Remember these words whenever anyone tells you policing is colorblind

[homersapien 11,420]

Opinion by

Eugene Robinson

March 18, 2021

 

“He was pretty much fed up and kind of at the end of his rope, and yesterday was a really bad day for him, and this is what he did.” Remember those words from a Georgia police official whenever anyone tries to tell you that policing in this country is colorblind. And if you doubt that those words matter, remember who law enforcement officials are supposed to serve and protect.

The “he” in question is Robert Aaron Long, a 21-year-old White man, and authorities say that “what he did” on Tuesday was to kill eight victims — including six Asian women — in three Atlanta-area spas. The “really bad day” account of the alleged rampage was how Capt. Jay Baker, the spokesman for the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office, summarized investigators’ description of their early interviews with Long.

Like Long, Baker is a White man. But you probably guessed that.

Journalists subsequently discovered a post on Baker’s Facebook page with photos of a T-shirt describing covid-19 as an “IMPORTED VIRUS FROM CHY-NA,” the kind of language many experts blame for a sharp increase in hate crimes against Asian Americans.

For all I know, in terms of the performance of his duties, Baker may be a decent cop. But take that post, and add it to what Baker said about Long and the way he said it, and the question is obvious: Whose side is he on? And how are the Asian and Asian American victims and families Baker is supposed to protect supposed to trust him?

Let me put this another way. When have you ever heard a White police officer, prosecutor or judge speak of a Black defendant — or any suspect of color — with such understanding, such apparent sympathy?

“He was pretty much fed up and kind of at the end of his rope” might have described George Floyd’s attitude when Minneapolis police officers started manhandling him over an allegation that he passed a counterfeit $20 bill. It might have been the way Rayshard Brooks felt when Atlanta police found him asleep in his car at a Wendy’s drive-through and took him into custody rather than let him walk to his sister’s house.

Floyd and Brooks were both Black. And their encounters with police — over piddling, nonviolent offenses — ended in their deaths.

Long, by contrast, had allegedly killed eight people in cold blood. He fled by car and was known to be armed and extremely dangerous — Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms said that when he was apprehended, Long was allegedly headed to Florida, possibly with the intent of carrying out additional shootings. Yet police managed to arrest him “without incident,” leaving him alive, well and able to tell investigators about his “really bad day.”

Or take Dylann Roof, who was 21 when he killed nine Black worshipers at Mother Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston, S.C. Roof, too, fled by car. He was also known to be armed and extremely dangerous. He, too, was taken into custody alive and uninjured. And when Roof told officers he was hungry, police bought him food from Burger King.

It is right for police to do everything they can to arrest suspects without injuring or killing them. But it is intolerably wrong for this standard to apply to White suspects but not to African Americans or other people of color. And there is a difference between getting a suspect to talk by treating him with dignity and appearing to sympathize with an alleged criminal’s self-justification.

It was striking that Baker was quick to report, and seemingly endorse, Long’s claim that the alleged killings were “not racially motivated” but instead had to do with some kind of purported “sex addiction.” My guess is that Baker probably doesn’t think his own Facebook post about covid-19 was racist, either. Perhaps Baker intended to show the public that Long was speaking to the police in revealing terms. Instead, he sent a disturbing message about who the investigators of this terrible crime really sympathize with.

Four of the victims in Long’s first alleged mass shooting, at Young’s Asian Massage in Cherokee County, were identified as Daoyou Feng, 44; Xiaojie Tan, 49; Delaina Yuan, 33; and Paul Andre Michels, 54. At this writing, the four individuals killed in the shootings at Aromatherapy Spa and Gold Spa in Atlanta have not been publicly identified pending notification of next of kin. Their deaths are a terrible cost. The damage done to everyone who knew and loved the victims is incalculable.

In Baker’s bloodless description, “This is what he did.”

