Reporter doesn't like questioning

Washington Post ^ | 3/24/03 | Courtlan Milloy

[Tspud1]

Something Suspicious Is in the Air

By Courtland Milloy Monday, March 24, 2003; Page B01

The sign above the highway leading into the nation's capital advised motorists to "Report Suspicious Activity" and gave an 800 number for the Office of Homeland Security. As a reporter, I figured this was right up my alley and set out yesterday to report on things that struck me as suspicious.

For instance, near the Jefferson Memorial, I saw a five-foot-tall metal box that was hooked up to an electrical outlet and equipped with a high-tech antenna and chrome-dome receptor. What was it?

I asked a couple of National Park Service workers and some Cherry Blossom Festival organizers whose tent was set up next to the thing if they knew. Little did I know that my inquiry would become a suspicious activity in itself.

"We hear you've been asking curious questions," U.S. Park Police officer Michael Ramirez said as he and fellow officer Karl Spilde approached me from behind a blossomless cherry tree. "Why are you doing that?"

Both officers carried 9mm semiautomatic pistols, Mace and batons. Perhaps because I had just left the Jefferson Memorial, where I'd read a few lines about "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and "all men are created equal," I felt bold enough to pose a question of my own: "Why are you asking me that?"

[TigersEye]

My definition of a stranger is anybody you don't know.

You don't know what a cop is?

[AnAmericanMother]

Hey, we've got a lot of yellow jackets and a lot of police stops around here . . . nothin' I can do about that, it's where I live! :-D Now if you were to ask me about surfing, since I live 800 miles from the ocean, all you'd get is a great big, "DUH. . . . . you can DO that?"

[Henrietta]

"I have made no intimations about the quality of your argument, merely your quality as a poster and as a person."

And I suppose that this namecalling qualifies as reasoned debate?

[=Intervention=]

But I've raised this point with you way back in my original post. This guy DOES fit the physical profile of a terrorist. That's yet another reason why he attracted the cops' attention. It's not wrong for the cops to act proactively in what may be a crime, especially when this guy has multiple matches with the profile of a terrorist.

[general_re]

What can I say? I've never had much patience for people who go out of their way to be rude, and I have even less for people who go out of their way to be rude and then complain about how rude other people are. Must be a character flaw of mine...

[general_re]

And I suppose that this namecalling qualifies as reasoned debate?

Reap what you sow, Henny - reap what you sow...

[Henrietta]

"But you want to be free to insult and belittle others, while at the same time whining about how you're being personally attacked. Sorry, peddle that line of junk elsewhere."

Pointing out namecalling and ad hominem attacks is not insulting others, nor is it whining about personal attacks. It's simply stating a fact. I'm not sure why my posts have aroused such animus in you, and I'm not sure why you don't just stop posting to me if you don't like what I have to say.

[AnAmericanMother]

What others mean by "baiting" is that the reporter deliberately did things that would arouse suspicion.

Precisely my point as well. It seems to me, both from reading between the lines in this story and from others' reports of what this columnist is like as a general rule, that he set out to create a story. Musta been a slow news day.

Lord knows there are plenty of cops who get overforceful and out of hand (your mileage may vary). But most law enforcement types develop a sixth sense about when "something's up". Everybody's heard the reports about seeing "Arab-looking" people going around taking photographs and video of public monuments, dams, power stations, etc. I think he deliberately played off that and tried to create suspicion. And then he's so offended when the cops picked up on his deliberately suspicious behavior . . . oh, the humanity!

Living in a free society demands that the citizens show a little responsibility and not set out to bait or "test" the police.

[Henrietta]

I don't think he fits the terrorist profile. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

The greatest thing about this thread, and the article, is that what had started out as something simple, transpired into something large. The whole point of the article is the "asking questions" line... and I don't think anyone's civil liberties got bent out of shape. Both sides asked and answered, and moved on. It is the author's right to be concerned about the police's behavior. It is equally the officer's duty to be cautious about the person they are questioning. No harm done in this instance.

[TigersEye]

...and I'm not sure why you don't just stop posting to me if you don't like what I have to say.

