I fit the description…

http://artandeverythingafter.com/i-fit-the-description/

by subdane • 11 years ago

171 126 11 years ago

rjeli• 11 years ago

How should the officers have handled this?

More to the point, is this protesting the inappropriate way he was detained, or the atmosphere of fear for black Americans?

cinquemb2• 11 years ago

In my experience its closer to "or the atmosphere of fear for black Americans" + distrust + likely hood of the application of the use of asymmetric force from hear say.

Extending the conversation a bit to the intersection of technology, sur|sousveillance[0]:

">[...]creepy stalker[...]

Which are attributes usually assigned to human beings, no? Or do you enjoy being trailed by officers/staff when you shop because of the color of your skin, or do you not have to face nor think about such things when you shop or in other interactions in your life? Because I don't particularly enjoy that either, and I'm doing what I can to address it among other issues assuming that if others could leverage information that is already out there about me, maybe, just maybe I won't have to be treated as subhuman by some on initial interactions, or at least while I patronize a store on occasion. What are you doing to address the problems you have surrounding the use of technology in such ways beyond vocalizing your displeasure? Do you still use social networking, webmail, play apps via smartphone, purchase via credit cards online/offline, etc…? If so, your behaviors are telling others otherwise.

I'm just stating that's the direction things are going in now, and for anyone to avoid such realities means that they shall continue to be suspended in a state of cognitive dissonance. Hardly just my "scheme", I'm just a piece in the puzzle that was already being built before I was even born."

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7496897

whafro2• 11 years ago

I think a piece of the issue is that, in Boston in December, you can expect about half the folks on the street to be wearing a knit hat and puffy coat. You might as well say "wearing winter clothes." Black man? That's about one in four. 160 pounds ("but you're a little more than that")? Not eliminating too many folks there.

At that point, you might as well just admit that it's an excuse to stop-and-frisk anyone you like, fishing for anything you can find.

I'd hope (but not expect) police to be looking for something a bit firmer, and maybe follow him, but as soon as you're effectively being detained in a public place, you're really messing with folks.

golergka7• 11 years ago

5′ 11″, black male, 160 pounds

Is it really a "stop-and-frisk anyone you like"?

facepalm6• 11 years ago

What comes to my mind: if they receive an valid ID, they could just note down the address and let the person go. They could expect to be able to get hold of them if the suspicions become more substantiated.

delinka8• 11 years ago

But then, if it IS the actual criminal, he's aware that the police are onto him and he's gone. If I knew for certain that A) I'd committed a crime and B) the police were indeed looking for me, I wouldn't be at my home address. Nor any other address they might be aware of my presence.

emeraldd• 11 years ago

Not likely, there's no guarantee that the address on the id has anything to do with where the person actually lives. Even if it is "valid" otherwise.

forrestthewoods• 11 years ago

The officers should have treated him the same way they'd treat a successful white person.

Would they have asked a successful white person to get in their cruiser and transported to the victim for identification? Hell no.

Would they have asked a successful white person to sit and wait for an hour while the victim is brought to them? Hell no.

If the description matched that of a successful white person the cops would have stopped the man, spoken to him for 2 minutes, recorded his identification, and moved on. If he was in fact the culprit then great. They have his ID. That's the important part. Once you know who a bad guy is you can always catch them later.

golergka7• 11 years ago

Would they have asked a successful white person to get in their cruiser and transported to the victim for identification? Hell no.
Would they have asked a successful white person to sit and wait for an hour while the victim is brought to them? Hell no.

I have no experience with US police, but as a successful white person, this is exactly what I would expect police officers to do to me. Why the hell wouldn't US police do it?

whistlerbrk• 11 years ago

The 'round up all the black guys' who don't even fit the vague description (which is inappropriate) is what creates the atmosphere of fear and persecution.

ianstallings• 11 years ago

I think he was explaining the thought process behind resistance, if you will. I don't think he is expecting anything except for us to empathize.

shadowfox• 11 years ago

I don't think he is expecting anything except for us to empathize

And this thread seems to have defied his expectations on that as well

ZenoArrow• 11 years ago

Let's put it like this...

1. He wasn't wearing a puffy jacket.

2. His build wasn't a close match for the person they were looking for (the police admitted this themselves).

3. It sounds like he was driving towards the scene of the crime.

Bearing all these things in mind, why would they investigate him?

gorbachev• 11 years ago

"Bearing all these things in mind, why would they investigate him?"

They all look alike?

dswalter• 11 years ago

That is a heart-wrenching encounter. I admire the author's cool head under pressure and emotional honesty and awareness.

kornish• 11 years ago

I'm getting a 503 Service Unavailable, so here's a mirror:

https://web.archive.org/web/20151205162353/http://artandever...

plug• 11 years ago

Thanks, looks like it's back up now. Google didn't appear to have a cached copy; it kept giving me a 503.

paulpauper2• 11 years ago

A top link on HN must send an enormous amount of traffic...has anyone ran a study as to how many hits it generates? I'm guessing a couple hundred thousand if it stays on the front page for a day.

paulpauper2• 11 years ago

His mistake was answering the officer's initial questions. You are under no obligation to talk to the police if questioned. If the officer has sufficient reason to believe you're guilty (such as witnessing a crime), he will simply arrest you on the spot and talking won't do any good.