Diversity, sensitivity and empathy in policing are not ethereal concepts. To people of color in this country, these abstractions are literally matters of life and death. Until attitudes like Baker’s change, the cry of last year’s Black Lives Matter protests must, and will, continue to ring out, and on behalf of Asian Americans, too: No justice, no peace.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/remember-these-words-whenever-anyone-tells-you-policing-is-colorblind/2021/03/18/fe6791fe-880c-11eb-bfdf-4d36dab83a6d_story.html

[wdefromtx 3,159]

So are we supposed to just assume all cops are racist? Some officers are as colorblind as one can be. I happen to know several officers from various races in various parts of the country (mainly southern.) Ranking from just traffic cops to battalion commander to assistant chief. All good people. 
 

Are their POS racist cops? Yeah, but I still won’t throw a blanket stereotype on all because of the ones that are. 
 

Also, this is an issue deeper than the cops. You need to look at the systems within the city/county from officers all the way to the mayors office. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,154]

It definitely struck me as weird from the very start how the police were talking about this kid like he got picked up from fist fighting in a Walmart parking lot or got arrested for public intoxication. 

 

'Well, he just had a bad day...things weren't going well for him and one thing led to another...you know how it goes. '

 

 

 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

It definitely struck me as weird from the very start how the police were talking about this kid like he got picked up from fist fighting in a Walmart parking lot or got arrested for public intoxication. 

 

'Well, he just had a bad day...things weren't going well for him and one thing led to another...you know how it goes. '

 

 

 

That was weird for the police to say. But I’ll refrain from lumping all police into the same boat as this particular officer and other bad cops. 

[AU9377 5,019]

Brooks was passed out behind the wheel of his car in the Wendy's drive thru. Law enforcement was called by the restaurant manager.  When they arrived, they had to bang on the window to get him to "wake up" and they instructed him to pull into the empty parking space.  He was on probation and they could smell alcohol.  They had a lengthy respectful conversation with Brooks before he became combative.  Brooks made the decision to not comply with the reasonable demands of law enforcement after he exited the vehicle.  When the officer told told him that he was under arrest, he fought being handcuffed then went the extra step when he took the officer's taser.  He then fired the taser at the officer as he was fleeing.  That resulted in him being shot. 

The new Fulton County DA knows that this is not a case that she can win and has asked the Georgia Attorney General to take the case.  He has refused twice. 

The case is night and day when trying to compare it to the George Floyd case.  People trying to fit it into the same mold actually do more harm to their cause than good.  The Floyd case itself isn't a slam dunk, but there is clear evidence of excessive force, including a video showing the entire event.  The only hurdle the prosecution has to get over is that Floyd had a level of Fentanyl in his system that could be fatal for most people.

As for the Cherokee County Deputy who described the events that happened leading up to the killing of 8 people at two different spas, I think that it is a little unfair to take that statement and make it seem as though he was trivializing the event in some way.  If someone listens to the entire press conference, he was not down playing anything.  There is no evidence that the murders were hate crimes.  Maybe some will come about, but it doesn't look like as of now. The Atlanta Mayor said immediately after the news conference that she didn't interpret the deputy's comments in that way at all. He could have chosen a better way to describe the events, but it doesn't change what happened.

I say all of the above and still acknowledge that there is an excessive force problem in law enforcement.  That problem is amplified by it being an even larger issue between law enforcement and communities of color. The problem isn't limited to white police officers.  Regardless of the officer's background, they are likely to use force more aggressively when minorities are involved.  Looking at that problem needs to be a priority. I just think that using every event as though they evidence the same problem isn't honest and it only makes real discussions more difficult and solutions impossible.

The problem isn't limited to the United States. I will never forget backpacking in Europe for 3 1/2 months years ago.  It was one of the best and most educational experiences in my life.  One thing I will never forget is what a good friend of mine, Michael, when thru that the rest of our group did not.  Michael had the same passport that I had, blue with the U.S. seal shown.  There was a group of 5 of us and we went to a total of 14 countries in Europe that summer.  My passport got stamped 3 or 4 times tops.  At every border, every overnight train and any security check post, Michael was pulled to the side and interviewed.  My passport seldom got opened.  On trains, I could hold up my passport and they would go to the next person. Michael had to stand and they reviewed his in detail.  To make an uncomfortable situation more tenable, we eventually just started joking about it all.  He did say one thing about it all.  He said "it's like going thru a traffic stop at home." 

