My sense is that the professor was wrong in attributing racial motives to Officer Crowley's actions.
The responding officer invented conversations which never took place, which contained racial components. For example, it was claimed the 911 caller had said "two black men", that Crowley had spoken to the 911 caller before entering the house, and that Gates had spoken racial insults to Crowley -- all later proven to be fabrications. I can't think of any reason for the officer to lie about such particular things without racial reasons.
Furthermore, it's notable that conservatives are largely defending Crowley on racial grounds. While I would expect a "conservative" to be against illegal arrests, many (if not most) are choosing to blame Gates for the events.
I'm sorry but you're just looking for a reason to make it about race. On your claims what the caller actually said was...
"two larger men, one looked kind of Hispanic, but I'm not really sure"
So the officer did transpose the correct race in his memory but the reality is the 911 caller was the one who injected race. In fact, if anything it was race bating on the other end. The reason the story came up in the first place is because the caller felt the need to distance herself from using the term "black" as if "black" is any better or worse than using hispanic.
I, for the most part, couldn't find articles that support your other claims.
I did find the "Crowley claims to have talked to Whalen claim" here (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/7/27/141815/821) but again there's no proof the conversation didn't happen. And if anything I believe the officer only because Whalen has shown she refers to people by race (see above). So if someone who referred to a person (on tape) as "kind of hispanic" got a closer look and realized they were african american it stands to reason she would refer to them as "black"
Basically I find the whole "crowley lied" scenario dubious since I don't think a lying police officer warrants an invite to the White House. For President Obama to invite both I have to think he sees a misunderstanding and not one side being at fault.
The reason the story came up in the first place is because the caller felt the need to distance herself from using the term "black" as if "black" is any better or worse than using hispanic.
The problem is not the caller's racial biases or lack thereof, but that the official police report contains fabrications.
I, for the most part, couldn't find articles that support your other claims.
* Attorney Wendy Murphy, who represents Whalen, also categorically rejected part of the police report that said Whalen talked with Sgt. James Crowley, the arresting officer, at the scene.
"Let me be clear: She never had a conversation with Sgt. Crowley at the scene," Murphy told CNN by phone.*
So that's two confirmed fabrications in the police report. Both are rather large, considering they report words which were not said and events which did not occur.
Again, as far as the conversation taking place its Whalen (the caller) vs Crowley (the Officer) since they were the only ones there. So the only way you can claim that’s a fabrication is if you just decide to believe her over him (which as I point out above isn’t really the logical conclusion given she’s claiming not to use racial identifiers when she clearly does)
So again, I see no fabrication here. At least no provable one.
It's on the first page of the report, last paragraph, lines 4-7: "Whalen...told me it was she who called. She went on to tell me that she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch of [redacted] Ware Street."
The responding officer invented conversations which never took place, which contained racial components. For example, it was claimed the 911 caller had said "two black men", that Crowley had spoken to the 911 caller before entering the house, and that Gates had spoken racial insults to Crowley -- all later proven to be fabrications. I can't think of any reason for the officer to lie about such particular things without racial reasons.
Furthermore, it's notable that conservatives are largely defending Crowley on racial grounds. While I would expect a "conservative" to be against illegal arrests, many (if not most) are choosing to blame Gates for the events.