Could the Yale police have made a worse choice of students to pull a gun on? Not likely. The student turned out to be the son of New York Times columnist Charles Blow.
Saturday evening, I got a call that no parent wants to get. It was my son calling from college — he’s a third-year student at Yale. He had been accosted by a campus police officer, at gunpoint!
Blow’s commentary often addresses the state of race relations in America. I suppose it comes with the territory, though that would be a racist conclusion based on Blow’s skin color. He could just as easily be a fencing writer, though it doesn’t pay as well. In any event, that’s what he does. And he does it well, whether or not you see the world as he does.
According to the column, his son was doing what normal people who have no reason to think any cop would be interested in them do.
He left for the library around 5:45 p.m. to check the status of a book he had requested. The book hadn’t arrived yet, but since he was there he put in a request for some multimedia equipment for a project he was working on.
Then he left to walk back to his dorm room. He says he saw an officer “jogging” toward the entrance of another building across the grounds from the building he’d just left.
Cop jogging? Okay, but what’s that got to do with him?
“I did not pay him any mind, and continued to walk back towards my room. I looked behind me, and noticed that the police officer was following me. He spoke into his shoulder-mounted radio and said, ‘I got him.’
“I faced forward again, presuming that the officer was not talking to me. I then heard him say, ‘Hey, turn around!’ — which I did.
It turns out that there had been some burglaries on campus. As he would later learn, Blow’s son “matched the description of a suspect.” No mention is made of what that description might be. Having seen write-ups containing the description of a suspect too many times, I can’t help but wonder whether it was the “black male, between 5′ and 7′ tall, two eyes and hair, wearing jeans and a black coat.” But I digress.
There is no mention made of anyone being harmed, or the suspect being armed, or any potential threat of violence. There is no mention of Blow’s son having come directly from the scene of a burglary. There was no mention of the burglary occurring in the library, which would be an interesting phenomenon in itself. Nonetheless:
“The officer raised his gun at me, and told me to get on the ground.
A gun? Why a gun? Well, there is really only one good answer, the First Rule of Policing.
“The officer asked me what my name was. I gave him my name.
“The officer asked me what school I went to. I told him Yale University.
“At this point, the officer told me to get up.”
Which raises a fairly straightforward question. Couldn’t the officer have asked the questions first, before drawing his gun, before ordering the young man to the ground, before making certain that the officer was protected at the expense of a young man who did nothing more than walk home from the library?
But nothing happened? So, a moment of seizure, a moment of fear staring down a weapon, sure. But then it was over, and nobody was harmed. All’s well that ends well, right? Blow explains:
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.
This could have happened all too easily. Consider the possibility of Blow’s son thinking he ought to show the officer his Yale ID, and reaching for his wallet. In his pants. Near his waist. What are the chances that might be misconstrued? Everyone would feel just horrible about it afterward, but as Blow says, “triggers cannot be unpulled.”
And yet, someone reading this will mutter to themselves, but what about the cop? How should he know this was a Yale student, Charles Blow’s son no less? How should the cop know that his life wasn’t at risk?
My son was unarmed, possessed no plunder, obeyed all instructions, answered all questions, did not attempt to flee or resist in any way.
Well, sure, we know all of this afterward, but the cop only knew there was a kid in front of him who could be armed, could be dangerous, could present a threat. How was the cop supposed to know this was Charles Blow’s son?
The answer, of course, is that it is irrelevant that this was Charles Blow’s son. That is merely the mechanism that gets this story before us. This could have been anyone’s son, provided he had a child who was a student at Yale. This could have been any innocent young man who had no clue why a police officer would be interested in him, following him, focused on him, pointing a gun at him and ordering him to the ground.
And this could have been another young black man killed by “mistake,” but fully justifiable in the eyes of law enforcement because nobody knew with certainty that he wasn’t a threat. And therein lies the problem, the presumption that permeates cop culture that everyone is a threat until proven not to be a threat. This is why the First Rule of Policing is invoked, because the cop’s life matters, and it matters more than anyone else’s life.