[CleCoTiger 1,957]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Brooks was passed out behind the wheel of his car in the Wendy's drive thru. Law enforcement was called by the restaurant manager.  When they arrived, they had to bang on the window to get him to "wake up" and they instructed him to pull into the empty parking space.  He was on probation and they could smell alcohol.  They had a lengthy respectful conversation with Brooks before he became combative.  Brooks made the decision to not comply with the reasonable demands of law enforcement after he exited the vehicle.  When the officer told told him that he was under arrest, he fought being handcuffed then went the extra step when he took the officer's taser.  He then fired the taser at the officer as he was fleeing.  That resulted in him being shot. 

 

Much of everything after "passed out" and "law enforcement was called" in that paragraph you wrote is either wrong or irrelevant. Did you get your "info" from someone else or did you take the time to watch every single second of video from the surveillance cameras and police body cams?

First, "they" (as in plural officers) did not arrive. A single officer responded and your description that he (not they) " had to bang on the window" is overstated. The officer certainly knocked on the window and called to Brooks, but banged? No. He didn't bang.

I'm not sure what relevance there is to Brooks being on probation except that in the end it may have factored into his decision to run.

You said Brooks fired the Taser at the officer as he was fleeing, This is absolutely wrong. What resulted in Brooks getting shot was the very questionable use of lethal force where lethal force was not required.

[AU9377 5,019]

1 hour ago, CleCoTiger said:

Much of everything after "passed out" and "law enforcement was called" in that paragraph you wrote is either wrong or irrelevant. Did you get your "info" from someone else or did you take the time to watch every single second of video from the surveillance cameras and police body cams?

First, "they" (as in plural officers) did not arrive. A single officer responded and your description that he (not they) " had to bang on the window" is overstated. The officer certainly knocked on the window and called to Brooks, but banged? No. He didn't bang.

I'm not sure what relevance there is to Brooks being on probation except that in the end it may have factored into his decision to run.

You said Brooks fired the Taser at the officer as he was fleeing, This is absolutely wrong. What resulted in Brooks getting shot was the very questionable use of lethal force where lethal force was not required.

First, him being on probation is extremely relevant.  He is prohibited from drinking alcohol while on probation. Also, while on probation, he is subject to being searched at any time without the need to obtain a warrant.  As to the number of officers, there were at least two when he was asked to exit the vehicle.  Upon exiting the vehicle, he failed the field sobriety test.  The officer administered a breathalyzer and he blew 0.108, which is above the .08 limit in Georgia.  Anyone being honest knows that "falling asleep" behind the wheel with the car running in the drive thru at Wendy's while being intoxicated is more than just being sleepy.  He was being arrested for DUI when he made the choice to resist and threw the officer to the ground, grabbing his taser in the process.

The GBI put it this way: " ......after Brooks took a Taser from one of the officers, he ran “about 5, 6, 7 parking spaces” from the officers while holding the Taser.  Brooks turned, and “it appears to the [naked] eye that he points the Taser at the Atlanta officer. At that point, the Atlanta officer reaches down and retrieves his weapon from his holster, discharges it, strikes Mr. Brooks there on the parking lot.” Reynolds says that information was corroborated by a witness"

This is why the DA is playing hot potato with a case that she knows should not be prosecuted and that she will lose if she moves forward in an attempt to do so.  In what world is it acceptable for someone to fire any sort of weapon at an officer to avoid being arrested?  What would you expect a trained officer to do?  Should he say.. "slow down and don't hurt yourself!"

