This house had been broken into recently. A neighbor sees another force-in of the door (the original break-in was the cause of the door being jammed when the professor returned from his trip) and calls the police, who respond quickly based on the previous incident. I won’t rehash the particulars except to say in the strongest terms, as I said yesterday, that if a white man had continually berated the police, he too would have been arrested and possibly tased. Sgt. Crowley showed Professor Gates unusual deference, owing to the professor’s “stature”. Sgt. Crowley also conducted this last piece of business in full view of every other officer on the scene, including black officers, all of whom supported the arrest. And Sgt. Crowley, who teaches racial sensitivity to other officers, was accepted by President Obama as a good human being and a fine officer.

And still he and we must endure these heavy-handed assertions that he treated this black man differently than he would treat a white man. “But we’re not saying he’s a racist!” they assure us.

No, they’re simply assuring us that Sgt. Crowley unwittingly treated Professor Gates a certain way because of the way the sergeant was conditioned by his life experience to treat black people.

Racial Profiling, but subliminal.

As I said over at the mokelly blog, so in other words, heads it’s racism and tails it’s racial insensitivity?

And in no case does it have anything to do with the professor’s conditioning and with the professor’s behavior?

Uh huh.

SO glad we could “talk about it”…

Adrian Walker doesn’t even understand how much a part of the problem he is…

How about we stop accusing the cop of being too dumb to know what a redneck he is?

How about we stop being so offensive to a fellow human?

Any takers?

“It’s not about me,” he keeps insisting, almost pleading.

Oh, yes it is.

Professor Gates, like President Obama, keeps talking, hoping to make things better, and only manages to make them worse. His statement, released today on The Root:

“It was very kind of the President to phone me today. Vernon Jordan is absolutely correct: my unfortunate experience will only have a larger meaning if we can all use this to diminish racial profiling and to enhance fairness and equity in the criminal justice system for poor people and for people of color.

And to that end, I look forward to studying the history of racial profiling in a new documentary for PBS. I told the President that my principal regret was that all of the attention paid to his deeply supportive remarks during his press conference had distracted attention from his health care initiative. I am pleased that he, too, is eager to use my experience as a teaching moment, and if meeting Sgt. [James] Crowley for a beer with the President will further that end, then I would be happy to oblige.

After all, I first proposed that Sgt. Crowley and I meet as early as last Monday. If my experience leads to the lessening of the occurrence of racial profiling, then I would find that enormously gratifying. Because, in the end, this is not about me at all; it is about the creation of a society in which ‘equal justice before law’ is a lived reality.”

Henry Louis Gates Jr. is editor in chief of The Root.

Professor Gates either still does not get it, or still obstinately clings to the belief that if he repeats a fiction enough times, he can make people believe it’s true.

Noticeably absent in the above remarks are any apology to Sgt. Crowley for his argumentative and non-compliant manner, nor any acceptance of any responsibility at all for the way things turned out.

No wonder he wants this to not be about him.

Vernon Jordan is absolutely correct: my unfortunate experience will only have a larger meaning if we can all use this to diminish racial profiling

If my experience leads to the lessening of the occurrence of racial profiling

But he does want it to be about his blackness. And there is the real issue in all of this, because in every remark Obama has made, he has supported that view, that Gates was entitled to behave the way he did because he is black and therefore “sensitive” to relations with the police.

It ought to be a very interesting conversation between Gates, Crowley and Obama.

More importantly, we cannot settle this issue with innuendo and assumptions. And we cannot and must not give in to any sort of theory that white people simply don’t know better, that they have been “conditioned” to behave a certain way toward black people.

Two things, two real important things: ONE: Professor Gates must then also answer for the social conditioning which led to his own behavior, irrespective of the behavior of the officer; TWO, I want to assure you that a white man who behaved the way Gates did (obviously with different motivation) would have been arrested, and perhaps sooner, and perhaps tased. Whether he and his supporters admit it or not, Gates was shown unusual deference by Sgt. Crowley.

I’ve come to grudgingly accept that some positions are too hardened to budge off of their initial stance that this incident was caused by a racially insensitive police officer. I wonder what they will say when the final report comes out.

Oh how the spool unravels.

Professor Gates made that comment in the course of the following interview (at roughly the 12 minute mark):

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

The problem, of course, is that most of us know by now that Sergeant Crowley is not the racially motivated caricature that Professor Gates tried to paint.

It is stunning to listen to Professor Gates give his version of events, and contrast that with Sergeant Crowley’s account. I’m no expert, but Gates sounds quite nervous and not at all down-to-earth when describing the incident. Although Crowley is trained to discuss criminal cases matter-of-factly, his interview comes across much more calm, much more clear. It is impossible to reconcile the two versions. Either Crowley arrested Gates for no reason, which is Gates’ version, or, in front of several other officers and several civilians, Crowley warned Gates twice to either quiet down or go inside, and only when Gates continued to fail to comply, arrested him.