Just because this young man, who happens to be Charles Blow’s son, wasn’t harmed doesn’t end the inquiry. Nor do the post hoc apologies change the potential for tragedy up front. In the absence of a reason to believe a person poses a risk of serious injury or worse to a cop, the gun should stay holstered. Yes, that may mean that a cop could someday be harmed. Why is that worse than the harm that might have come to Charles Blow’s son? Why is that worse than the harm that might have come to any person who isn’t a cop?
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Yale university at some point got a special dispensation from the Connecticut State General Assembly to carry firearms. Why? Was the campus more dangerous than any other in the state? No other college or university campus police in CT are so “privileged”. Yale campus police have the reputation of being wannabee City of New Haven police. They are authorized to make arrests off campus of individuals who are not on Yale properties and who otherwise may have nothing to do with the university. And they do in fact make these [unwarranted] arrests. This is well-known in downtown New Haven.
That’s not unusual. Yale officers are commissioned under the authority of the New Haven Police Commission, and have city-wide jurisdiction. In Texas, Baylor officers are dual-commissioned as Baylor officers and as reserve McLennan County Deputy Sheriffs.
The actual question is why the other colleges and universities care so little for the safety of their students that they would not employ peace officers. Do they think that crime doesn’t occur on campus?
In the last three years, Yale has had 46 forcible sex offenses (rapes) on campus, 10 robberies, and 7 aggravated assaults. On the streets and sidewalks immediately adjacent to campus, there were 2 rapes, 61 robberies, and 6 aggravated assaults. That’s a total of 132 violent crimes in the last three years.
I think that justifies a police presence.
BTW, according to federal statistics, none of the other private 4-year schools have a similar crime problem. Most report few to no violent crimes on campus.
First off, there are more than four private-sector four year colleges in CT. I can name five, and I never went to any of them. Yale is of course the most famous, centered in the downtown of what criminologist Prof. James Austin determined, 2004, was the most crime-ridden and dangerous city in CT (actually tied with Hartford). At the bottom of my comment above, I did mention that New Haven was a dangerous place.
I should know; I lived there for ten years.
That part of my comment was deleted by Our Host, presumably for “relevance”. I did mention the notorious unsolved murder case of Yale undergrad and German national Suzanne Jovin. Followiing was the botched investigation of this murder by New Haven City detectives and subsequently the State. Prof. James van deVelde, her senior thesis adviser, came under early suspicion–as reported in the press–was suspended and then fired by the university, even though there was not a shred of evidence connecting him with the case other than his professional capacity. He filed a state lawsuit against the university and settled “out of court”.
The City is not known for its adept handling of murders. There are several other cases of interest to me.
The question in my mind is why the Yale cops have to be armed? It seems to me that this invite the same issues of excessive use of force plaguing police departments around the country, including New Haven.
My conclusion is that Yale University is part of the problem and not part of the solution, although they
certainly have an excellent PR department and love to cozy up to whoever happens to be mayor of the city. The previous long-standing, thuggish mayor is now gone (retired), and none too soon.
A new dawn may be rising in New Haven, but would not bank on it.
I never said that there were only four 4-year private colleges and universities, the Dept. of Education shows twenty, from under 100 students to Yale, with over 12,000. That’s what I limited my query to, because I didn’t see how the Connecticut Center for Massage Therapy-Groton and similar schools were comparable to a 4-year school.
I never made any comment on the skill and abilities of the various police departments, nor do I particularly care. That’s not relevant to Scott’s post.
The reason cops need to be armed? Are you serious? Ask James Davis, of Butler. Or George Sullivan of Nevada-Reno. Or Michael Blankenship of Ohio State. Or Sean Collier of MIT. Oh wait – they’re all dead. Killed in the line of duty.
I mis-read your sentence regarding number of four-year colleges, obviously.
“That’s a total of 132 violent crimes in the last three years,” you report. If that is correct, my response is, where were the cops when the victims needed them– whether university police or city? You make my point for me. Either they are poorly trained or else spending too much time drinking DD coffee in their squad cars. Being both armed and on active duty seems not to make much of a difference in New Haven.