Second, I see a subtle racial angle to this, and as a white person I too have been stopped by the police several times. White police are not singling out black people.

getting barraged by dovecotes but will not remove the post because I think it is still helpful, or at least encourage discussion about the matter

discardorama• 11 years ago

but his mistake was answering the officer's initial questions.

You know, a lot of Internet Tough Guys(tm) make this claim. Only those who have been stopped by cops randomly (I have, and I'm not white) will understand that this is nearly impossible. You are intimidated. You know that you have basically no rights; they'll just charge you with "obstruction of justice" or "disobeying a lawful order" and throw you into the justice( * ) system, where you'll end up wasting countless hours and dollars before "all charges are dropped". A white person, on the other hand, has a strong feeling of "I have rights". Most non-whites don't.

( * ) for some definition of "justice"

klenwell• 11 years ago

Yes, I would expect most officers to take this as a provocation. And the results can be even worse. Listen to this story for instance:

http://www.npr.org/2014/08/15/340419821/after-a-traffic-stop...

"So I ask them, 'Can I please see a warrant before you continue the search?' " Landau says. "And they grab me and began to hit me in the face. I could hear Addison in the background yelling, 'Stop! Leave him alone.'

cookiecaper4• 11 years ago

A lot of Internet Tough Guys don't understand that if you're respectful and kind to the police, they'll more often than not go on their way without any type of escalation. Making their life difficult by refusing to talk to them at all or show any basic respect might work OK a few times, but really you're just going to cause problems. A better response than just repeating "Am I being detained?" is to filter your words carefully against some basic legal knowledge. Not necessarily foolproof, but most likely a better outcome than acting like a dick, as long as you're reasonably intelligent.

tibbon• 11 years ago

You have the privilege of being a dick to a cop when you're white.

The moment they claim they were intimidated/frightened, then time and time again we've seen that any use of force becomes justified by police somehow. Just being black means they'll claim that feeling should things go wrong.

Dead right or dead wrong... is still dead.

cookiecaper4• 11 years ago

You have the privilege of being a dick to a cop when you're white.

Not really. Cops escalate against whites too and are often on a hair trigger. We just have to accept that the type of people our police forces attract as officers, with present combination of required qualifications and incentives, are most likely not going to be the most even-headed or rational members of society. If we really care about improving policing, we want to increase the incentives so that the job attracts the best and brightest instead of the washed-up football players that can't hack it at junior college.

I'm white and probably 40% of my interactions with police have been unpleasant just because those policemen felt like feeling important that day. You just have to grin and bear it, because doing otherwise risks escalation. Submission is the component most victims of escalation neglect.

The "racial divide" is less of a thing than it's made out to be; race is just one signal among many. One thing is for sure though, and that's that the media is very interested in provoking racial tension, rioting, and other "exciting" news events.

TeMPOraL3• 11 years ago

His mistake was answering the officer's initial questions. You are under no obligation to talk to the police if questioned.

I know that this is the common advice now, but I see it as a symptom of the serious problems the US has. The police is supposed to protect law and order. If you're not a crook, you shouldn't be afraid of talking to officers. When innocent people are so scared of interacting with law enforcement that they have to execute right to silence as a default, it means the situation is deteriorating into oppressive state.

res0nat0r4• 11 years ago

Luckily this guy didn't act like an idiotic internet tough guy, acted perfectly reasonable, so did the cops, and they all went on their ways. Just like things are supposed to and normally do happen every day.

DrScump6• 11 years ago

  His mistake was answering the officer's initial questions.

There's a hint of blame-the-victim in that statement. he seemed to be voluntarily proactive (initially) to hasten him being on his way. Right or wrong, police have broad powers of detention even before/without arrest.

gavinpc• 11 years ago

You are under no obligation to talk to the police if questioned.

This is a great thing for white people to be aware of.

TeMPOraL3• 11 years ago

It's not just about race. I am an average white guy, and I'd still find it hard not to talk to the police. The police has guns, and more importantly, has the state behind them. So I'm intimidated by default (and it's partially how it's supposed to be - the police is supposed to commend respect). Refusing to answer a politely asked question feels like an escalation (and will likely be received as such). I'm a law-abiding citizen, we should be "in it together", me answering their questions should help us both in ensuring bad people get caught and good people stay safe. It's a very unhealthy situation if cooperating with police by default is seen as dangerous.

mdip• 11 years ago

I realize this is a fully appropriate legal response but there's the not-too-subtle component of "who has the power in this particular conversation".