She has a point. Whadda ya say we go check out the war threads?

[stands2reason]

For anyone who doesn't know Courtland Milloy, he's the Ramsey Clark of journalism.I thought Robert Fisk wa the Ramsey Clark of journalism. No, wait, you're right, Fisk, or how I like to spell his name. F**k, is the Ramsey Clark of columnists.

[general_re]

Good choice - I'm outta here. ;)

[Henrietta]

It's been fun, guys...g'nite! No hard feelings!

[AnAmericanMother]

That incident with the lady in the restaurant happened around here. It didn't come down as you describe, at all. The woman appeared honest and stuck to her story, while the students were alternatively hostile and defensive, cried "racism!" loudly and often, and changed their stories to the police and to the press several times. And, oddly enough, my opinion is that the same thing was going on there that I believe happened here -- the students were deliberately baiting the woman. (They loudly said something like, "If they think 9-11 was bad, wait until they see what's going to happen soon . . . ") And another parallel besides the deliberate baiting and the "race card" - given that stories came out after 9-11 about vague threats made by Mohammed Atta and others that were NOT acted upon, the woman felt it was a good idea to notify the authorities.

You're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't.

[algol]

Does he refuse to show his driver's license when he gets on a plane?

WTH must the government know our names when we travel?

Blame the airlines for this one. Oh sure, it may be a gov't regulation, but the airlines love it. With their wacky fare structures, half a round-trip ticket is often cheaper than one-way, and without a way to ensure that the name on the ticket is the same as that of the person using the ticket, it was common practise to buy a round-trip ticket when you only needed one-way and then sell the unused half to somebody wanting to go the other way. That and reselling advance-purchase tickets for less than the last-minute price.

This way the airlines can blame it on gov't regs and not take the PR hit.

(Note that the gov't doesn't give a damn who you are if you travel by private transport.)

[Henrietta]

"Both sides asked and answered, and moved on."

Yes, but only after one side illegally detained the other for an hour and a half. See the problem?

[george wythe]

the students were deliberately baiting the woman.

Apparently, the woman was easily baited. Her son did not buy the bait story, according to her own version of the events. I also find interesting that her son was never shown telling his side of the story.

I wonder if the son's recollection varied from the mother's recollection of the events.

At any rate, I live in Florida, and I had 24 hr coverage of the story. My recollection is that the med students were cleared, and the toll-violation fine given to them was publicly revoked by the police, after the officers had time to review the toll video tapes.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Well, I don't know that it was illegal... he could have asked for an attorney, he could have asked them to take him down town, he could have TOLD THE WOMAN WHO WANTED TO CALL THE POLICE WHO HE WAS... he could have told the police who he was. If he had told them the full truth, they would have let him go... so, in not telling the whole truth, he was questioned. He is complaining, and yet, get's paid for the words that he types up for the article. His detainment earned him column space!

[Michael.SF.]

Sigh. You just don't get it, do you?

Well, there you go again. You you are really sounding more and more like a democrat. In that you stoop to insult (no, I did not flunk civics), you refuse to listen to reasonable opinions, which are contrary to your own, you think you are smarter then everyone else, and you have no logic to your arguments.

Try reading more slowly this time:

"He doesn't have to produce I.D. just because the cops ask for it."

Well Miss, then he should not complain when his refusal to do so causes a delay in his daily routine, should he?

"Refusal to produce I.D. or cooperate with a search is not probable cause for arrest."

What if this guy had been your average everyday terrorist instead of a Liberal Nutcase Opinion Columnist for a third rate newspaper, and the cops walked away after he refused to show his ID? He then waits an hour or so and blows up the Lincoln Memorial, killing 187 people including 47 students from Miss Marples third grade class.

Now, are you going to say that the cops did their job?

sighhhhhhh You just don't get it do you?

Answer one question: At what point do you feel the cops were out of line in this story?

was it:
a) When they responded to the cal regarding a suspicious man?
b) was it when they asked for his ID?
c) was it when they waited for confirmation of who he said he was?