...Teach the basics of Modern Criminal Law in each American High School and Citizen Naturalization Center. The 'Gates' case illustrates that a person can be an accomplished Ivy League professor and yet without an understanding of the law (Disorderly Conduct), they can become victims of their own ignorance.  We at LawyerUp feel that not providing an opportunity for every American to learn the Law is like asking a person to play a game of Monopoly without first introducing the rules.

The issue (though we know the prism of race and class may cloud this) is whether a person can be lawfully arrested while at their own home, after officers, responding to a possible burglary, determine that said person is the resident.

On July 16th of 2009, in Cambridge Massachusetts, Harvard professor, Henry Louis Gates (aka Skip), returned to his home from a journey to China.  Due to a malfunctioning front door, Gates enacted the help of his car driver to assist him in trying to open his troublesome door.  Seeing this abnormal activity and aware of previous break-ins throughout the neighborhood, Lucia Whalen placed a 911 call stating that she saw two men on Gates' front porch who appeared to be trying to force open the door.

In the vicinity, Sgt. James Crowley responded to the call, encountering Gates when Gates was in the foyer of his Ware Street home. Now here's where it gets somewhat fuzzy (as to who said what and when), however Patrolman Carlos Figueroa (a 3rd party eye witness) stated in a police report that he heard Crowley ask Gates for id and heard Gates say, "No, I will not!" We do not know whether Sgt.  Crowley first put his question into context (i.e. we had a report of a break in...).  Then, Figueroa says that Gates began calling Sgt. Crowley a racist, saying, "This is what happens to black men in America."  Gates, then retrieved his i.d. proving that he was the legal resident of the home.  Sgt. Crowley asked Gates to come outside... Because, when investigating a burglary, Figueroa says, "Part of our protocol is to make sure we know who is in there (the home) and legally in there.  On the way out of the residence, Gates began demanding Sgt. Crowley's name and badge number.  On Gates' front porch Sgt. Crowley arrested him for 'Disorderly Conduct.' 

While almost every state in America has a 'Disorderly Conduct' law with varying penalties, in Massachusetts' General Law a disorderly person is defined as one who:

• with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or
• recklessly creates a risk thereof
• engages in fighting or threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or
• creates a hazard or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose.

"A person may be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than six months, or by a fine of not more than $200, or by both such fine and imprisonment." For further detail see MGL Chapter 272, section 53. 

Here, the officers responded to a legitimate 911 call, as opposed to 'profiling' or seeing Gates pry open his door first hand, so they had probably cause to investigate a possible crime. When they asked, Gates for his id and he (supposedly) initially refused, the officers have a legitimate reason to be alarmed. When Gates produced his id, all suspicions as to his legitimacy to be in the residence are cleared, however protocol often demands that the resident come outside of the home (so the officers can determine whether the person is being threatened from inside the home by a latent criminal).  This is seemingly legitimate, especially if a search of the home is then conducted.  However, enroute to his front porch, it is reported that Gates grew loud, questioning the officer for his name and badge number (which is legitimate) and (supposedly) hurling insults.  Now, case law states that mere words can not be crimes, they may however be the basis for a defamation law suit, but that is a civic matter.

Therefore, when Gates left his home and grew loud in public, creating a public inconvenience, he can be (and was) arrested.  However, since each prosecutor is responsible for deciding whether to prosecute a (potential) crime based on the merit of a case, here, the case was dropped 5 days after the incident i.e. meritless.

While we are refraining from commenting on all contextual prisms here- there is always 'context' - which should be carefully considered before acting...The takeaway or 'Teachable Moment' is, it helps to know the law and while (supposedly) hurling insults are not unlawful, if they are hurled with volume (to an officer or anyone else) and in public, you can be arrested- albeit not in the confines of your home. On your front porch? Yes.