If I am approached by a person, any person, who has a holstered gun and an official looking outfit (or hell, just a holstered gun), the position I'm in is not one of "what am I legally allowed to do", it is one of "a person with a gun wants me to answer a question". A gun is danger signal to most people and the result is compliance regardless of rights. And if you have some place to be, most people figure it's going to take less time to sort out proving their non-involvement in whatever they're being questioned on than getting taken to the station for proper questioning with legal counsel.

On your "I'm a white person and have been stopped by the police several times", I didn't read that the author was particularly angry that the police stopped him because he was black. He was angry because they simply didn't believe him despite his collection of circumstantial evidence that he was not involved.

It was logical that he police questioned him -- he was in proximity and matched the description. Obviously the police weren't similarly grabbing white people off the street in this situation -- that would be idiotic -- the witness said the person was black. I don't think they (the cops) behaved particularly badly in this situation but I don't blame the guy for being completely shaken up.

Being accused, even mildly, by the police is an extremely stressful situation. When I was a kid (yes, I'm a white guy), I was in a parking lot of a strip mall in front of a large chain store that had closed 30 minutes prior to my arrival. My girlfriend and I had just gotten into an argument and were finishing it up in the car before heading to a restaurant next-door and I chose to park in front of the store because I was driving my new car (my first, paid for with my own savings) and didn't want to get a ding from a carelessly handled door on a neighboring vehicle. Twenty minutes into the conclusion of our argument, flashing lights appeared behind my vehicle.

I was questioned, my word was completely disregarded and my girlfriend was put in the awkward situation of having to prove she wasn't a prostitute I had paid for (they took our IDs and asked her what my street address was). Evidently she was too far out of my league for the police officer to believe she was actually my girlfriend! The experience was awful. My anxiety went through the roof (further giving the appearance of guilt) and it was about as embarrassing a situation as I could have found myself in.

sp332• 11 years ago

If you are wondering why people don’t go with the police, I hope this explains it for you.

Nope, I still don't get it. Thanks for the perspective though.

Practicality• 11 years ago

I think the author was aware of his standing in the community and was considering purposely becoming a martyr. While I disagree with his decision (like you do), based on his perception it may have felt like the best thing (for the planet, not for himself) to do in his circumstance.

hartator• 11 years ago

Source down. Other source: http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/33894-i-fit-t...

delinka8• 11 years ago

I understand the reason for fear in the current law enforcement climate in the US. But this quote really misses something:

"...they didn’t believe that I wasn’t a criminal. They had to find out. My word was not enough for them. My ID was not enough for them."

Well ... no. If you are indeed close to the given description of a criminal complaint, they're going to check. The have to check. If they'd come across the actual criminal and he'd behaved similarly (and lying by producing plausible ID, acceptable home address, etc) and then let the actual criminal go, that'd be terrible.

Now, the situation could indeed have been improved by the cops: the 'suspect' made no threatening moves, NO need to reach for a gun; simply act like a reasonable human being having a conversation; call for another officer with the same (similar?) ethnicity...

TeMPOraL3• 11 years ago

Indeed. The only thing in this story that really disturbed me is that the officer apparently went for his gun immediately. This whole situation could, and should, go in a friendly manner, "like a reasonable human being having a conversation". The US really needs to work on reducing the amount of fear in the society - among both general population and law enforcement officers.

cmiles745• 11 years ago

I feel that this is a pretty important part of the story. Here's someone that clearly has real anxiety around exactly this situation and this very agressive move is made almost immediately.

In my opinion, not only is it made to intimidate, but also puts his life in danger. What if he reached for his wallet without warning the police (something I could easily see myself doing)? He may very well catch a bullet before the officer realizes what he's really trying to do.

Artistry121• 11 years ago

Except that guy is nowhere near 160 lbs and the cops should have asked for an age range and a variety of other factors before detaining suspects.

cmiles745• 11 years ago

Eyewitness identification is known to be extraordinarily weak, yet in this case police officers were letting that decide if this man should be taken in. Even worse, we know that cross-racial identifications are often more inaccurate than the already poor identifications of people we don't know.[0]

No, I do not believe that the police are picking everyone "close to the given description of a criminal complaint". Perhaps they were trying to pick up everyone close to the description in _this_ criminal complaint.

IMHO, this is simply an excuse to pursue racial profiling. In this story, the police readily admitted that he didn't match the description (he was heavier) but they didn't really notice until after the fact and this didn't prompt them to let him go. Then what was the point of detaining him? Clearly for show, everyone in the area was reminded of how active the police were. Again, in my opinion, I suspect that the way people felt about said activity would likely break along racial lines.

[0] http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/a...

delinka8• 11 years ago

"Eyewitness identification is known to be extraordinarily weak..." and then "...the police readily admitted that he didn't match the description."

You can't have it both ways. If they know the description they have from an eyewitness is weak, then they have to dig deeper to make sure they're not releasing the actual suspect. In this case, he never mentioned whether the eyewitness actually came along and said it wasn't him. All we know is that we was not arrested and no longer detained. We don't know why.

flexie• 11 years ago

Here's the thing: the guy is stopped because he's black, average size and wears a knitted hat during the winter. It's like being stopped because you are white, average size and wear a baseball cap.

