re: #166 Anymouse š¹š”š·
Thread, twelve tweets, after which Ms. Rice goes into discussion with Hoarse Whisperer with a thoughtful and civil discussion on the hellsite known as Twitter.
[Embedded content]
I ask Ms. Rice to consider the following hypothetical: During the same incident, Mr. Cooper doesnāt pull out his cellphone to record the verbal altercation and thus does not have Ms. Cooper on video saying sheās gonna call the cops to have him ātaken care of.ā Cop arrives and heās got a white woman with little dog and a black man in a situation that has been described to him as the latter āthreateningā the former.
Weāll go ahead and waive for a moment the suggestion that Mr. Cooper may have been brutalized and/or killed by the cop and deal with an equally likely scenario: The cop begins by asking her (the caller) what happened. She describes how she was just taking her dog for a walk when this black man suddenly appears and starts harassing her about have her dog somewhere it shouldnāt be. Sheās reattached the leash by this point, so Mr. Cooperās assertions that it was unleashed in violation of the parkās rules fall on deaf ears. When she says that Mr. Cooper said he had dog treats in his pocket and would do āthingsā to her dog if she didnāt leave, the cop then turns to him and asks if he does have treats (hindsight: We know he did because heās admitted to such and admitted he frequently uses them to entice dogs to leave their owners in order to force them away from the birds).
So the cop the asks Mr. Cooper his side of the story, where he does have to admit that he confronted her, that he did insist she leash her dog (again, dogās back on its leash) and he did suggest heād use dog treats he keeps in his pocket to lure the dog away. At this point, with the basics of the story corroborated, whatās the cop to do other than arrest Mr. Cooper? He could give him a citation, but it still means arguing in court that the whole thing is wrong, meaning money and time from his life that a man of lesser means might find himself financially crippled by. He could cut Mr. Cooper a break and order him to leave, but that means Ms. Cooper has broken the rules without consequence and will feel empowered to do the same routine in the future if confronted about her dog being off its leash. And if he orders them both to vacate, then she still walks free.
tl;dr, Ms. Cooper is only facing consequences for her actions because Mr. Cooper took steps to protect his own innocence.