I mean, that’s a lot of people you gave to get to tell the same lie.

So, I think it’s at least highly likely that Gates’ version lacks all the essential elements of truth. He has all sorts of motivation to try to portray himself as the victim. I know it’s unlikely, but I would hope the day will come when Professor Gates admits that his initial version of events was not completely truthful.

Not only does Gates say that officer Crowley has a problem, he accuses Crowley of lying on the police report. The only part of the incident which cannot be verified by others was the part inside the house, where Gates admits he refused to comply and admits that he tried to take charge of the situation. What Gates does not admit is that Crowley had completed his business and was trying to leave, and Gates followed Crowley outside and continued to rant and rave. This last part was done in full view of other officers, at least one of whom, a black officer, supported the arrest “100 percent”.

Now you might say he’s just lining up with a fellow officer. So let’s see what the other witnesses say.

To me, the credibility clearly lies with Crowley, with regard to the factual aspects of the case.

With regard to the sensitivity aspects of the case, I am completely willing to have that discussion, because I’m hearing some things such as Sgt. Crowley was unwittingly conditioned to treat blacks with less respect than he treats whites.

But that’s not racism!, those same people say. In other words, this theory holds that whites mistreat blacks in ways that whites are not even aware of. This theory holds that a white man would have been treated differently because he was white.

But that’s not racism!, they say as they try to dance on the head of a pin.

As the insults just continue to pile up.

Re-posting the interview with Sgt. Crowley:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

I very rarely video blog. Today I was motivated to. I’m not a pro at this and I didn’t prepare beforehand, so I ramble on a bit. I’ve sat through the replay myself, and other than the fact that I constantly switch names and titles, it’s not too drawn out. Yes, it’s about 15 minutes, but as I say in there, this is complicated stuff.

I would hope we’re not being clocked.

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

Where is the apology?

Hell of a good question. The Cambridge Police Department, and it’s union, strongly supported their own practices and strongly condemned the president’s assertions.

As much as some want to make this about, as my good friend Morris says, that the police should have just walked away, I want to make it about the actions of Professor Gates, and his blunt repetition of the allegation that Sergeant Crowley was a racist.

My attitude is this: “Racist” is the white equivalent of the “N-word”. It is an incredibly powerful word to use and must not be tossed indiscriminately. And in fact we must not tolerate nor excuse those who do. We must condemn those who would be so reckless and so malicious.

Before I can honestly hear what anybody has to say about this, I need to hear them condemn Professor Gates’ behavior. If that person honestly accepts that Gates had no right to call Sgt. Crowley a racist and in fact that he owes the Sergeant a sincere apology, then we can have a meaningful conversation.

Otherwise, I don’t see how. We have to stop here, digest this moment, and get it right.

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

For all his efforts to make things better, the more that president Obama says on the matter of Sgt. Crowley and Professor Gates, he makes things so much worse.

It is time to start questioning the innate decency of a man who cannot utter a simple apology, who can speak for 6 minutes and admit, in so many words, that he was the stupid one for saying what he said, without ever actually taking blame. If that’s not enough to make you question this man’s innate decency, try this: Based on his own words, Obama knows that Crowley is not a racist. Obama made a point of flattering Crowley’s character. And yet, Obama will not condemn Gates for repeatedly calling Crowley a racist. In fact, Obama went out of his way to suggest that Sgt. Crowley should have deferred to Professor Gates more than he did, simply because blacks may, based on history, have a suspicion towards a police officer who is doing his job.

This would be the President Of The United States declaring that the policy of law enforcement should be to defer to blacks more than they would defer to whites, to prevent a misunderstanding based on history. This would be the President telling the black community to rise up against any police action that you, in your subjective perspective, deem unacceptable. You are not responsible for your actions. You do not have to comply with his orders. You may carry on at will.

I’m nearly at a loss for words, which is where I find myself most of the time with this embarrassment of a president.

That the chief law enforcement officer of this country could categorically justify disobedience in the face of lawful police activity, that he could further assert that the police ought to defer more to blacks than to whites in the name of “sensitivity” - I hope that any thinking person of any color would stand with me and insist that this president answer for these allegations.

At one and the same time, he has gone much too far and not nearly far enough.

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

The reason President Chicken took no questions:

“Mr. President, do you believe that Sgt. Crowley is a racist?”

“No, I’m sure that he’s not, and in fact I’m confident that his actions were not racially motivated.”

“Followup, sir: In that case, do you condemn Professor Gates’ allegations in that regard, and do you think that he owes Sgt. Crowley an apology?”

“…………”

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

There are many, many things which are in the process of going horribly wrong with the Obama presidency, and I am sorting through them in order to write a coherent post on the subject, coming soon.