Would that ever happen? Very rarely. Would the officer stopping a white guy who fitted a 1/5 description grab for his gun? Of course not.

delinka8• 11 years ago

"the guy is stopped because he's black, average size and wears a knitted hat during the winter."

Because the description of the suspect is "black, average size, and wears a knit cap." Indeed the description could have been more complete. Whomever interviewed the victim might have botched it. Maybe the woman was completely wrong. Maybe the communication for a BOLO was still incomplete.

But that's the description they had and that's the description they went on. These cops could have been less intimidating, but with the information they had, they still had to check this guy out.

cmiles745• 11 years ago

IMHO, this description is practically useless. It is, in fact, racial profiling; that's the effective description. And the officer's knew that when they took it down from the witness and they knew that when they pulled this man (and likely several others) over for questioning.

I would not so easily let the officers off the hook. The worst case is that this happens so often, they don't even see it for what it is.

kazinator3• 11 years ago

A robbery had just taken place (presumably nearby), and the perpetrator had been described to the police as black.

There is a time and place factor here together with a description; they are not randomly stopping someone in a random location at a random time just for looking black.

RightWingRabble• 11 years ago

Would that ever happen? Very rarely.

It happened to me a few years ago. A guy had just robbed a 7-11 and I was walking home from work. The cop stopped me, cuffed me, put me in his car, drove me back to the crime scene and had the witness make sure it wasn't me. I'm a fat, short white guy, btw.

Stopping people who fit the description of somebody who just committed a crime is the system working. No wonder both sides are agitated. The cops get slammed if they do their job and if they don't. No matter what the cops do, certain citizens will say it either is too much or not enough.

Seriously, the only thing I get out of these conversations these days is nobody here should be taken seriously about anything serious.

DrScump6• 11 years ago

Unfastening the holster means two things:

1) he's making a display of readiness, and 2) he does not consider the detainee an immediate threat to grab for his gun.

unprepare3• 11 years ago

Except the description specifically said puffy coat, and he is wearing a wool coat.

He literally doesnt fit the description.

kazinator3• 11 years ago

You can't take every word literally from someone who just had someone break into their home.

DrScump6• 11 years ago

He literally called it a quilted blazer right in the article.

drostie2• 11 years ago

If you are indeed close to the given description of a criminal complaint, they're going to check. They have to check.

No, no they don't. Goodness.

Let me break down this problem for you. Maybe a quarter of Boston is black, half of those are men, the height/weight thing probably doesn't rule out more than half the people (and the police clearly admit in this interaction that it's a stretch to say he's that light-weight). At least 10% of men will go out with a knit cap on a cold Boston day. You multiply those together and you get 0.00625. You, and the police officers, together are thinking, "man, that's a surprisingly low probability, only an 0.625% chance that we'd come across a guy matching that description! We'd better detain him!"

But that's a dangerous fallacy, in a family called the false positive paradoxes. Usually we surprise kids in statistics class with these by saying, "hey, you live in New York and took a 99%-accurate test for HIV and it came out positive, what's the chance that you actually have HIV?" And they answer 99%. But the real answer is, you probably don't have it, and the probability is closer to one in three. How can this be? Well, you can look up these statistics for 2012, where there are 130,000 cases of HIV/AIDS in New York, which has nearly 20 million people, so your prior probability of having an HIV infection is only something like 0.65%; then the 1% false positive rate means that your 99%-accurate test has only increased your probability of actually having an HIV infection to about 39%, as the false positive set is larger than the true positive set.

It's even worse in this case, where you're looking for one person. Your 0.625% chance is spread out over a city of 650,000, meaning that over 4,000 people are subsumed by this description. Given all of the facts cited there is a less-than-0.025% chance that the guy they are detaining has done anything wrong.

Imagine the absurdity if they actually worked out and then quoted the statistics: "Look, we're 99.98% sure that you're not the guy we're looking for, but we're detaining you anyway, because we demand six nines of certainty that you're not who we're looking for. Oh, you have a valid photo ID and we can easily check that someone with that name is a professor at this college? Roots in the community? Well, that only bumps you up to about 99.999% sure that you're not the person we're looking for, but that's only five nines, buddy, not enough for us to let you go about your business. We've got to get the woman who made a complaint to look at your face to make absolutely sure that you're not the criminal who we think you might with 0.001% chance be."

They absolutely do not have to check that. Certainly they don't have to stop you to check that -- at five nines surely they can let you go about your business and check up with you at your residence if they receive sudden incriminating information.

ssijak• 11 years ago

That is all fine if they detained a guy from another part of the city from where the robbery happened. If a crime happened like 5 minutes ago and you are looking at someone who fits a description who is for example 200 meters away from the crime scene than it is unreasonable to not check him. I am not from US, but I guess this can happen to everyone. There were no violence from either side and he was checked and released, which is unpleasant but it did not imply racism in any way in my opinion.

joesmo• 11 years ago

"If they'd come across the actual criminal and he'd behaved similarly (and lying by producing plausible ID, acceptable home address, etc) and then let the actual criminal go, that'd be terrible."

