Disorderly Conduct: Conversation About Gates Arrest Precedes Arrest

[BlueJessamine]

Source: The Huffington Post

A lawyer who moments earlier had been complaining to friends about police overreaction in the arrest of Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., got a taste of the Gates treatment himself after loudly chanting "I hate the police" near a traffic stop in Northwest Washington, D.C.

Pepin Tuma, 33, was walking with two friends along Washington's hip U Street corridor around midnight Saturday, complaining about how Gates had been rousted from his home for not showing a proper amount of deference to a cop. "We'd been talking about it all day," said Tuma. "It seems like police have a tendency to act overly aggressively when they're being pushed around," Tuma recalled saying.

Then the group noticed five or six police cruisers surrounding two cars in an apparent traffic stop on the other side of the street. It seemed to Tuma that was more cops than necessary.

"That's why I hate the police," Tuma said. He told the Huffington Post that in a loud sing-song voice, he then chanted, "I hate the police, I hate the police."


Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/29/disorderly-conduct-conver_n_246794.html

---

Tuma was arrested - The charge: disorderly conduct -- just like Gates.

snip

Tuma filed a complaint with the D.C. Office of Police Complaints, alleging a lack of probable cause, a false arrest, and that the officer used harassing and demeaning language -- Tuma alleges the officer called him a "faggot."


"People talk about the Gates thing in terms of race, but it's an ongoing problem of police using disorderly conduct to shut people up," Tuma said.

[Enrique]

1. this is very different from the Gates case

for one thing it's in public and for another thing Tuma seems to have an agenda that Gates doesn't have.

[dogtag]

5. How utterly charming.

I felt from the get go, that one of the unfortunate results of the Gates case would be fuel for the young and stupid to try out their new found 'right' to yell at the police regardless of the circumstances. He's lucky he wasn't charged with inciting a riot.

[Threedifferentones]

50. You forgot the sarcas, tag, right?

Inciting a riot? So, it is okay for someone to hold up a sign that says "I hate gay people," because that is a part of free speech. But, yelling "I hate the police" is a crime on the order of looting and burning. Assuming you were in fact serious, dogtag, your post demonstrates exactly why the police get so much "heat" on DU.

[imdjh]

21. I agree that it's very different, though I disagree that Tuma and Gates have different agenda.

They might have a different ultimate or primary objective, but the methodology was to piss off the cop.

[No Elephants]

43. Gates had no agenda, period. And pissing off a cop is not against the law.

Especially when the cop is hassling you for being in your own home, but, just in general. Pissing off a cop is not a crime. A cop violaing someone's first amendment rights, on the other hand, is actionable.

[cosmicone]

70. All cops-n-training should have a "psychological hardening" training

where the candidate is placed in a windowless room and several people of different ethnicities use profanities and slurs at him (including references to his mother and wife etc.) The cop can be monitored with telemetry for BP, Pulse, Skin temperature and respiratory rate.

None of the candidates advances until they pass with a minimal change in stress.

This test should be repeated years while the cop is actively employed.

We can weed-out overly reactive and belligerent cops this way and it would result in a better police force.

[The abyss]

72. No - it would only result in robots

Remember "GORT"

GORTs passing a qualitative test assigned by a continually changing society.

I prefer humans, fallible as they are.

I also prefer humans that are willing to take control of their own lives!

[EFerrari]

57. Gates' agenda was to go to bed after a long flight.

[No Elephants]

41. +1. But, whatever happened to freedom of speech? Since when is chanting in public against the law?

These arrests for not treating a cop like a demi god MUST stop!

[sharesunited]

2. It is pride elevated to hubris. But it is unwise to taunt anyone who holds power over you.

[SkyDaddy7]

4. I thought We the People...

Were allowed to speak freely as long as we were not threatening others or interfering in an ongoing investigation?

I guess those days are over?

[sharesunited]

7. Absolutely! But you want sympathy when police persecute you.

You don't want people to say you were asking for it.

