We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.
I'm sticking with brilliant.
The Holloway/Solovey email is brilliant. They are really the A Team.
In 50 years of following Yale in the news, I have never seen Woodbridge Hall cave so swiftly to pressure------and well they might. Not only is Mr. Blow's pulpit far-reaching, but the recently emerging issue of institutional racism in law enforcement is explosive."Brilliant" isn't exactly the right word: Maybe politically prudent is a better term. In some circles it would be called a "lateral arabesque": Move the issue swiftly and adroitly to the side (a committee) to defuse it. I think a well known sports team did that last week with Deflategate. PK
You put a badge on a chest and you are asking for the whole roulette wheel of human emotions to come into play: Race, bigotry, intellectual and religious straightjackets, all that stuff. Choke-holds and unholstered guns aren't far removed.Just because you add the magic word "professionalism" to the training and put a uniform on the person doesn't make them less subject to irrational thoughts and feelings. My own cousins disowned me two years ago when I offered their aunt's (my mother's) cemetery plot to the slain Tsarnaev brother, the alleged Boston massacre perpetrator whose undertaker could not find anyone willing to bury the guy.My own cousins: One a retied cop; the other a practicing EMT, both native New Haveners. Both white anglo saxon Protestant males: Both willing to disown a relative for an intense vision of reality driven by anger, hatred and revenge.Maybe the explosive ingredient is not race, but gender. Paul KeaneM. Div. '80
Your cousins should have given you a pass on that grave thing--you are a divinity person--you are expected to do stuff like that. Shame on your cousins.
You know what ? You're the first person to say that. Thank you..PK
One hopes the irony of Charles Blow effectively accusing a black police officer of racial profiling is not lost on anyone.
The officer was responding to an emergency call of a crime in progress that was almost certainly part of a rash of recent burglaries including more than one where the burglar entered the rooms of sleeping students. What would be criminal would be for the officer not to detain and question someone in the immediate vicinity matching the description of the perpetrator out of fear some race-baiting NYT columnist would cry victim. Blow should be thankful that there are competent police protecting his son from the cesspool of the New Haven slums.
Blow's son was not "accosted"—he matched the description of a suspect. Had the emergency calls identified an Asian female in glasses, there is no way Blow's son would have been stopped.
In NYC, 2013 data show that blacks are 17 times more likely than whites to be suspects in violent felonies, 25 times more likely in robberies, and almost 50 times more likely to be the suspect in a shooting. So the odds of an innocent black person matching the description of a criminal suspect are far greater—that is not the result of "profiling" but rather racial disparities in criminal activity.
One feels for police and innocent citizens who are actually forced to deal with crime, as Blow and others who want to play victim disparage them and demean their motives.
Apparently some commenters have not even bothered to read Charles Blow's column at all. He says the issue was that his son was stopped AT GUN POINT (his emphasis, in his tweet).
For those who can't access the Times column, here is the relevant part:
BEGIN COLUMN QUOTE:"Now, don’t get me wrong: If indeed my son matched the description of a suspect, I would have had no problem with him being questioned appropriately. School is his community, his home away from home, and he would have appreciated reasonable efforts to keep it safe. The stop is not the problem; the method of the stop is the problem.
"Why was a gun drawn first? Why was he not immediately told why he was being detained? Why not ask for ID first?
"What if my son had panicked under the stress, having never had a gun pointed at him before, and made what the officer considered a “suspicious” movement? Had I come close to losing him? Triggers cannot be unpulled. Bullets cannot be called back."END COLUMN QUOTE.
I would hope and expect that most of us would have exactly the same reaction as Mr. Blow.
You left out the relevant line from the column, of course:
"In these moments, what you’ve done matters less than how you look."
Of course, Blow was suggesting his son was being "accosted" because of his race. Anyone who doesn't get that needs to stay after class and clean the blackboard.
Unintentionally or not, you're leaving out the part of the column that is actually relevant to my comment:
Blow is—if somewhat coyly—suggesting his son was "profiled" because of race. If that's not obvious to you, stay after class and clean the blackboard.
His implied suggestion is specious: police obviously can't know what someone who matches the description of a suspect has "done"—they have to stop people on the basis of how they "look". They are also under no obligation to "immediately" tell a possible suspect the specifics of why they're being stopped—indeed, there are a host of reasons it might be a serious mistake to do so.
Seems to me if DAD really was involved in his son's life like he professes- he would know his major.
Wish I could call Yale Police's trigger-happy encounter with your Yale son "racism' Mr. Blow.Yale Police have at least a 35 year history, not of racist behavior but of classist behavior. As a townie dressed in overalls in 1979 , when my personal check was refused for dinner and I protested loudly, I was arrested in the Divinity School Refectory inby Yale Police, even though I was an enrolled divinity student. The overalls made me look dangerous---and poor.The judge threw the case out of court (nolle) because he himself happened to have been an eyewitness to the event and said the Yale police "overreacted." http://yalearrest.blogspot....