No it wouldn't. This happens all the time to white people. I had a friend who had numerous warrants and was let go by the police numerous times because he used his brother's name. The author is saying they only did this because he was black and I don't doubt that one bit.

mwill• 11 years ago

I see some comments here along the lines of 'this is standard, nothing to do with race'

Even if that is true (And I don't know that it is), doesn't it speak to some greater cultural problem that this man was so scared for his life, being a black man questioned by police?

It's all well and good to say "I've had this happen to me, no problems", but thats dismissing the fact that this man, and many others, fear for their life whenever they interact with the police.

(I should note that I am not American, so maybe theres things I'm missing as an outsider looking in / maybe I'm way off base)

golergka7• 11 years ago

It's a problem that he's so scared, yes. But this particular incidents paints his fear as baseless paranoia.

cinquemb2• 11 years ago

If someone is afraid for their life, regardless if there are objective measures for it being grounded or not, certainly casting it as baseless paranoia serves to dissuade such fears.

beat4• 11 years ago

This reminds me of something I pointed out elsewhere... I don't know any black people who have never had a negative, frightening interaction with police. And I have a lot of black friends, from teenagers up to men in their 60s. I've had friends arrested, had guns pointed at them, on ridiculous things (one that stands out was a friend who got arrested and roughed up for doing his laundry in his dorm).

"Baseless paranoia"? Ask any black person you know if they think this is baseless paranoia.

HelloNurse• 11 years ago

Many lost lives paint his fear completely well founded: USA police clearly tends to kill black citizens because of race.

golergka7• 11 years ago

WTF?

Can someone point me to what exactly did police officers do wrong in this story?

Barbara Sullivan made a knit cap for me. She knitted it in pinks and browns and blues and oranges and lime green. No one has a hat like this.

Yeah, dude — I'm looking at your photo right now and it definitely looks like a generic knit cap. It's completely reasonable that when someone hears a detail "knit cap" and then sees you, it clicks.

If you are wondering why people don’t go with the police, I hope this explains it for you.

No. It doesn't, at all. Nothing in behaviour of this police officers even hinted of a wrong attitude. The "white woman" wouldn't "decide" if you're a criminal or not: she would give testimony. This attitude of "resisting arrest" would seem paranoid on it's own; it seems even more paranoid and insane in context of this story.

By the way, did any officer actually tell him that a victim was white? Or is it just what he automatically thought?

If I would go through something like that, I would be glad that police is doing it's job.

res0nat0r4• 11 years ago

Can someone point me to what exactly did police officers do wrong in this story?

This sounds like a perfectly fine interaction to me in this case, and like most other cases that you never hear about every single day.

incongruity2• 11 years ago

So here we get to the crux of the issue – the author very clearly didn't see it as a fine interaction. You see it as a fine interaction.

That means one of two things – 1)The Author is completely off base or 2)You don't understand why it's legitimate for the author to feel that it wasn't an okay interaction. (Or, I guess, 3 - Some middle ground between the two)

It's easy to say the other side is just wrong when you don't agree with it. It's more of a challenge to say they're not completely off base and that we don't understand their experience, and then try to find understanding, try to make sense of what might not make sense at first.

The thing is, if you take the first path, it doesn't do anything constructive. You've got your side, they've got theirs and the conflict will go on. If, instead, you try to understand where they're coming from, it might make it easier to bridge gaps and find common ground. Worst case, you decide you were right to begin with... but, in my experience, there's often something to be learned from every person... unless you out and out think they're lying.

sirtastic• 11 years ago

They did nothing wrong. That's also not the point. The point is this guy feared for his life and that's the state of things for a black male in this country. To stand there and hope/pray people stay around to witness a situation you are helpless in is pretty scary.

pmikesell• 11 years ago

It wasn't about this one interaction, it's about the relationship that police have with black people, and vice-versa.

If you are white, your expectation is that in this situation the cops would have taken you to the victim, she would have said it wasn't you, and you'd go on with your day.

This man's expectation, as a black man being questioned by the police, was that he has a 50/50 chance of being falsely accused; that the woman who was going to give this testimony might just see "black man" and say "that's him officer". In the article, this college professor was so sure of that that he was going to resist arrest!.

It's not about this one interaction, it's about the culture of fear we have in this country between cops and black people. You're not supposed to figure out these particular cops did wrong in this particular encounter - you're supposed to empathize and understand what's generally happening for/to people in different circumstances than yourself, and hopefully have an impact on changing that over time.

logfromblammo5• 11 years ago

My expectation is that if police transport a suspect anywhere, that is an arrest which must be justified by reasonable suspicion that the suspect had committed a crime.