I am very familiar with the Yale campus and the surrounding areas, to include the “worst neighborhoods” of New Haven. I personally never had any fear of anything or anybody at any time. My solution was a male Rottweiler dog who was frequently with me, but not always. I witnessed a shooting once. It appeared to be between minority kids (teenagers) who should not have been armed in the first place. (I was unable to describe the assailant; they all looked the same to me.)
Fast forward: Eventually I learned that in New Haven, you had nothing to fear but Law Enforcement itself. New Haven cops routinely ignore departmental rules, regulations and guidelines. They blatantly ignore Constitutional rights of citizens. They fail to respond to calls for help; their presence is unpredictable and unreliable, which are reasons for the university to have its own police force. (I’ve already opined on Yale campus police, if that is what you want to call them?)
New Haven cops seem not to understand the concept of “community policing”. They have no compunctions against filing false and/or illiterate police reports. In court, they swagger and have no fear of testilying under oath. They clock in, make unnecessary arrests willy nilly, clock out, and draw their pay. They used to have “beat-down” posses, which I have observed in action and personally tried to prevent, at my own peril.
People Against Injustice, New Haven, with which I was active, drew some attention to rampant problems with, and abuses by, Law Enforcement, but nothing seemed to change. The Civilian Complaint Review Board was a “paper tiger”, signifying nothing more than a desk and a telephone at City Hall. That’s my take, for what it’s worth.
I do not believe law enforcement, whether campus or city cops, should be armed with live, lethal ammo. There are other, safer ways to down perps without killing them.
One of Diane Rehm’s guests yesterday reported that a very high percentage of cops (43% ?) miss their target upon first shot. Training, not to mention “judgment in the heat of the moment” would seem to leave a lot to be desired. Additionally, a small percentage of arrestees nationwide are killed, and a small percentage of cops are killed in the line of duty. Statistics don’t lie, but LE boosters can lie like rugs and carpets.
“[W]here were the cops when the victims needed them….”
You do realize that police are primarily reactive, not proactive, right? The police owe no individual person a duty to protect, if you want that, you should allow the individuals to protect themselves. Currently Yale bans students and non-police staff from carrying handguns on campus.
“I do not believe law enforcement, whether campus or city cops, should be armed with live, lethal ammo.”
That tells me all I need to know. You’re entitled to your opinion, but I won’t be responding to your future comments after this one.
BTW, Rehm’s figures appear low, if you are looking at actual gunfights. I would not be surprised to see a first round miss rate of 60-70%. That’s a matter of fight physiology, not training, which, BTW, the citizens are not willing to pay for. We can train them to be better, but it requires recurring training as it is a perishable skill. And to maintain that level of training requires additional officers be hired to maintain the same level of coverage on the street.
“Need to know” is a term which grates on me. As in: Agents of the state refuse to release certain “sensitive information” to the public, unless there is a demonstrable Need-to-Know. Oh really,… I have a short essay all prepared and ready to go, but perhaps should stop while ahead. Am getting too much exposure here.
Suit yourself. No tears shed by me. However, I suspect you may relent,… and that my dear Watson is all I need to know. All we’re asking for is a rollback of the police state mentality which has overtaken the nation, and some college campuses. Is that too much?
Plus, chances of my allowing you to post your essay are, how shall I says this, slim.
ECLS: What do you think of the way the campus police treated Charles Blow’s son?
OK, we’re game. What is he supposed to think? Smarty!
It’s a fair question. I would be interested in knowing what ECLS thinks as well.
The officers are responding to the equivalent of a home invasion. Someone who will enter an occupied residence is much more dangerous than your run of the mill burglar, who overwhelmingly does his thing when there is no one present.
I’ve put people on the ground at gun point in similar circumstances, which was within policy where I worked. I never had a problem after I explained it to the individual. Here, both the officer and Tahj Blow are black. I have no clue what the Yale PD policy is, but they are doing an IA review.
Another factor to consider is that apparently the PD had a decent description of the suspect, and apparently Tahj actually fit the description.
BTW, most of the ones I proned out were white, not black.