The person most responsible for the death of Mr. Brooks is Mr. Brooks himself.  He endangered the lives of others when he decided to drink and drive and law enforcement was absolutely doing the right thing when they attempted to place him under arrest. It is unfortunate that he lost his life, but in that officers shoes, the split second decision to fire his firearm in response to the taser being fired by Brooks at him was not an unreasonable one.

[wdefromtx 3,159]

3 hours ago, AU9377 said:

First, him being on probation is extremely relevant.  He is prohibited from drinking alcohol while on probation. Also, while on probation, he is subject to being searched at any time without the need to obtain a warrant.  As to the number of officers, there were at least two when he was asked to exit the vehicle.  Upon exiting the vehicle, he failed the field sobriety test.  The officer administered a breathalyzer and he blew 0.108, which is above the .08 limit in Georgia.  Anyone being honest knows that "falling asleep" behind the wheel with the car running in the drive thru at Wendy's while being intoxicated is more than just being sleepy.  He was being arrested for DUI when he made the choice to resist and threw the officer to the ground, grabbing his taser in the process.

The GBI put it this way: " ......after Brooks took a Taser from one of the officers, he ran “about 5, 6, 7 parking spaces” from the officers while holding the Taser.  Brooks turned, and “it appears to the [naked] eye that he points the Taser at the Atlanta officer. At that point, the Atlanta officer reaches down and retrieves his weapon from his holster, discharges it, strikes Mr. Brooks there on the parking lot.” Reynolds says that information was corroborated by a witness"

This is why the DA is playing hot potato with a case that she knows should not be prosecuted and that she will lose if she moves forward in an attempt to do so.  In what world is it acceptable for someone to fire any sort of weapon at an officer to avoid being arrested?  What would you expect a trained officer to do?  Should he say.. "slow down and don't hurt yourself!"

The person most responsible for the death of Mr. Brooks is Mr. Brooks himself.  He endangered the lives of others when he decided to drink and drive and law enforcement was absolutely doing the right thing when they attempted to place him under arrest. It is unfortunate that he lost his life, but in that officers shoes, the split second decision to fire his firearm in response to the taser being fired by Brooks at him was not an unreasonable one.

This is pretty much how I remember it all played out. I remember watching different videos from different angles think that the officer looked like he was following his training and instincts. If I recall correctly the officer was cordial in the very beginning. If Brooks had been white and did the same thing I’m pretty sure that officer would have fired as well. It would have been the same outcome. The only difference is it would not have gotten near the coverage and nobody would be talking about it today. 

[CleCoTiger 1,957]

3 hours ago, AU9377 said:

First, him being on probation is extremely relevant.  He is prohibited from drinking alcohol while on probation. Also, while on probation, he is subject to being searched at any time without the need to obtain a warrant.  As to the number of officers, there were at least two when he was asked to exit the vehicle.  Upon exiting the vehicle, he failed the field sobriety test.  The officer administered a breathalyzer and he blew 0.108, which is above the .08 limit in Georgia.  Anyone being honest knows that "falling asleep" behind the wheel with the car running in the drive thru at Wendy's while being intoxicated is more than just being sleepy.  He was being arrested for DUI when he made the choice to resist and threw the officer to the ground, grabbing his taser in the process.

The GBI put it this way: " ......after Brooks took a Taser from one of the officers, he ran “about 5, 6, 7 parking spaces” from the officers while holding the Taser.  Brooks turned, and “it appears to the [naked] eye that he points the Taser at the Atlanta officer. At that point, the Atlanta officer reaches down and retrieves his weapon from his holster, discharges it, strikes Mr. Brooks there on the parking lot.” Reynolds says that information was corroborated by a witness"

This is why the DA is playing hot potato with a case that she knows should not be prosecuted and that she will lose if she moves forward in an attempt to do so.  In what world is it acceptable for someone to fire any sort of weapon at an officer to avoid being arrested?  What would you expect a trained officer to do?  Should he say.. "slow down and don't hurt yourself!"