Now, I don't know how Boston classifies "try to break into a woman's house", but it looks like my web search in the General Laws of Massachusetts brings up part IV, Title I, Chapter 266, Section 18.[0] Maybe IV I 265 18C [1] if there was someone inside the house.

Based on it being daytime, and the quoted statement from the cop including the words "try to break into" rather than "inside", it would appear that no crime actually occurred. So the cops circulated a vague description of an average-height, average-weight, typically-dressed Bostonian male as a suspect for a nonexistent crime.

The Internet Tough Guys aside, the author did make a mistake in answering police questions. It should have gone something like this:

  Cop: Hey my man.
  SL: Yes?
  Cop: Where are you coming from?
  SL: Am I free to go?
  Cop: No.
  SL: Am I under arrest?
  Cop: Not yet.
  SL: Why am I being detained?
  Cop: We had someone matching your description just try to break into a woman’s house.
  SL: [remains silent]
  Cop: You fit the description: Black male, knit hat, puffy coat.  Do you have identification?
  SL: My name is Steve Locke.  I live at XXXXX, in Dedham.
  Cop: No, no, no, do you have a photo ID card?
  SL: I do not consent to searches or seizures.  I will not answer further questions without the assistance of legal counsel.

At this point, he gets arrested, not for breaking and entering, but for "contempt of cop"--probably even "failure to identify". He beats the rap, but does not beat the ride. He later sues the city, and eventually accepts a $75000 settlement, which isn't bad for enduring one very stressful day and some PTSD.

The bystanders made a mistake in not whipping out their cameras to film the incident.

But that ideal conversation does not happen when you are dropped into a stressful situation with no notice. While you're thinking about burritos, an armed man confronts you and informs you that you are a suspect in a crime. Instead of thinking about how to resist police corruption, you're thinking about not getting killed in the next ten minutes. It doesn't matter if you know, rationally, that you have the right to not get murdered by cops, if you also know in your fluttering intestines that Eric Garner and Freddy Grey theoretically had the same right.

[0] https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Cha...

[1] https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Cha...

GBond• 11 years ago

It wasn't about this one interaction, it's about the relationship that police have with black people, and vice-versa.

I agree. The OP does a great job of capturing the emotions of the moment. Despite this, many commenters here fail to entire context of the situation beyond the legalities. Maybe one reason why people still deny systematic racism exist is it really takes a person to experience it in first-hand to truly understand.

PuffinBlue• 11 years ago

Can someone point me to what exactly did police officers do wrong in this story?

I can't point to anything the officers did 'wrong'. The tragedy of the piece is that the author brings two sets of prejudices to the encounter that really strongly negatively affect him and his perception of the treatment he received:

1) He's special, obviously not a criminal and the cops should know that

2) He's persecuted because of his race.

Neither of these things are objectively true from the content of the article, but the fear he experienced is real.

I can understand what caused that fear - the constant drip of police abuses occurring to people throughout the US, but it's still a sad state of affairs when a man must fear the police in this way.

It's also disheartening to see him take up such a self-involved perspective. The author entirely fails to understand the motives of anyone other than himself and instead ascribes a set of his own prejudices upon the action of others. Far from simply highlighting the prejudice he perceives he endured, he's actually revealed himself as guilty of the exact same charge whilst simultaneously lambasting those for not understanding his motives.

I wonder if this 'victim mentality' is justified given the abuses certain demographics do suffer, but I also wonder if it doesn't also fan the flames of discontent, distrust and ultimately lead to a worsening of relations between civilian and police. If all encounters have this undertone of anger, arrogance and persecution it's no wonder casual encounters can regularly devolve into conflict.

falcolas• 11 years ago

Can someone point me to what exactly did police officers do wrong in this story?

Preparing to draw their guns was probably the first thing. If you want to make someone afraid for their life, prepare the tool you can use to end it.

The second is probably the corralling of the gentleman by multiple officers.

We know that Police officers are told that their primary goal is to "get home at night". We know that they regarded this gentleman as a threat; his intelligent handling of the situation when frightened for his life is probably the one thing that saved him. "May I reach for my id" instead of just grabbing for it. Removing his hands from his pockets... it's not hard to see how this could have gone very, very wrong.

jack-r-abbit• 11 years ago

If you want to make someone afraid for their life, prepare the tool you can use to end it.

If you want to make someone afraid for their life, second guess them every time they prepare the tool they can use to save it. Remember, it is not just black people getting shot out there.

hunterjrj• 11 years ago

I have no political axe to grind, no agenda to push and no particular opinion one way or another. I simply have a question: Is it important to his recounting of the story to emphasize that a "white woman" carried his fate? Would the story have the same impact if he simply said "victim"?

[Edit: grammar]

qopp• 11 years ago

The cops wouldn't have revealed the witness's race. The author likely didn't actually know who actually gave the cops the description that matched his.

lostPixels2• 11 years ago

No of course not. In fact, him doing so only serves to alienate readers.

fiatmoney• 11 years ago

I guess the problem is that when he identified himself as a college professor, the cops didn't immediately genuflect?