Someone who will stop an innocent Yale student at gunpoint without any basis beyond generic description is much more dangerous than your run of the mill police officer, who overwhelmingly does his thing without pointing guns at innocent kids. If we’re going to play with facile assumptions, I prefer mine.
Well, I obviously don’t believe that it was a facile assumption. The link at Charles Blow’s site show that the suspect entered occupied dorm rooms, i.e., the student’s residence. This happened twice, according to the article.
Do you have any support for the assertion that the description was “generic?” I was under the impression that the clothing description matched, along with general height and weight. “Yale College student, who closely matched the description of the suspect, was briefly detained and released by Yale police.” Yale Daily News, Jan. 25, 2015 (emphasis added).
I suspect we’ll disagree on this.
What I am more interested in is how the investigation is conducted. Conn. PDs are not exactly known for being open to criticism.
I note that one of the areas where we tend to disagree most is the operative assumptions of police work. You find lack of information to justify greater latitude in the use of force. I go the opposite way; without knowing that a person is armed or dangerous, don’t pull a gun or shoot him. Your way protects the cop. My way protects the citizen.
My operative assumption is that a citizen is not a threat unless and until there is good factual reason to believe he is a threat. Your operative assumption is that citizens are inherent threats until there is good factual reason to believe they are not.
I won’t argue with that basic assessment, although I would change some of the language.
But I also believe that the citizen has that same right as the officer does.
Where I differ with most police officers is that if a mistake is made, then the officer must face the consequences of his actions, including criminal prosecution. Their good will is insufficient when a citizen is seriously injured or dies at the hand of, or in the custody of the police.
Currently they don’t. That’s why actions like Brandenberg’s are so rare. That’s why DeBlasio rolled over and played dead (which killed any chance he had of winning this).
When I was in college, they renamed the university police “campus safety.” They were sworn officers with county-wide jurisdiction, but they patrolled unarmed, the theory being that this sent a message to students that they were there for our protection, not as the enemy. Then again, this was Ithaca, not New Haven.
They’ve since been renamed police and carry guns. The Halcyon days of youth are gone.
Scott, it’s been a number of years since both of us were undergrad students.
Besides, the officers are armed at Cornell now. Having unarmed police was pretty much a Yankee idea. It never was popular in the south or west.
I wonder why they changed back to carrying guns. I wasn’t able to find anything about it.
Normally it was because the officers lobbied for it (at most campuses).
I don’t know about Cornell.
Well, that ag students did tend to get a bit wild and crazy, so it could be that.
It would also be nice to know what the suspect was accused of doing. Were they looking for someone armed and dangerous who should be confronted with that in mind? Or was it just a person who’d stolen a library book or seemed drunk in public?
Burglary. There was a link in Blow’s column that provided details.
ECLS said:
“But I also believe that the citizen has that same right as the officer does.”
Does that mean that a citizen has the right to walk up to a cop and point a pistol at him without any reasonable belief that the cop is an imminent threat to his life or safety?
And it has come out that the officer involved was black. Some think this is relevant, although the races of the student or officer weren’t a significant part of Blow’s article.
“Does that mean that a citizen has the right to walk up to a cop and point a pistol at him….”
Where have I advocated that? At Yale, based on the reports, the officer has a reasonable suspicion that Tahj was a burglary suspect. And that the suspect had been entering occupied residences.
Should a citizen find a person who meets the description of a burglary suspect who has been going into occupied residences, the citizen should be able to hold him at gunpoint too.
You really mean the citizen should be able to point a gun at the “suspect” even of he is unarmed and there is no indication he poses a physical threat? And if he flees or says “who the hell are you,” should the citizen be able to shoot him?
“[T]here is no indication he poses a physical threat?”
Entering an occupied residence is an indication that he poses a physical threat. Holding a burglary suspect at gunpoint is widely accepted as reasonable. I don’t have to assume that he is unarmed, nor do I have to assume that burglars are going to join hands and sing kumbyla.
In the south, this is not an uncommon thought. An Alabama family held burglary suspects at gunpoint (the wife with a pink gun) in Dec. 2014. A Louisiana homeowner did the same at his home in Dec. 2014. A Texas man in Jan. 2015. I could go on with example after example, and guess what–none of the suspects ended up being armed.
