Barack Obama’s legal mentor publicly scolded the president this week for inserting the White House into a debate about the controversial arrest of Obama’s friend, African-American scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr., by a white police sergeant last year.
Obama “blackened himself” by commenting on the low-level municipal arrest, turning it into an “international story,” said Harvard Law Professor Charles J. Ogletree before 100 people attending an event Thursday promoting Ogletree’s new book on racial injustice.
“He was the black president taking sides with the black professor,” Ogletree said. The second mistake Obama made was immediately labeling the incident one of racial profiling by discussing the long history of blacks and Latinos being stopped by police in this country, Ogletree said.
Obama said Sgt. James M. Crowley and the Cambridge Police acted “stupidly” by arresting Gates at his own home. The President later invited both Gates and Crowley to mend fences at a get-together now known as the White House “beer summit.”
Gates, 59, said at the time he was arrested because he was black.
Crowley said Gates was uncooperative and screaming at him while he inquired about a 911 report of a possible break-in at Gates’s Harvard Square home.
The disorderly conduct charge was dropped within days, but Obama’s comments triggered widespread debate and the establishment of a special police panel to review the incident.
The Cambridge Review Committee released a report this week stating the arrest was unnecessary and both men should have made attempts to “ratchet down” their behavior. The committee’s work cost Cambridge about $100,000, city records show.
The report follows last month’s New England Center for Investigative Reporting analysis of police reports over the past five years. The study found Cambridge Police arrest more whites than blacks for disorderly conduct, considered among the most discretionary criminal charge used by officers.
Gates has declined repeated requests to be interviewed in the past month.
But he has some regrets about last summer’s incident, Ogletree told an NECIR reporter following his speech at the Harvard Coop bookstore.
“Gates wants to put this behind him. He didn’t want to be the poster boy for racial profiling,” Ogletree said. “Now he has a better understanding of Crowley since meeting him.”
Ogletree said “common sense went out the window” during the encounter, which would not have occurred had both the suspect and police officer been female.
“Judgements were made that caused the situation to escalate,” Ogletree said about the behavior of both men.
Crowley last month said the NECIR report absolved him and the police force of racism. Following this week’s report, Crowley issued the following statement, which reads in part: “I’ve learned a lot through this process and I continue to be committed to the city of Cambridge, my responsibilities as a police officer and father, and my dedication to teaching fellow officers about the need for balancing tolerance and safety.”
Ogletree also said Gates was truly afraid of Crowley at the time of the incident.
“When he met Crowley at the White House, he said ‘you’re smaller than when I last saw you. You were 6 ‘ 8 “ and 300 pounds last time,” Ogletree said.
Crowley, meanwhile, initially did not want to attend the White House session because he felt he would be the odd man out, given the friendship between Obama and Gates. He changed his mind when told he could bring family and friends along, Ogletree said.
Ogletree said his book, “Presumption of Guilt: The Arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Race, Class and Crime in America,” was not about the Gates’ arrest but about the “broader problems of minorities being racially profiled.” Gates did not participate in the preparation of the book, he said.
Ogletree also said citizens would have benefited from having the charge processed through the criminal justice system.
Ogletree also said Dr. (Martin Luther) King (Jr.) “wouldn’t have wanted the charges dismissed.”
“If Gates went to trial (he) would have been acquitted,” he said.

By Maggie Mulvihill, Sarah Moffit and Carroll Cole

Nearly a year after Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. was arrested for disorderly conduct at his Cambridge home, a special panel of law enforcement experts and academics released a 60-page report today stating the arrest was avoidable.
“This incident could have been resolved quickly and peaceably,” said Chuck Wexler, Executive Director of the Police Executive Research Forum and a member of the 12-member Cambridge Review Committee.
President Barack Obama, a Gates’ friend, said last year the Cambridge Police “acted stupidly” in arresting Gates.
The criminal charge was dropped by the Middlesex District Attorney’s office within days of the incident.
The review committee was formed by Police Commissioner Robert C. Haas following the July 16, 2009 arrest of Gates, a prominent black professor. Gates claimed the white sergeant, James Crowley, who arrested him did so because he was black. At the time, Crowley was responding to a 911 call about two men possibly breaking into the house.
The committee’s report also backs up findings released earlier this month by the New England Center for Investigative Reporting demonstrating the Cambridge Police have had no pattern of racial bias with disorderly conduct arrests within the past five years.
Wexler said while race did factor into the Gates arrest, issues such as class and police authority also came into play during the encounter between Crowley and Gates.
Gates has declined requests to be interviewed by NECIR. His attorney, Harvard Law Professor Charles J. Ogletree, is currently promoting a book entitled: “The Presumption of Guilt: The Arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Race, Class, and Crime in America.” In the book, Ogletree compares the Gates arrest to the 1991 beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles, which led to race riots. He has acknowledged he never reviewed arrest data from Cambridge police nor did he interview Cambridge Police officials or Crowley before writing his book.

Read the story in The Daily Free Press.

This was our assignment: find out everything you can about 21 road construction firms in Massachusetts that are getting millions in federal stimulus dollars. The reporting required a complete scrub or background check that introduced me to several government databases, websites and documents I had never worked with before. Checking the OSHA website for workplace safety violations, the EPA’s database for environmental violations and “PACER” (a federal court system website) for federal lawsuits was a valuable learning experience. Over the past two months, I’ve had the opportunity to use those databases for other research I’ve conducted either for NECIR or my classes. It’s important for every reporter, whether a rookie or veteran, to know how to work with these information tools.
Assisting with the reporting for the stimulus story also has taught me the importance of triple-checking facts and being absolutely positive that every piece of information in a story is correct. I have personally reviewed many of the numbers in our report several times. Accuracy is always key and when you’re working on a story with so many numbers and data, ensuring accuracy is a painstaking process.
Being a part of the team that reported this important story also has taught me what it really means to be fair. When you’re reporting on several different companies, each one must be contacted and given a chance to respond. We made sure that every firm had the opportunity to speak to us regarding their past history of trouble. However, not many companies did so, which I believe is a shame. I wish that people and businesses would realize that journalists are just trying to uncover the truth.

Sarah Favot is a student at Boston University’s College of Communication.