"I was hoping that someone I knew would walk down the street or come out of one of the shops or get off the 39 bus or come out of JP Licks and say to these cops, “That’s Steve Locke. What the FUCK are you detaining him for?”"

IOW, "do you know who I am?"

There are legitimate abuses of police authority and unaccountability, and this is not one.

pkinsky• 11 years ago

My handmade one-of-a-kind knit hat was an object of suspicion. My Ralph Lauren quilted blazer was only a “puffy coat.”

"They did not realize that I am an individual of high socioeconomic status, one whom should not be treated like a prole."

There are many clear cut examples of police racism and abuse of power. This does not seem to be one of them.

maldusiecle• 11 years ago

I dunno, it doesn't seem like a huge leap to stop investigating someone as a burglar once you notice they're a college prof. Especially if you've stopped them for nothing more specific than wearing a knit hat and "puffy coat," and they're not wearing a puffy coat (did you not look at the picture? or read the article, for that matter, he mentions that he was wearing a blazer).

DrScump6• 11 years ago

  did you not look at the picture?

That's a bio pic, not surveillance.

He writes in his own words that he was wearing a quilted blazer.

sosuke• 11 years ago

Thanks for the new five dollar word. Genuflect was one that gave me no clues, nothing, even in context. I should have taken Latin it would have lasted longer than my other foreign language choices.

  Latin genu knee + flectere to bend
  to bend the knee
  to touch the knee to the floor or ground especially in worship

facepalm6• 11 years ago

Not to take away from his experience, but being surrounded by cops is always scary. I was never under suspicion for anything serious, but got stopped for running traffic lights or cycling on the wrong way of the street. That was not that scary (no guns), but it is always clear that you are completely at the mercy of the cops. Sometimes stories like this seem to escalate when people talk back. Don't talk back to cops! That is my mantra anyway. Don't argue, don't try to use logic. Just apologize meekly and try to be as nice and compliant as possible.

A (white) friend of mine used to wear the wrong kind of jacket, associated with left youth, and the cops would also sometimes search him, and even do anal probing for hidden pot. (All this is for Germany, mind you).

Also the stories about calling SWAT teams to innocent people's houses, or the unreliability of forensics, are really scary. I think "unfairly detained or killed by cops" has to be accepted as another modern risk, like being run over by a car or getting cancer. And unfortunately the risk is probably higher for people with dark skin.

roneesh• 11 years ago

I really feel for the person in this story. Given the heightened media lately, it's hard to feel totally secure in any interaction with the police. I don't feel completely secure talking to them or interacting with them when I see them.

I however, do think the police did just an ok job handling this situation. It clearly could have gone worse, but they could have de-escalated this even further. Why isn't it possible to simply say clear statements like "We intend to respect your rights." or "We have no intention of escalating this situation". When it comes to the officer seeming to reach for his firearm at the beginning what's wrong with saying "That's something we do for our protection, and is not an intent to use?"

I'm sure people in law enforcement have answers for all these questions, and I'm sure they make sense. However, something in me will probably always wonder why we as a society find it easier to blog about police encounters, or make police wear body cameras, when it might just be easier for two people to talk more openly.

mbarrett• 11 years ago

I found myself in a similar situation, sharing the same name, not profiling. I was asked to come in to 'help with a case'. It was really an interrogation of my involvement. I had the same feeling of uncertainty and the thought I could do nothing to argue my case, based on the continued, escalating questions.

It was assumed that I needed to prove my innocence rather than they prove my guilt. Luckily I happened to be across the country on that day so it was easily dropped. I was denied to see the police report after multiple requests, which I thought I was entitled to.

This one experience greatly changed the way I view police and their tactics. I can empathize

jdmichal• 11 years ago

It was assumed that I needed to prove my innocence rather than they prove my guilt.

This was not a trial. How do you propose to eliminate suspects, if convincing yourself that they are innocent is not permitted?

howeyc• 11 years ago

It seems to me that the cops did everything right here, aside from perhaps drawing a gun (which it seems he may not have, only undoing a snap perhaps?) too early. They can't just take his word for it, they need to verify the eye-witness ID. This should be obvious.

His paranoia is a likely a result of his previous encounters with other police officers and hearsay from other encounters. This particular encounter sounds right.

They thanked him repeatedly for cooperation, apologized for messing with his lunch break, etc. This is their job, what could they do better? Not investigate since he said "it's not me, honest"?!?

eggbrain• 11 years ago

About a year ago, the same thing happened to me. That night, my girlfriend had suddenly gotten sick and was walking home from a friends place a few miles away, and I wanted to make sure she got home ok, so I ran out to meet her.

I was dressed in a long wool jacket with a nice shirt on, and got stop by the police. Apparently, it was suspicious that someone would be jogging in that type of attire, and there had been a hit-and-run a bit away from there, and I fit the description of the person that ran.