Meanwhile, we have last night’s news conference in which Obama decided to comment on the arrest of Henry Louis Gates, a Harvard professor who was breaking into his own home because the door was jammed. Gates was, as we all know by now, arrested not because he was a suspected burglar but because he created a raucous scene in which he directly and repeatedly accused the police of racism. His disorderly conduct arrest was likely designed to calm him down, and the charges were later dropped “in the interests of justice.” I’ve read the police report; if you have not, I suggest that you do.

And when the President Of The United States decided to comment on a situation about which he admitted he did not “know all the facts”, what did he say? He said: “The Cambridge police acted stupidly.” Not might have; did. Fact. Certain.

Really?

Couple of things: one, I’ve gone over this in my head many times and I honestly don’t know if the police would have asked a white man for his ID in this circumstance. The point is, it was not egregious for them to ask the professor for his ID. After all, they were investigating a possible crime. Confirming that this was, in fact, the resident would wrap this thing up in no time flat and let everybody go on about their day. Gates in fact refused this lawful police request at first and instead turned tables, immediately accusing the officer of being a racist.

As a white person, I take high, high offense to that remark. How does Gates know what is in the officer’s heart? This officer is behaving as he has been trained to behave, and he has to deal with such an accusation? He has to tell reporters “I am not a racist”? Anybody with any sensitivity should feel for this man, who was only doing his job.

But no, not only must he endure Gates’ endless berating and ex-post-facto insistence on an apology, now he must endure the wrath of the PRESIDENT?

I already had a lot of reasons to be disgusted with this president, but this one takes the cake.

At what point is Gates required to answer for his acts, if only as a matter of setting the record straight?

Gates wants an apology from a man he accused of being a racist? It seems to me the officer is the one who is owed the apology.

My other thought is how reckless it was of Obama to make that statement. Why? Because it undermines public confidence in law enforcement. If mistakes were made here, they were clearly made by Gates as well as the officer. Gates was the one who made the baseless accusation, Gates was the one who escalated, Gates was the one who made a public scene and Gates was the one who refused to calm down.

Gates, in other words, got himself arrested. This wasn’t racial profiling, this was an indignant black man who chose to make his blackness the issue. Any profiling that went on came from Gates, who assumed he knew what motivated this officer, and knew that it was not public service.

This is the same officer who, as an EMT in 1993 attempted to save the life of dying Celtic Reggie Lewis. Some racist.

But much more important is that this president has, once again, said something he should not have said. He should have remained unbiased and encouraged all of us not to react until we know all the facts. The police report speaks volumes; the officer commented today on Boston radio station WEEI.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

One day we will know how all of this went down, and I predict that it will not turn out that the police acted stupidly but that Gates did.

All he had to do was comply, like any other citizen would be expected to do. That’s all. Just comply. This thing would have been over in moments and he could have gone about his business.

I know that a lot of black bloggers give Obama crap for not addressing black issues more directly, more often. This is the issue he chose to inject himself into? And this is how he chose to do it?

People, we cannot excuse this behavior. This man supposedly represents all of America, and he called the police “stupid” while admitting he did not “know the facts”.

This man is qualified to lead the most powerful country on the planet?

Just what the hell is going on here?

In 1968, when I was 8 years old, Adam-12 came on the air. It lasted seven seasons and made household names out of Martin Milner and Kent McCord. Many of you have probably seen it on Nick At Night or TV Land.

The premise of the show is that seven year veteran Pete Malloy (MIlner) is a mentor to probationary officer Jim Reed (McCord). Milner had last been seen living the road life in the TV series Route 66, but that show had been off the air for four years by 1968, and Milner came back as older and more grizzled than his chiseled partner. There was no denying McCord’s eye appeal.

The show was basically a “day in the life” saga about two L.A. patrolmen, with very little connecting narrative between episodes. The show was half an hour long, or 24 minutes of air time. I remember looking forward to the show every week, although at age eight I probably did not see the first season much if at all.

And so I have taken up the idea of watching the series from start to finish, which totals 175 episodes, and which I can do for the price of my Netflix subscription, but which you can do at Hulu for free, if you don’t mind the commercials.

I’m here tonight to recommend episode 17 from Season 1, It All Happened So Fast. Without giving too much away, there is only a single story line, and it all takes place at the scene of a crime and then back at headquarters, and there are no more than half a dozen speaking parts. McCord does a brilliant job as Reed in a very high strung situation, and as I watched it I began to wonder if he’d been nominated for an Emmy Award for the episode. He was not, nor was he ever nominated for any acting award.

The series itself is a quaint throwback to a time when people smoked whenever and wherever they wanted to, women were “dames” and, of course, teenagers were all stoners who loved to commit crimes for the sheer thrill of tormenting the pigs.

Still, it moves along well, the characters are clearly defined, there is a quirky sense of realism that shows such as “Hill Street Blues” would later seek to replace with earthiness and chaos, and no matter how you slice it, Milner and McCord work well together. I’m having a great time watching it.

And I highly recommend the above episode. You don’t need to watch the preceding episodes to appreciate it, at least I don’t think you do.