The fact is, he didn’t. He told Gates to come outside to continue the conversation, and the proceeded to continue the conversation, culminating in Gates’ arrest. Why, if he planned to leave, did he not just… leave? I mean, I’m open to the idea, but the facts of what happened to do not support it.
Exactly. We only know that he did not. He could have, but he did not. If he planned to, what stopped him? He could have ignored Gates’ imprecations and just… kept walking. Why didn’t he, if, as you claim, he planned to? Since you claim insight here not obvious evidence based on the facts.
I guess I’m trying to say it seems to me that you’ve made some huge assumptions yourself, based on no evidence whatsoever. Let’s try to keep this fact-based. You claim that I’m not open to the idea that Crowley was planning to leave. Well, what I want you to explain to me is, what stopped him? You want me to acknowledge that he may have planned to go. But he didn’t. So who is drawing conclusions about what he was thinking or planning? You are. I have no idea what he was thinking or planning. I can only point to what he did, which is… not leave.
He also told Gates to come outside and talk to him. That’s in the police report. Why would he think the conversation wouldn’t continue in a similar vein to the one they were having inside? If he just wanted to leave, why not say, “OK, Dr. Gates, I think we’re done here. Have a pleasant day,” and then leave? That would have indicated that the misadventure was over. He didn’t say that. He, by his own admission, did not try to end the encounter.
He went outside because he coudn’t hear above the noise. I’m not sure why you’re plugging a fantasy conversation but why would you think the officer was going to suggest Gates have a nice day after being treated poorly by him? Gates had no reason to take his tirade outside but the officer had a reason to exit the house so he could finish his radio transmission.
For crying out loud, that doesn’t mean he didn’t PLAN to.
No, he told Gates to come outside IF HE WANTED TO continue the conversation (this may be semantics, but is was an OFFER, not an ORDER).
Because Gates came outside. Gates did not have to come outside, and if he had not, I think it’s quite reasonable to assume that Crowley would have left, as he possibly planned to.
The facts of what happened don’t say anything one way or the other about whether Crowley PLANNED to leave.
I only claim logical assessment of possibilities. You want to know why he didn’t leave, ask Crowley. I suspect the answer will have something to do with Gates raising a ruckus that Crowley, at the time, thought best to not ignore.
Again, so what? So flipping what? The fact that he didn’t go does not tell us whether or not he planned to go. Have you never in your life experienced having planned something and then not done it because of a change in circumstance? Quit beating this dead horse, please.
Not at all. I’m suggesting possibilities.
And yet you said “It’s safe to say, then, that Crowley…did not plan to leave…” Which is what started me on this little sparring match with you. I maintain that it is NOT safe to say he didn’t plan to leave, and that the fact that he did not leave does NOT make the case that he did not plan to. I don’t know what Crowley planned, and haven’t claimed to know, but you have claimed so in the quoted statement, and I challenge your stated conclusion that he did not plan to leave.
I’m not plugging anything. I’m imagining what a person would say to extricate himself from a conversation that he wanted to be over. I’m imagining ::gasp!:: a polite end to the situation. It was entirely possible. What, you’ve never said, “Have a nice day” when you just meant, “Fuck off!” I sure have.
Gates could have been encouraged to remain in his house, but, and you seem to be missing this over and over and over, he exited the house AT CROWLEY’S SUGGESTION. If Crowley didn’t want to talk to him, he easily could have said any number of conversation enders, including a totally insincere, “Have a nice day, sir.” Instead, he told Gates to come outside. Those are not the words of someone who wants the other person to stay inside, or to end the conversation.
This is not rocket science. I am not extrapolating or making assumptions. It’s all in the police report. Why do you keep contradicting the only document you accept as true in this whole scenario?
No, he told Gates to come outside IF he wanted to talk to him.
Maybe he thought Gates had gotten it out of his system. Maybe he thought it would be quieter outside and lead to a calmer atmosphere. Maybe he knew it was a long shot and was just hoping. Whatever. It wasn’t an irrevocable given that things would continue in a similar vein.
Maybe he couldn’t tell if Gates had further questions, and wanted to offer him an opportunity to ask them rather than cut him off just because he (Crowley) had nothing further.
The officer didn’t encourage him to exit the house, he said if wanted to continue the conversation he would be outside. He went outside so he could hear. The last thing the officer wanted was more of Gates’ love and attention. The words of the officer are those conveyed to a nut job who wouldn’t STFU. I don’t understand your fasination with this point.
Who gives a fuck about his plans? He obviously was not very attached to them, because he stayed. He knew that Gates was heated up, but continued the conversation. He chose to do these things. He could have walked away, ignored Gates’ words and gone. He could have encouraged Gates to remain in the house rather than suggesting he come outside. You want me to consider possibilities? Fine. Why don’t you consider these possibilities?