[Fumesucker]

14. As the Gates brouhaha shows clearly..

There is *always* someone who will say you were asking for it..

[No Elephants]

63. +1 Just like the birthers will always have more questions, no matter who shows what to them.

[Jim Sagle]

71. Anyone who DOES say that is a piece of shit, anyhow.

[No Elephants]

60. No. What you want is freedom from persecution by the police. Right is right and wrong

is wrong, regardless of what people say about it.

[No Elephants]

44. True, but lack of wisdom is not a crime, either.

[rateyes]

3. I agree that this arrest was "stupid." But, Tuma isn't very bright, either.

Who publicly insults a group of people all wearing guns? Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, this guy.

And, yes, I hope Tuma wins the upcoming lawsuit.

[SkyDaddy7]

6. Not very bright?

He was simply using his constitutional right of free speech! It is the cops who are using "disorderly conduct" to arrest everyone and anyone they please for anything they please!

I am sorry but I simply do not agree with those who say he is stupid or does not have the right to say he hates the police!

I guess saying, "I HATE THE GOP" will soon get me arrested? There is NO DIFFERENCE!

[Doremus]

9. +1

[rateyes]

10. I guess you didn't read my whole post.

I didn't say he didn't have the RIGHT, and I said I hope he WINS and that the charges are dropped against him. I also said the cops were wrong to do what they did.

But, a person who knows by reason of what he said to his friends that those cops might very well overreact, if he proceeds to irritate a group of people with guns, tasers, clubs, etc. is not being very bright.

[Downwinder]

12. If anybody gives up their rights, they give them up for all. n/t

[rateyes]

15. Whatever.

I guess my point went right over your head. I never suggested that anyone give up their right to free speech. But, there is a way to exercise that right that lessens the chance of being killed and never being able to exercise that right again.

Cheese on a cracker. Some things are worth dying for...this isn't one of them.

[Fumesucker]

35. US troops take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights is part of the Constitution.

Are you suggesting the BOR is not worth dying for?

[rateyes]

40. Yeah, I'm suggesting that.

:sarcasm:

[Fumesucker]

42. Good, that's what I thought..

Because I'm one of those fools who took that oath..

Nice to know what you think of me.

[rateyes]

67. Good Gawd Almighty. Did you not see the sarcasm smiley?

I didn't take the cop's side in this. All I said was that pissing off people with guns, many of whom are "roidaholics" is not a smart thing to do. But, hey, if you want, go exercise your freedom of speech the next time you see a bunch of cops and cuss them the fuck out.

Take a pill of the chill variety.

And, on edit: I took the oath, too. And, I'm no fool. As I said, there are things worth dying for. Using my free speech rights to piss off people with deadly weapons with no way to defend myself isn't one of them. I'm just as free not to do such a stupid thing.

[No Elephants]

59. Yes, you are suggesting exactly that. You just don't get that you are.

[rateyes]

69. No. I'm not. You just don't get that I'm not.

[No Elephants]

47. Actually, you did suggest that he should have not have opened his mouth in the presence of cops. If

that is not giving up your right of free speech, what is? Freedom of speech is the ability to speak truth to power boldly, not the ability to whisper it in the midst of only those who agree with you.

I am glad these incidents are occurring. Perhaps we will finally be able to get it said out loud that cops have no right to arrest people for not treating cops like demigods.

[rateyes]

68. Free speech

is the freedom to speak, or the freedom not to speak. I already said that the cop was wrong in this. I simply remarked that the "speaker" in question deliberately used his speech to piss of a bunch of cops with deadly weapons. I don't find that to be a very smart thing to do if one values his life.

Risking your life over jumping up and down creating a scene by yelling "I hate cops" over and over again just doesn't strike me to be a risk worth taking.

If he didn't want to get arrested, as he said, then he should have used his freedom not to piss off the cops. He didn't change a damned thing, and he most likely will be found guilty. Yeah, real smart.

