Ya think?
Here’s the final report by the Cambridge Review Committee. I haven’t read it yet, but this may be the key sentence: “But instead of de-escalting, both men continued to escalate the encounter.”
And the key insight may be here: “To say that the arrest of Professor Gates was avoidable is not to say that it was unjustified from a legal standpoint…. [S]ome police actions that may be ‘within policy’ are not necessarily the best outcomes to a situation.”
Like I said… ya think?
Meanwhile, according to the Boston Herald, “Professor Gates’ Attorney Blasts New Report.”
If you still care, you can all my posts related to Gates.
Crowley did not have sufficient legal cause to go in that house. Period. End of story.
Except you're wrong.
He needed probable cause to go in the exigency exception. He did not have it.
He needed evidence of a medical emergency requiring immediate medical attention to go in on the emergency exception. He didn't have it.
He needed consent of a rightful occupant to go in on that theory. He didn't have it.
You got nothing. This new report does a disservice by sidestepping the important issue.
Whatever you think.