The person most responsible for the death of Mr. Brooks is Mr. Brooks himself.  He endangered the lives of others when he decided to drink and drive and law enforcement was absolutely doing the right thing when they attempted to place him under arrest. It is unfortunate that he lost his life, but in that officers shoes, the split second decision to fire his firearm in response to the taser being fired by Brooks at him was not an unreasonable one.

Brooks did NOT fire that Taser towards any officer. That Taser had been fully discharged. What he pointed at the officer was a non-lethal weapon. You jump from “it appears to the [naked] eye that he points the Taser at the Atlanta officer" to he fired it. Not the same. Also, not a death penalty offense, as in not a situation that requires lethal force. 

You need to watch each and every available video (yes, need) and reconsider what you think you know.

I flatly disagree with you that the decision to open fire was not unreasonable. It was. It was unreasonable, unjustified and if the result of training (which frankly I find difficult to believe), then the training was terrible and failed that officer as well as Mr. Brooks.

 

[AU9377 5,019]

16 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

This is pretty much how I remember it all played out. I remember watching different videos from different angles think that the officer looked like he was following his training and instincts. If I recall correctly the officer was cordial in the very beginning. If Brooks had been white and did the same thing I’m pretty sure that officer would have fired as well. It would have been the same outcome. The only difference is it would not have gotten near the coverage and nobody would be talking about it today. 

I have never heard of someone blowing a .108 and not being arrested for DUI, regardless of their race or gender. Once Brooks blew that, he was going to be cuffed. The fact that he was already on felony probation likely played into the officer's perception that he needed to be apprehended.  If he had not taken the taser during a scuffle resisting arrest, the argument that this was an excessive use of force would have merit. That same argument is extremely weak to nonexistent after he turned and fired the taser at the officer while fleeing.

[AU9377 5,019]

24 minutes ago, CleCoTiger said:

Brooks did NOT fire that Taser towards any officer. That Taser had been fully discharged. What he pointed at the officer was a non-lethal weapon. You jump from “it appears to the [naked] eye that he points the Taser at the Atlanta officer" to he fired it. Not the same. Also, not a death penalty offense, as in not a situation that requires lethal force. 

You need to watch each and every available video (yes, need) and reconsider what you think you know.

I flatly disagree with you that the decision to open fire was not unreasonable. It was. It was unreasonable, unjustified and if the result of training (which frankly I find difficult to believe), then the training was terrible and failed that officer as well as Mr. Brooks.

 

There is a debate as to whether or not the taser had been fully discharged. The video shows him turn and light coming from the taser indicating that it was being fired.  He certainly attempted to fire the taser at the officer. That is not in dispute at all. Remember, the taser that he fired belonged to the other officer,  the one that he assaulted while attempting to elude being justifiably arrested, not the officer that shot Brooks.  How was he to know if that taser was fully discharged or not?

Also, the former Fulton DA, Paul Howard, not known for his desire to truthfully describe events, alleges in the charging documents that Brooks was 5 or 6 car spaces away when the shot was fired.  This video show that is not the case. Scroll down about half way to get to the video.

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/man-shot-killed-during-struggle-with-officer-over-taser-wendys-gbi-says/25FF4PNJNBBA7MBKXBPA34ETUE/

That video alone makes it impossible to get a guilty verdict in this case.  I do believe that there is an excessive force problem in this country, but this case is not the hill to make that stand upon. It was embarrassing the way some members of his own family have acted after he died. I wish his life had turned out differently, but pretending that he was some sort of saint only makes things worse.

[DKW 86 7,437]

homey that was an excellent read.

and the folks quoted by Robinson could not be more tone deaf if they tried. 

That defines tone deaf or should.

[homersapien 11,420]

13 hours ago, AU9377 said:

That video alone makes it impossible to get a guilty verdict in this case.  I do believe that there is an excessive force problem in this country, but this case is not the hill to make that stand upon. It was embarrassing the way some members of his own family have acted after he died. I wish his life had turned out differently, but pretending that he was some sort of saint only makes things worse.

