<p>
And somehow a restraining order can be placed without the alert of police and Gates? I was just wondering. Because if I’m not wrong, his license says he lived in the house. If a restraining order was placed on a home, then there would be police monitoring (most of the time). Gates would be notified. He would not have the key, nor the password to the security. He actually wouldn’t have called Harvard telling them about a faulty door. Usually when there is a restraining order, the police is notified about it. And there is monitoring because it is a trespassing. Also Harvard can’t put a restraining order on Gates home (well the home that Harvard rent to him). You can’t restrain one from one’s place where they live. For it to work, Gates must not be the resident there, in other words, he can’t be legally living there (which he does legally live in). Gates is the current legal resident of the house. You can’t kick a person from their home. It’s like a apartment company placing a restraining order on a family who legally lives in one of their apartment and pays them. You can’t do that. The family must not be the legal resident there. Currently Gates is the renter of the home, and for Harvard to place a restraining order, they must legally remove Gates as the current resident and then file a order. If I’m not wrong, when you rent a real estate, it must undergo a process in which the landlord and the renter agrees that the renter is a legal resident, and only when that is clear a driver’s license can bear the address of the house that is rented. I don’t a court would allow Harvard to restrain Gates when he legally lives there under the contract. It’s also questionable why they would change a lock if Gates had the key to the back door if he was restrained or even have the keys at all. </p>
<p>
Actually you can’t search a home unless you made a lawful arrest. In that case the arrest must be accomplished by taking physical custody and transporting the person away. A temporary detention followed by a release on a written citation does not justify a search. Also for a property search to be done with out a warrant, the arrest must takes place inside a residence the officer lawfully entered (in other words, the police must be able to legally enter the house, in a usually questioning situation like Gates, the police can not), the scope of search extends to places where the arrested could reach or lunge, and also allows a peek into immediately adjoining rooms and spaces that could conceal a potential assailant (which does not include flipping through things). By legally enter the home and arrest the person and then search his or her house, it requires an arrest warrant (a robbery does not fit the case because the police is not arresting the home owner, the police is arresting an invader). However, in most property search cases that does not include a warrant, you can look but you can’t flip through things like digging into people’s files. Also you can’t take anything. Also in most cases where there is a robber inside a home, police would not go into the house, they would surround the area. Why? Because if they go inside of the house, they can risk the chance to get shot. Yes there are times when they would go into the house but usually they surround the area. And they would usually not notify the robber so when they walk outside, he/she could be arrest. In a hostage case, they would totally not go into the house (and in this situation, it is life threatening). But there are cases that they would go into the home but that would also question why they would search a home without a warrant if the robber is not a resident. I mean they didn’t make an arrest of the property owner, they are not allowed to search the property of the home owner when it is the robber that is arrested (unless it is consensual).</p>
<p>
This is quite usual, police are trained to be concerned about the safety of other, not about themselves, how can a police serve if he is mainly concerned about himself (yes I do agree that he should be thinking about his own safety but he should be mainly caring about himself). I mean the policeman is *mainly *concerned about his safety, not about others?</p>
<p>
However, you have to know that he fully knows that there was no robbery, so that’s why he felt reserve about stepping out. If I see a police come to my door for no apparent reason and knows everything is fine, I would be questionable about why the police is here. Now I mostly likely wouldn’t act like Gates and refuse. But what I’m saying is that Gates had a reason to refuse. It is because he is greatly puzzled by why a police is there and claiming that there is a burglary even though he fully knows there is not. Because of the fact that he teaches about race relationship, he had a bigger question why there was a white policeman asking him to step outside. He was puzzled. So he was actually justified to take the legal act of refusing to step outside.</p>