Yale Police kicked a black man on my graduation night in my presence, and I foughtfor months with Woodbridge Hall defending him against unreasonable and abusive Yale Police behavior. The charges were finally dropped.In both cases Yale Police were treating those dressedlike poor town folk, rather than Ivy League preppies, as second class citizens(one white----me-----and one black ------Mr. S___) . Their behavior was based on suspicion of those who did not fit the "Yale persona", a form of classism.Perhaps the fact that they kicked the black man was more racist than classist since they didn't kick me, the white man. They just handcuffed me.The pistol packin' Yale patrolman's unholstered gun pointed at your son, Mr. Blow, a few days ago makes me wonder if Yale Police still operate out of xenophobic fear rather than calm professionalism. And xenophobia may be too generous, since their victim's skin was black. Perhaps "racism" does fit here. I'm incorrect, after all, Mr. Blow. My apology.Paul KeaneM. Div. '80
See attached linkfor documents related to both arrests.http://yalegrad80.blogspot....
I " liked" the comment. And I agree the claims of "racism" in the matter of Tahj's experience are unfounded, at best.
And perhaps the YPD overreacted in your own old case.
But there is no evidence of "classism" in anything you provide. Those conclusions seem to be entirely a gloss of your own divising, although screaming in a dining hall is definitely low or no class behavior. Merely acting as a low-class bum and getting swatted for it doesn't prove that social class was the motivation behind the swat. It is also likely that those running the dining hall couldn't stand screamers no matter what their social position. I can't. And anyone who starts screaming in a dining hall over something like this deserves little sympathy, although perhaps not criminal charges.
That you were the beneficiary of the judge acting in your case despite having an obvious conflict of interest stemming from his personal involvement as a "witness" is not something of which you should be proud. What he did is inconsistent with accepted standards of judicial temperament and ethics, and at a minimum should have been vetted as a substantial impediment to any effort to elevate that judge to a higher position (an appeals court, for example). No doubt the fact that you settled and the case couldn't go to trial caused him to consider his breach de minimis.
Can you imagine what you would have thought if the case had gone to trial as you wanted before that judge and, during the trial, he had leaned forward from the bench and said:
"Well, I happened to witness the whole thing, and so I know the defendant is obviously guilty of at least as much as the prosecutor says he is. I saw it myself with my own eyes. The only real question here is how much time he should spend in prison. So let's cut to the chase."
That's why we try to keep the judiciary disinterested.
Shouting "This is money" while holding a check is terribly low class.I suspect the judge was trying to help the Divinity School avoid embarrassment while allowing the Yale police to save face. As Professor Bainton (author of "Here I Stand" said as an eye-witness:"pushing to the ground and handcuffing was excessive."The guerilla theatre of the 1970's is lost on this fragile generation.
Shouting at dining room staff is definitely no-class behavior, especially with the intent to harass them into doing something they are not permitted to do. No question about it. Always has been. Is now. Always will be. There is no excuse.
N-O C-L-A-S-S. Something to be avoided.
Also no-class behavior: Shouting at restaurant service employees, especially for making a mistake with your order (morally, this should result in your prompt incarceration if you include "Do you know who I am?" among the things you shout). Shouting at movie theater ticket agents, unless it is to overcome bad acoustics in the booth. Shouting at supermarket checkout personnel. Shouting at anyone at any time because he or she differs with your politics (also, interrupting). Shouting at police and security agents of all kinds, including new office building guards who don't know you and won't let you in when you forget your ID. Shouting at secretaries. Shouting at slow people, including fat people who take up too much room on the sidewalk or waddle more than you think they should (including any unnecessarily loud "excuse me" as you pass).
Potentially classy behavior if done in a measured, moderate and controlled fashion: Shouting at your kids, when they deserve it and it can do some good. Shouting at ball games and boxing matches to encourage your favored competitors. Shouting at the flickering images of politicians on your television screen for saying things that are stupid and wrong. Shouting so someone can hear you in the shower. Shouting to alert anyone of danger or to summon needed help.
Not complete lists.
No, not prim: classy.
This is a great start to finally bring this issue to a rest. I am troubled that any police officer would find it necessary to draw his gun in order to stop and apprehend a suspected thief in a Yale residential college. Were there any idications that the suspect was armed? Rather than framing this incident as a race issue, we need to see it as a how-to-fight-crime issue. Clearly, the police erred in stopping the wrong person, but regardless of who was stopped, why was it necessary to draw a weapon? To me that is the real issue that needs to be addressed.
I too come from a minority group and I also attended Yale. If there is one thing I learned while at Yale it was that no one was out to get me or to mistreat me. Quite the contrary, everyone made me feel at home, but I also made every effort to fit into the Yale environment. Good race relations are a two-way street, and when you begin to see race as the cause of everything bad that happens to you, step back and take a close look at the facts and see if perhaps the issue is other than race, as is the case here.