[SkyDaddy7]

27. My bad...

However, if we do not all begin to irritate these government sanctioned gangs the problem will continue to get worse. IMHO.

I can speak from experience! I got arrested in my own yard one time for standing up to an very unprofessional cop...He was cussing at me calling me a smart ass mother fucker and asking me if I had problem to do something about. He literally was trying to get me to hit him! The case was thrown out but he knew I would have to pay a lot of money to get out of jail and hire an attorney...However, I have a few criminal defense lawyers as friends so I got lucky.


Cops have way to much power using the disorderly conduct for whatever they decide is disorderly.

[Ignis]

11. Exercising those pesky 1st Ammendment rights? Horrible!

:patriot:

[imdjh]

19. There is a huge difference between Gates and Tuma

Gates' childish behavior could in no way have put Crowley in danger from a mob.

Police officers effecting an arrest or interrogation in the "hip (not unless heaven and earth has been moved in the last 20 years) U Street" area being baited by someone's childish, playful, or deliberately provocative behavior can be viewed as a serious threat.

In San Francisco, gay people fought for the "right" to OBSERVE the police in their dealings with people on the street. They went to classes on how to OBSERVE, even OBSERVE with prejudice, without interfering with or obstructing the police. The police were instructed to CEASE to demand unreasonable privacy and distance from those citizens who were OBSERVING their actions. The observers did not gain a "right" to taunt the police while the police were conducting an arrest.

[SkyDaddy7]

29. My entire point is...

Police have way to much power within the disorderly conduct statute in most states...Cops these days make things personal and forget they are to be professional. I know certain a true "police officer", not cop, could have calmed the situation with Tuma without arresting him, the same goes for situation with Gates! These are Professional "Police Officers" not egomaniac "cops", there is a HUGE difference!

I have seen countless cases where cops lie on police reports and actually lie on the stand...Judges do very little to discipline them and police chiefs do NOTHING! Several police agencies in my area have been busted by the local news having arrest incentives for their officers! Like for instance if a cop can instigate an individual to do something stupid by using "verbal judo" he can take what would have not been a crime up to a felony and then get rewarded with time off or better equipment, etc. This goes on all over the place and there simply is no one who can police the police! At least this is the environment in Atlanta, Ga.

I understand police have very tough job but things are spiraling out of control. IMHO.

[Skipperoo]

31. The fight to "observe" predates gays by a long shot.

This goes back to the Civil Rights era of the sixties and the Black Panthers.

"California Supreme Court ruling states that everyone has the right to observe a police officer carrying out his duty as long as they stand a reasonable distance away, and a reasonable distance was constituted in that particular California Supreme Court ruling as eight to ten feet." Bobby Seale (a hero of mine) to a police officer, 1966.

[imdjh]

65. I didn't say they invented it, I said they fought for it.

Prior to that, in SF, the cops were still doing the "move along or I'll arrest you too" thing.

[No Elephants]

48. Dup.

[No Elephants]

49. Gates did not behave childishly and people do have a right to taunt

the police. It's called the Constitution of the United States. No one has to "gain" that right. In both cases, it was asshole cops who were out of line.

Observers may chose to relinquish certain rights voluntarily in order to accomplish other goals they have. That has nothing to do with the price of tea in china, in terms of this thread.

[Threedifferentones]

56. But, if a cop treats you like shit during a traffic stop, or whatever,

NOTHING will be done. Which is why so many of us harbor anger towards cops, we have been treated badly for no reason.

Of course, the cops mentioned in the OP did not necessarily deserve the treatment they received. But, they have a recourse: they shove you around, cuff you too tight, call you awful names, then fuck your life up with trumped up charges. Until I have similar vindictive power against abusive cops, the police will get little sympathy from me.