As to your second question, what if he’s a Taliban terrorist wearing a DuPont vest? I can come up with hypos too, and they have as much bearing on this as yours.
I agree. Holding a burglary suspect at gunpoint is or should be reasonable.
But burglary suspects, like all things*, come in various flavors. For instance, it might be more reasonable to draw down on a guy in a stripy shirt holding a swag bag and a nine than on a peaceful black student out returning library books.
*cf. Leibniz
You suggested that the cops had a good description of the suspect and that Blow matched that description well. Really? The cop let him up after determining Blow was a student. Did the description also include the fact that the suspect wasn’t a student? Perhaps whoever supplied the description got a look at the suspect’s wallet and determined it didn’t contain a student ID? Maybe the suspect yelled “I don’t need no education!” before sprinting down the street? Or are burglaries just never committed by students?
How’s this for a more parsimonious explanation: the cop, armed with a gun and a description that went “black dude” walked around campus until he found someone who closely matched the description, then went into hero mode before realizing, oh crap, this guy is a student and probably not the perp, but whatevs, at least I’ll make the news.
Aim guns at suspects. Sure. But exercise discretion, and don’t conflate somebody in Blow’s situation with someone caught with their hands in the safe. Leaving the line of bullshit out of the equation would probably also help.
Sorry, the line of official* bullshit
“You suggested that the cops had a good description of the suspect and that Blow matched that description well.”
No, I didn’t suggest that. The local student newspaper suggested that.
I also doubt that the black cop went into an every “black dude” must be the bad guy mode.
Right, you sourced the claim, and said you were under the impression it was true. If you’re no longer under that impression, then cool, I don’t believe it either.
SHG’s been arguing for a while that cops are more “blue” than black or white. For example, see http://blog.simplejustice.us/2014/12/26/the-line-between-black-and-blue/. There’s also the fact that both black and white people are more likely to believe evil things of black people, in any number of contexts. And the argument loses nothing if we sub in “white dude” instead – it’s just that you and I know perfectly well that “black dude” is the version more likely to lead to this kind of outcome.
ECLS, the crimes described in the articles are those of a sneak thief, not “home invasion”. I went to college and lived in a dorm years ago–half the time, people leave their doors propped open or unlocked and anyone can just wander in and steal stuff. If you think cops should be in fear for their lives of a sneak thief to the point of threatening to kill people–and it is a death threat to point a loaded weapon at someone–then the unarmed retail floor guys who regularly confront shoplifters are heroes of the highest order! Either that, or cops are rank cowards and bullies, hiding behind their badges and guns.
I understand the difference between a sneak thief and a home invasion, and I stand by my comment that someone who enters an occupied residence is more dangerous than a typical burglar. I might also note that almost every sneak thief I have confronted has tried to fight. If they are willing to go into an office, school, or home that is occupied, they are more prone to violence.
I’m also very impressed with your comments on cowardice. Please don’t make me cry.
Okay, I think this thread is played out too.
Vigilante-breath! No citizen should be allowed to hold another at gunpoint,… just because,… [Most] citizens are not trained in the finer arts of such endeavors as this. Not to mention, their states of mind which might be as aberrant as the alleged perpetrator/lawbreaker/assailant. Trayvon Martin case in Florida, for example, was a major catastrophe where a self-designated citizen decided to “take the law into his own hands”. How does any one civilian know that someone else does not have a “beef” with some other civilian, or what they are really up to? That is precisely why we have trained, uniformed officers licensed and supervised to carry out such tasks.
You have disappointed me several times in the last few days, ECLS. I think it’s time for nite school or some remedial studies in your continuing education. Yes, good luck with your solution to the presenting situation/problem of an alleged, unauthorized person entering the dorm rooms of students at Yale, matching the description of,… That is why we have “housemasters” there, cameras and locked gates and doors with plastic keys. Puhleeeze, get with the program.
Trigger-happy campus police, we do not need. Common sense and composure we need.
Now it is time for you to retire from this discussion, ASAP. You’ve done enough damage already!