Because this has been brought to my attention, I feel the need to clarify that this Juan Diaz is not Juan Diaz, Morse '15. I do not agree with the contents of this comment, and I don't buy into the race-blindness narrative that this author is trying to push. As a queer person of color from a working class background, I can say that Yale is an immensely alienating place for many racial and ethnic minorities, as well as women, queers, and working class people, to name a few.
Furthermore, I think the author's insistence on focusing on crime, rather than racial profiling and inequities, is a misdirected approach. Logic of this sort ("being tough on crime") is troubling because it is fodder for further police militarization in this country. Let us discard these preposterous racial and policing theories into the trash heap of history where they belong.
-Juan Diaz, MC '15
I thought it was clear from my post that I was not currently a student at Yale. I attended Yale in the 1980s and lived in Stiles.
I am baffled that anyone would draw the conclusion from my post that I take a tough-on-crime approach. My post clearly stated that I was troubled by a Yale Police Officer drawing his gun at a Yale student or petty thief in a residential college. I think this issue needs to be investigated, and that Yale needs to find a better way to deal with the apparent increase in thefts occurring in the residential colleges. For the record, I am a prosecutor's worst nightmare since I almost never vote to indict, and much less to convict, when I serve as a juror. I am also a member of Families Against Mandatory Minimums, and support strong gun control laws.
The incident that occurred in Trumbull College has nothing to do with race. It has to do with how best to deal with the rise in petty thefts at Yale. To frame this issue as a race/minority issue is misguided. I also come from a minority community and a lower middle class background, but I have never allowed myself to play the role of the victim because of these characteristics. Many members of minority groups fall into this trap, and it is one to best avoid. I have found it is more productive to carefully evaluate each situation before playing, for lack of a better word, "the race/minority card." In this respect, I side with Condi Rice and not Al Sharpton.
This is the most neutral factual account of what happened that I have seen. I applaud Salovey, Holloway and Higgins for trying to set out the facts and for acknowledging what they don't know yet. I wish others will follow their example and not force this incident into some meta-narrative. The campus police are capable of mistakes --and perhaps one was committed here--but they are also acting in good faith to protect the community.
I agree. It's odd that Blow never mentioned the race of the officer who stopped his son. It's almost as if he were hoping that a predjudicial asumption would be made. I understand that it was an opinion piece, but I felt a bit misled.
I wonder if Blow had intended to use his son for cover when he penned the enigmatic phrase, "[t]his is how my son remembers it," at the beginning of the incomplete and somewhat misleading account of the event.
I also wonder whether Blow asked his son for permission to write the column. It would be exploitive had he not.
Blow didn't mention the race of the officer in his column and, to my knowledge, he has not supplemented that column to fill the gap in any way whatsoever. Not even in the on-line files. Unless I've missed the correction, Blow is quite clearly misleading his readers, and so is the New York Times.
Arsoning while Yalie & white...
Yale Shanty Burns and Alumnus Is HeldBy CONSTANCE L. HAYS, Special to the New York TimesPublished: June 6, 1988
FYI Recollection has it that Bracey was bailed out by fellow 'Old Blues' within an hour, and the NHPD let him go without even testing his person or effects for accelerant, weaking the potential case against him significantly. He plea bargained to a charge such that he never spent a day in jail, but paid restitution for damages and costs to Yale's Beinecke Plaza, the City of New Haven, and several thousands to the student activist group. He allegedly went on to give talks to fellow alums around the U.S. as a minor celeb.
I presume the YDS archive, New Haven Register & NYTs has more on this.
Why have the replies to this seriously misleading post been censored by the YDN?
The crime in New Haven and Yale is getting out of control
Stick with Buffalo then.
? Not sure of the reference. Buffalo for a city four times the size of New Haven has a significantly lower crime rate.
About time someone answered back to that writer/dad at the NYT. Way to totally insert yourself and your position as a "journalist". How unprofessional. He ought to be fired actually.
Yes, because you would have been totally sanguine if this had happened to your kid!
Oh wait, you're white! So this almost certainly WOULDN'T have happened to your kid.
This claim that this African American YPD officer was motivated by racial animus against another African American is creepy and bizarre and, of course, utterly unsupported by facts.
Doesn't have to be animus, but rather implicit bias. There is a wealth of psychological research about this--much of it started at Yale--that shows how everyone (people of color and Whites) hold implicit biases that operate at a sub-conscious level. These shape our interpretations of others and of situations. And yes, even African Americans hold implicit biases about other Blacks as dangerous, which could led to poor judgment by the officer in this case.
This claim that this African American YPD officer was motivated by implicit biases that operate at a sub-conscious level against another African American is creepy and bizarre and, of course, utterly unsupported by facts.
No the white kid would have been more likely to be the victim of the original crime, according to statistics. Who should they "protest" to about that?