[mule_train]

8. I am suspicious of police and for limiting of their power, but

i also worked for a guy who was a reserve officer, and he gave me some insights about what goes on in a cop's head

you dont have to 'suck up' to them, or take any guff from them

But, whenever you act in a manner that suggest to them that the situation is not under their control, then they feel they have to get it back under their control, or risk getting written up by their boss, at the very minimum

if you reallyu want a cop to go away and leave you alone (and most people do), then help them justify in their report why they left the scene, that things were under control

you might be dealing with someone who just wants to get off work and go home without writing up a report - if you'll let him

it's just common sense

(was also told if you get 'lit up' pull over as soon as it's safe, turn the dome light on, turn the car off and put your hands on the wheel - it's body language for 'i'm not armed, you can relax, officer')

[L. Coyote]

18. And don't forget, keep your hair short!

Rather than limit their power, how about they become less prejudiced.

It would help a lot to eliminate laws that allow them to take liberals out of the voting pool!!

[No Elephants]

52. If speech makes a cop feel the situation is not in his control, that is his problem. A poster

on one of the Gates threads said that Crowley's immediate demands that Gates step outside were Crowley's attempts to get control of the situation. This poster assumed that an innocent person has an obligation to step outside his own home, yielding his own control of his home and his person to the cop, simply because that would make the cop, who already has a nightstick and a gun, feel more in control. That's crap. Whatever it is that goes on their heads needs to change.

[mule_train]

73. my comments only applied to people who just want the cop to go away

if your first priority is to make a big stink, go right ahead - it's your constitutional right

[mule_train]

13. try chanting 'i hate lawyers' while pepin is speaking in court

and see what his reaction is

[CBGLuthier]

17. Do you know the difference between a street and a courtroom?

[No Elephants]

54. Apples and oranges. Chanting in court disrupts the proceedings because the judge, witnesses, etc. .

cannot be heard. Contradistinctively, Chanting on the street does not prevent a cop from going about his legitimate business--and that business does NOT include violating anyone's Constitutional rights or arresting people for not liking cops.

[nbcouch]

16. Gulag DC

Chanting "I hate the police" from across the street is disorderly conduct? How, exactly? Not profane, not disruptive, on public property - how is that NOT protected speech?

Maybe what Tuma did was foolish - so what? If acting foolish is grounds for arrest, then the entire GOP should be behind bars.

The police state mentality that's been encouraged for so long in this country is now so pervasive, both in the police and in the public at large, and so accepted that even on a progressive message board we find people agreeing with what the police did here. They should have simply ignored Tuma. What they did do instead cannot be allowed in a free society.

[imdjh]

20. Change the players.

Make the person taunting black, the neighborhood more dangerous, and the police arresting a black guy. Now, have someone "playfully" or "sing song voice" taunting the police and possibly encouraging mob action against the police for arresting someone. I know, it's not the same thing, but in racially contentious places where police must make an extra effort to do the same thing the same way regardless of neighborhood, regardless of color, regardless of suspect, regardless of taunter, then arresting Tuma makes sense.

[nbcouch]

22. I'm not particularly interested

in hypotheticals. If Tuma had been black, if it had been a dangerous neighborhood, blah blah ... who cares? If Tuma had thrown a brick at a police officer, he should have been arrested for assaulting a police officer - but that's not what happened. He stood across the street from them chanting "I hate the police," and the police overreacted. It's a open and shut case.

[imdjh]

23. Then you aren't really interested in reason.

Because, if police officers can look over and say, "Hey, it's only some white queen, no threat." then they can selectively enforce other aspects of the law.

The legitimate goal for fifty years has not been to stop the police from doing their job, or to stop them from protecting themselves, or to erode their authority or dignity. It has been to get them to treat everyone the same under the same circumstances.