It was a bit surreal -- an officer started immediately asking me questions, including identification, what was in my pockets, etc. After telling him just a glove was in my jacket pocket, he came up to me and quickly felt himself. Satisfied that I had answered honestly, he asked me to wait as a second police car drove up.

The first officer looked back to the second police car and asked if this was the guy -- the second police officer took one look at me, looked back at the guy angrily, and shook his head slowly no in one of the largest looks of contempt I had seen. After that, I was back on my way.

This story brings me back to that moment, but to be honest I have not thought about it since, and now I wonder if I should have done something differently. Should I have resisted? Should I have proclaimed my rights and had them try to arrest me? Was I too meek in allowing them to frisk me briefly? Was there some sort of prejudicial motivation for what happened? Was I wrong to simply forget that moment afterwards, and not attribute to malice?

I have no doubt police target people, due to prejudice of some kind, in many different cities. And I also do not want to in any way dismiss or diminish someone's fear, someones worries, or someone's feeling like they were targeted directly because of their race or ethnicity, their gender, or their beliefs.

But is there a lesson to be learned from this story? Is it a story of a man who felt enormous fear when approached by the police, and how that still reflects the worry many minorities feel in society with regards to the police? Is it a story about how a man was targeted unfairly due to his race, due to prejudice still present in law enforcement? I'm not sure the takeaway from this -- only that a man was stopped on the street, and that he felt pain from that experience. Do I share this pain having gone through something similar? Do I rewrite my own experience and feel pain? Or do I continue as I have -- not attributing to malice until proven otherwise? It's not clear, and I'm not sure how to take this and use it for the better.

awalton• 11 years ago

The saddest part is that this is not a unique story.

Some number of weeks ago, I "fit the description" of a latino male exiting Safeway after having caused some kind of spat in Mountain View. They "identified" the male as having on black shorts and wearing sandals, and some kind of sleeve tattoo if my memory serves.

I am a fairer-skinned black male, I did have on black shorts and Birkinstocks, so close enough I guess. I was over a block away from Safeway, but the cop still felt the need to creep up on me, then bleep his siren, turn around, get out of his SUV and question me.

The cop felt the need to know if - simple Silicon Valley yuppie me, carrying a Starbucks cup from earlier in the day and a fresh bag of Thai food with a receipt dated no more than nine minutes prior - I had gang tattoos and/or affiliations, asked me to roll up my sleeves. He needed to know why my out-of-state drivers license didn't have my current California address (no, I'm dead serious, I guess he couldn't figure it out.)

Of course, I grew up in the deep south so I'm more than used to this, and know how to keep my head on when dealing with a police officer who is holier than thou and is packing the hardware to prove it to you at a twitch's notice. My upbringing taught me that, as a black person, this is what we have to expect from officials, be it police, school officials, any petty tyrant's office job. This is why you don't talk to the cops and you keep your head down when walking - your skin still says enough about you.

However, even after climbing the broken ladder, fighting my way out of abject poverty through stacks of student loans, it was truly disheartening to see it's still true, even here in the land of million dollar homes and self driving cars.

I've felt this man's fear.

DrScump6• 11 years ago

"He needed to know why my out-of-state drivers license didn't have my current California address"

Actually, that's the law, if you've been in CA more than 20 days or accepted a job here. Otherwise, you are technically not licensed to drive here.

aklemm• 11 years ago

To be interrogated or detained (the pre-arrest stuff) is not benign. It is full of risk because police are sanctioned to use force on citizens. It is especially risky for non-whites, especially if they try to exercise their rights. This story is about what it's like to experience these phenomena in real life. Did I make that easy enough for you all that are struggling to see the value in this piece?

justifier• 11 years ago

    I saw the woman in red.
    “Thank you,” I said to her.  “Thank you for staying.”

if you see the police talking to someone: whoever they are, however they are acting, and whatever they look like; and you have a minute to spare, please.. please, stick around and make it known you are watching

if you have a phone, record it, or just hold your phone as if you were recording it

people can feel the gaze of others and you will alter the behaviour of the officers for the better

just yesterday i was walking by an irate homeless person yelling at three officers, refusing to move

two officers were directing foot traffic to keep a distance and the third was prodding the homeless man with his toe asking him identifying questions and telling him he needed to get up and move

by my just standing there i could sense the officers sensing my presence, every so often they were send me a quick sideways glance

the officer using his foot to interact with the homeless man turned his head to see what his fellow officers kept looking at and saw me, standing there drinking a coffee, staring at him

he jerked his gaze back at the man lying on the ground and knelt down and just placed his hand on the homeless man's shoulder and talked to him calmly

the officer managed to get the man to sit up and answer his questions, eventually he got up and walked away and the officers gave me a look like, 'you happy?!' and got in their cars and drove off

i was happy with how the interaction turned out, the whole thing lasted less than a minute

i would like to think that my presence had little to do with it

I fit the description…

Related Stories