Yahoo! Headline in Conflict with Article Headline: "Charges Dropped [sic]" versus "Charge Dropped"

[xocet]

It is interesting to note that Yahoo's homepage headline reads:
"Charges dropped against prominent black Harvard scholar".

However, if one were to look at the AP article to which this headline points, the article's headline reads:
"Charge dropped against black Harvard scholar".

The introduction to the AP article is as follows:
"By Melissa Trujillo, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jul 21, 9:28 pm ET

BOSTON – Prosecutors dropped a disorderly conduct charge Tuesday against prominent black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr., who was arrested after forcing his way into his own house in what he and other blacks say was an outrageous but all-too-common example of how police treat them."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_harvard_scholar_disorderly

This is a clear example of - at best - inconsistent editing or - at worst - slanted editing in the media; it makes the situation of the arrest seem worse that it actually was. In fact, if one were to read the full URL, one might even come to believe that the URL were written to make an assertion - but that, of course, would be paranoia....

[zonkers]

1. Yeah, the same way Fox mislabeled Gov. Sanford and other "sex scandaled" Republican politicians

as Democrats and then apologizes after the fact when no one cares. I don't buy it. Happens too often. There is so much ugly out there.

[MercutioATC]

2. How would he want the police to respond if somebody WAS breaking into his house?

From the article, he was asked for identification and provided it. While the officer should have given his name or badge number, Even Gates doesn't claim that the officer acted offensively or unprofessionally. Nevertheless, Gates was verbally combative and followed the officers out of the house even after the situation had been resolved.

That's a completely legitimate disorderly conduct charge.

(and yes, I agree that it was a "charge", not "charges")

[MADem]

3. What was disorderly about his conduct? That he didn't kiss the cop's ass?

Speaking firmly to a police officer is not "disorderly conduct." That's why the charge was dropped--because it was bogus in the first place.

[MercutioATC]

5. From the article:

"Police said Gates was arrested after he yelled at an officer, accused him of racial bias and refused to calm down after the officer demanded that Gates show him identification to prove he lived in the home."

Nothing in the article, which includes claims by Gates, describes the officers engaging in any activity that could be construed as "racial bias"...yet Gates accused them of this to the point of following them out of the house even after the situation had been resolved.



In addition:

"He spoke of a "terrifying and humiliating" experience at the Cambridge jail, where he was booked, fingerprinted, photographed and questioned, then locked up in a tiny cell that made him claustrophobic."

Gates was arrested and went through the same process that anybody taken into custody goes through...and I'm almost certain that they didn't build a special holding cell for Gates...he went into the same cell that thousands of people before him have occupied.

In light of the fact that his arrest only came after he left his house to further verbally abuse officers that were leaving after already dealing with his abuse for doing their job, I find his claim that the booking process was "terrifying and humiliating" laughable...a notion that is reinforced by his claim that his holding cell was "tiny" and "made him claustrophobic".



From the facts presented in the article, Gates did act in a manner that violated the "disorderly conduct" statute...

...and his "terrifying" and "claustrophobic" comments seem, frankly, whiny to me.

[MADem]

6. You need to keep up. You're waaaaaaaay behind the curve on this matter.

First of all, it's not a crime to yell at a cop. It's not even a crime to call a cop a racist. Particularly when the cop entered your home without permission and without a warrant....see?

Second, the Professor, who is a very well known, highly regarded, and measured elderly man who needs a cane to get about (turn on PBS and you'll see him, often as not) vigorously disputes the report prepared by Sgt. Jim Crowley. No, I'm not making the guy's name up.

Third, when the Professor gave the guy two forms of ID and proved that the house was his, the cop should have tipped his cap and said "Sorry sir. We had a report of a break-in at this address. Apparently the caller saw you and your driver wrestling with the door and came to a wrong conclusion. We got here as quick as we could. I hope we haven't upset you too much--can we help you get that door closed until your maintenance man can get here to fix it?"

That was the "right" response.

You're wrong. You're so wrong it's not funny. I suggest you look up that "disorderly conduct" statute and educate yourself on what it actually says. The reason that the Cambridge PD dropped the charge, apologized and the Mayor of Cambridge also expressed her intent to offer a formal apology on behalf of the city, is because the man did nothing that rose to the level of "disorderly conduct." By your view, a man can't say "Tell me your name and badge number" in his own goddamn home.

The police officer didn't like the Professor's "attitude" in his own goddamn home, so he cuffed him--on his own front porch. Without cause. Without justification.

Now all that remains is for the Sergeant to apologize for his intemperate behavior and the prevarications he entered into his police report to cover his ass, and the Cambridge PD, which has an ugly history of minority insensitivity, to go through a bit of that "grow up and treat people right" training in the long, hot month of August. There is a vigorous investigation underway into the Sergeant's response. He may end up in the property room for the rest of his career, if he even keeps his job. He went WAY over the line, and he thought he could get away with it, because the "whiny" guy (I can't believe you even used that term) was just an old black fellah with an attitude. He thought wrong.

[SleeplessInAlabama]

4. Fourth Amendment =/= disorderly conduct

"Disorderly conduct" remains one of those BS charges they can throw at someone to "take him downtown" give him a hard time when he's done nothing illegal.

[Fearless]

7. This whole issue is a nonissue... I can't say how glad I am that DU didn't pick up the meme...

As it's done by so many other pointless media-spun stories in the past.