All the craziness and bluster aside, the core allegation from Gates and his supporters has been that Officer Crowley would not have been as diligent or authoritarian had Gates been Professor Kingsfield. This is before the arrest and independent of it. Whether Gates actually believes that or whether he was just starting some shit is also open for discussion, but the core question returns if Professor Kingsfield would have been arrested under the same circumstances. Well, Professor Kingsfield couldn't be arrested under the same circumstances, because he couldn't be accusing Crowley (not sanely anyway) of being racist in his actions. Crowley couldn't be put in the position of allowing someone to halt his investigation or challenge his authority simply by accusing him of racism. So there is no functional hypothetical there.

In the situation in question, a person taunting the police should be treated the same regardless of color. And given Tuma's apparent attitude, had he NOT been arrested, he would have called a press conference to say, "See, I was mouthy with the police and nothing happened because I'm white."

Don't put the police in a no win situation. Yes, they work for us, but we rely on them. We cannot hobble them and expect what we expect from them. We can't hobble them through policies which make it impossible for them to do their jobs, and we cannot hobble them with an unrelenting barrage of accusations of misconduct.

[nbcouch]

24. Of course I am

Number one, we're talking about Tuma in DC, not Gates in Cambridge. I don't see the two stories as analogous at all.

Number two, if we allow police the latitude of behaving as if hypotheticals are reality, then we are truly and inevitably screwed.

Number three, yes, the police should be consistent in their actions. They should consistently adhere to and uphold the Constitution, and what they did to Tuma was prima facie unconstitutional. It simply doesn't matter what your or my opinion of Tuma is, or what might have happened had there been a mob present, or what the outcome might have been had Tuma been a different person or behaved completely differently.

[imdjh]

25. But that is the function of the hypothetical in my post. What Tuma did, would be dangerous ....

... in another scenario. Tuma yelled (or sang as the sympathetic article presented it) "I hate the police." while the police were involved in an arrest. He didn't yell, "The government is evil.", he directed his complaint at the police during something that was none of his business. If he were concerned about the situation, he could have stood quietly and observed. He didn't. In another situation, directing verbal 'hatred' at the police could indeed present a threat to their safety. Don't act like a mob has never moved on police after being led on by an instigator.

[nbcouch]

39. If a frog had wings

he wouldn't bump his ass hopping. Is there any indication whatsoever that a "mob" was present while Tuma stood ACROSS THE STREET from the police doing his chant?

Your hypothetical is irrelevant. If I walk into a bar in Green Bay and yell "Packers suck," you might be able to make a decent case for incitement - does that mean I should be arrested if I do the same thing in Minneapolis, where it would be met with loud cheers?

[imdjh]

45. You're saying that the police should have exercised discretion.

One of the major complaints over the years has been that the police exercise discretion, especially when it comes to race.

The bottom line is that Tuma provoked the police and got his name in the paper, while he and he friends were supposed on their way to Cobalt which is no way on a straight line to where they were, so we can only assume that he did this for the reaction he got, in which case he should be happy. He got what he wanted.

[nbcouch]

53. No, I'm not

I'm saying they should have followed the law, that they should not have arrested Tuma for doing something he had every right to do.

[No Elephants]

61. Baloney. Dealing with what actually happened, rather than with some totally different

hypothetical is perfectly rational. In your other post, you admitted that your hypothetical is not like what happened, and now you are going on about treating people the same in the same circumstances. If your hypothetical is not like what actually happened, what on earth does it have to do with treating people the same in the same circumstances?

As far as your comments about Gates, I don't want to hijack this thread by reinventing all the Gates threads on this board. Calling a cop a racist is not a crime, either, though, especially when you do so in your own home. If the police stick to arresting people who commit crimes, we'd all be better off. Murderers, theives and drug dealers roam the streets with impunity while cops are busy arresting people for insulting cops. And the RW defends it. What crap.

[Recursion]

26. Err.. this is U Street

If there's a geographical center of racial tension in DC, that's it. Though I guess it's been gentrified in the past couple of years.