Why would he suggest a person who was verbally abusing him come outside and continue the conversation? Knowing full well that a continuation of that behavior would be disturbing the peace? And more to the point, why would he make this suggestion IF HE WAS PLANNING TO LEAVE?
But you place no responsibility upon the officer to defuse the situation. How could he have done this? By not suggesting Gates come outside? By saying good bye inside the house, and then leaving? I mean, these are also logical possibilities. If Crowley had made these attempts to disengage, and Gates had still pursued him, this would be a very different conversation. Someone planning to leave usually finds a way to leave. Crowley did not, and there’s plenty of evidence to suggest he didn’t plan to leave either. You can ignore that if you wish, but I think it hurts your argument.
I’M beating a dead horse? You’re the one saying over and over what Crowley PLANNED to do. Who gives a fuck? He didn’t leave, and Gates in no way stopped him from doing so. Gates was doing exactly the same thing he was doing in the house, and Crowley could have walked away from it. He chose not to. So his plans, which you don’t know and I don’t know, are totally irrelevant. You could stop bringing them up any time you like.
Only the ones that support your view of the issue, not the ones that suggest Crowley’s culpability in the situation.
The fact that he didn’t offer a conversation ender, or any encouragement to remain inside, and that he suggested to Gates to come outside to keep talking, all undermine your position that Crowley planned to leave. I could be wrong, maybe he was just really really really bad at planning to leave.
There are ways to disengage from a conversation you want to be over. Crowley did not employ these. I certainly would not offer further conversation to someone I no longer wanted to talk to. Are you a mind reader? Are you sure Crowley didn’t want Gates to come outside so he could arrest him? You don’t know this for a fact. Also, you don’t know that Gates was a nut job, and I would say that you’re very much wrong on this point.
No, he didn’t continue the conversation, he left the house. He still had to wrap up his radio transmissions which he did outside. Gates chose to follow the officer outside. The problem with Gates’ situation is GATES.
His hip reminds him of overt racism with every twinge, and all the wealth and power and recognition in the world can’t ease the pain of one leg that’s two inches shorter than the other because a white doctor blew him off as uppity.
Gates experienced racism from a white doctor in Appalachia 44 years ago.* Thus, the white policeman at his door is racist.
Makes sense.
I’ve been burglarized by black kids, had my car radio stolen by a black guy, was in a car wreck caused by an uninsured black woman high on crack. I suppose by Gatesian logic I should assume all black people I encounter are irresponsible substance abusing criminals. I don’t. I suppose I’m not on his intellectual level.
*Too bad he wasn’t a white kid in Appalachia, who are famous for the world of opportunity before them.
Is you proposition that Gates deserved to be arrested? That he committed a crime? That the application of the vague “disorderly conduct” charge was justified?
Baloney. I was simply pointing out that your stereotype of Gates as some out of touch, privileged by position whiny ass titty baby who wouldn’t know real racism if he tripped over it was nonsense.
This is getting surreal. Apples and oranges to the extreme. We have really different styles of discussion here.
Rubystreak contends that Crowley did not plan to leave. I counter that we don’t know what his PLAN was. That’s the one point I’m making – we cannot and do not KNOW what his PLAN was. The responses address this, that, and the other thing, but not the point made. They go into accusing me of saying I know what his plan was: no way, I’ve consistently said we don’t know what his plan was. They say “but he didn’t leave”: I make the glaringly obvious observation that that still doesn’t tell us what his plan was. And finally we get “Who gives a fuck about his plans?” Well, I’d say the person who brought them up in the first place. If his plan is irrelevant, why make the statement that he didn’t plan to leave?
Then there’s the contention that Crowley continued the conversation. Magiver counters that no, he left the conversation, having offered Gates the opportunity to continue if he (Gates) wanted to, and it was Gates who continued the conversation. That’s the one point he made – that it was Gates who kept it going when there was an option to stop. And the response blithely ignores this sole point and fires a series of questions that have already been addressed in previous posts and DO NOT ADDRESS THE POINT AT ALL.
So what I’m seeing is a pattern of misstating certain details (e.g., “he told him to come outside” is NOT the same as “I’ll talk to you outside if you have further questions”), getting called on the misstatements, diverting from the misstatements to other aspects, and continuing to propagate the misstatements. And Rubystreak, Omniscient, and others no doubt have similar frustrations with how I, Magiver, and others are responding in this thread. It reminds me of debates on abortion – althought the stated subject is the same, the two sides are discussing two different issues (murder vs. control of one’s own body) and never connect.
I think that Rubystreak may be right about one thing – there’s no point in further discussion. Not that it hasn’t been valuable – I’m glad to see various perspectives, and I imagine we’ve all learned something. It just seems we’re spinning our wheels now.