This case is just another data point on the general historical trend in our country of unjustified or excessive force being used against a black person by the police.

[AU9377 5,019]

37 minutes ago, homersapien said:

This case is just another data point on the general historical trend in our country of unjustified or excessive force being used against a black person by the police.

I honestly do get that. However, in order to achieve real change, everyone has to buy in and accept that there is a real problem and that it is systemic.  When we don't honestly discuss these encounters in the context in which they happen, instead choosing to lump them all together, the very people that need to pay attention are those that are least likely to do so.  The most alarming example of excessive force in recent years has been the Breonna Taylor case.  That case exposed the problems with the warrant procedures and the execution of warrants that happen every day across the country.  It also shows the vulnerability of police officers executing warrants that they had no involvement in procuring.  The system needs to be changed.  What happened there could happen anywhere, without regard to the race of the homeowner.

In the Brooks case, leaders need to have the courage to explain why that series of events took place.  Instead, they file charges that can't be prosecuted and when/if the charges are either dismissed or a not guilty verdict is reached, we have chaos and destruction.  That makes the divide that we try so very hard to get rid of get even wider.  Instead of understanding that we are all on the same team here, too many use that to argue that we aren't.

[homersapien 11,420]

8 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I honestly do get that. However, in order to achieve real change, everyone has to buy in and accept that there is a real problem and that it is systemic.  When we don't honestly discuss these encounters in the context in which they happen, instead choosing to lump them all together, the very people that need to pay attention are those that are least likely to do so.  The most alarming example of excessive force in recent years has been the Breonna Taylor case.  That case exposed the problems with the warrant procedures and the execution of warrants that happen every day across the country.  It also shows the vulnerability of police officers executing warrants that they had no involvement in procuring.  The system needs to be changed.  What happened there could happen anywhere, without regard to the race of the homeowner.  I disagree.  IMO it's far more likely to happen to someone who lives in a black neighborhood, which may be a different problem, but it doesn't change the fact.

In the Brooks case, leaders need to have the courage to explain why that series of events took place.  Instead, they file charges that can't be prosecuted and when/if the charges are either dismissed or a not guilty verdict is reached, we have chaos and destruction.  That makes the divide that we try so very hard to get rid of get even wider.  Instead of understanding that we are all on the same team here, too many use that to argue that we aren't.

The statistics as a whole, as well as many of the individual cases, suggest that we are not on the "same" team.  That is the underlying belief - supported by the data - that results in the "chaos and destruction".

If you are honest with yourself, you acknowledge that being white provides anyone who interacts with the police provides an inherent advantage, generally speaking.  Or to put it differently, simply being black bestows a disadvantage.

IMO, our culture of policing (militarization) also plays a contributing role.

[AU9377 5,019]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

The statistics as a whole, as well as many of the individual cases, suggest that we are not on the "same" team.  That is the underlying belief - supported by the data - that results in the "chaos and destruction".

If you are honest with yourself, you acknowledge that being white provides anyone who interacts with the police provides an inherent advantage, generally speaking.  Or to put it differently, simply being black bestows a disadvantage.

IMO, our culture of policing (militarization) also plays a contributing role.

I agree that the militarization of policing is a problem, as is the privatized prisons that exist on down to the privatized probation and parole companies.  I agree that being white provides an inherent advantage. That is true even when interacting with black police officers. There are many reasons for that. One problem that there is no easy answer for is the problem of police officers forming expectations based on their day to day experiences while doing their job. It is human nature to use past experiences to guide our interactions with others.  That is a difficult conversation to have and it is unfortunate, but it is real.  It is true that if I am pulled over for a tail light being out, I am extremely unlikely to be given anything other than a warning, if that.  If I was a young black male, the same traffic stop is likely to end in a search of the vehicle.

I'm not saying any of that isn't true or that it isn't a problem.  I am saying that statistics cannot play into the charging of an officer. In the Rashard Brooks case, the specific facts matter. To ignore those facts in the name of other wrongs is not justice.