[imdjh]

28. That's what I thought. But I guess if you're from Great Falls, it's "hip"

But that why in another post I wrote: "Police officers effecting an arrest or interrogation in the "hip (not unless heaven and earth has been moved in the last 20 years) U Street" area being baited by someone's childish, playful, or deliberately provocative behavior can be viewed as a serious threat.
"

[Recursion]

30. Getting arrested for taunting officers right next to Ben's Chili Bowl

There's something very petty and sad about that.

I lived a few blocks up 11th St in C.H. for several years as the gentrification started. It actually was pretty hip back then: Howard and Catholic students, gay couples too poor to live in Dupont or Logan, service industry people, etc. Great Ethiopian food, great Salvadoran food, better jumbo slices than in Adams Morgan. And of course, Ben's. Best chili north of the Potomac.

Then the condos started being built. And the Target up by Tivoli. We were glad when they opened the Giant; the Safeway in Mount Pleasant was disgusting, overpriced, and never had any food. But with the Giant came the condos. There were some good changes (the Wonderland, B&P, the re-opening of the Caverns, the new 9:30, police actually showing up if a crime happened, etc.) but, as always, that brought with it the lame suburbanites who wanted a more "authentic" life or whatever and displaced the people that made it a cool place.

Sigh.

[Skipperoo]

32. How about really changing the players...

Make the person taunting a right wing abortion foe who is encouraging a mob to intercede with women legally walking into a medical clinic the RW doesn't approve of. NOBODY GETS ARRESTED! This is NEVER disorderly conduct. Even when police are on the scene and the people interfere with the action of a police officer.

[imdjh]

33. That's way different. Back to your kitchen woman!!!

Just kidding, and welcome to DU.

[redqueen]

38. Excellent point.

Welcome to DU. :hi:

[No Elephants]

58. You're right. It's not the same thing at all.

[No Elephants]

55. Many people who post here regularly are not Democrats, let along Progressives. They're just

dishonest posers. You'll soon discern who they are.

Welcome to DU.

[proteus_lives]

34. Quite the dumbass.

What did he expect to happen?

[Fumesucker]

36. Probably to win a large settlement in court..

The guy *is* a lawyer..

[imdjh]

46. I wish I was the judge. I'd toss his case because his name is Pepin.

[Fumesucker]

51. I find your attitude completely unsurprising..

Fortunately you aren't the judge..

Edited to add: And that would be an outfuckingstanding way to get the case overturned on appeal..

[Fumesucker]

37. Dupe, self delete..

[No Elephants]

62. Gee, maybe he believes the Constitution? Was he dumb, or was he brave?

[No Elephants]

64. The D.C. cops were not worried about disturbing the peace. This was cop macho.

"One officer reacted strongly to Tuma's song. "Hey! Hey! Who do you think you're talking to?" Tuma recalled the officer shouting as he strode across an intersection to where Tuma was standing. "Who do you think you are to think you can talk to a police officer like that?" the police officer said, according to Luke Platzer, 30, one of Tuma's companions.

Tuma said he responded, "It is not illegal to say I hate the police. It's not illegal to express my opinion walking down the street."

According to Tuma and Platzer, the officer pushed Tuma against an electric utility box, continuing to ask who he thought he was and to say he couldn't talk to police like that.

'I didn't curse," Tuma said. "I asked, am I being arrested? Why am I being arrested?'"



{P.S. cursing is not against the law either.}


<snip>

The local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has said that the city's disorderly conduct law is "confusing, overbroad, frequently used by police to harass disfavored individuals" and that it "violates constitutional rights of free speech, assembly and petition."

<snip>



Tuma filed a complaint with the D.C. Office of Police Complaints, alleging a lack of probable cause, a false arrest, and that the officer used harassing and demeaning language -- Tuma alleges the officer called him a "faggot." Tuma has retained a lawyer. He might sue if he's not satisfied after a meeting with the complaint office on Thursday."


Best wishes, Mr. Tuma! And thank you for standing up for our rights.

[The abyss]

66. Recommend

Particularly for comments and observations by DU members.