The Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project
138 Chandler Street, Number Four
Boston, Massachusetts 02116
July 17, 2007
Ms. Sharon Lynn
Town Manager
Provincetown City Hall, 260 Commercial Street
Mr. Warren Tobias
Acting Police Chief, Provincetown Police Department
26 Shankpainter Road
Provincetown, MA 02657
Dear Ms. Lynn and Chief Tobias:
The Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project was deeply concerned to learn of the use of force in the arrest of Barry Scott on July 15, 2007, which caused him bodily injury. It is difficult to reconcile the degree of injury Mr. Scott suffered with any explanation consistent with the reasonable use of force, particularly in view of Mr. Scott?s physical size. However, what is known at this point does not allow for any conclusions to be drawn: apparently there are a number of witnesses yet to give statements, as well as, I am told, potential videos or photos of the arrest scene. Based on what we know now, we are requesting that the Town of Provincetown and the Provincetown Police Department launch a formal investigation into the use of force against the person of Mr. Scott, to assess whether there is culpability in the conduct that caused his regrettable injuries.
We find a number of legal issues that might arise over the physical force applied to Mr. Scott resulting in his injuries. First, the question of excessive use of force needs to be considered, in relation to potential violations of Police Department policies. Moreover, given the bodily injury suffered by Mr. Scott, the question of potential civil rights violations within the meaning of G.L. c. 265, § 37 arises. Furthermore, we strongly feel that the question of the motive behind the conduct causing Mr. Scott?s injuries is a serious one. While I do not know the full facts?obviously?there are relevant bias indicators that may well apply in the circumstances. If there is found to be evidence of a prohibited motive for an assault and battery causing bodily injury, G.L. c. 265, § 39 would come into play. Additionally Provincetown must decide whether the police conduct in question should be classified as a hate crime for purposes of the Hate Crimes Reporting Act of 1990, G.L. c. 22C, § 32 et seq. The law calls for all hate crime episodes to be reported to the State Police, which compiles the data to send to the FBI. The implementing regulations issued by the Executive Office of Public Safety, 501 CMR 4.01 et seq. help structure the relevant line of inquiry in making the determination about hate motivation, by enumerating the various bias indicators that serve as evidence of motive. Consider that it is not necessary that hate crimes be evidenced by the perpetrators? use of epithets during an attack. Other bias indicators offer ways of identifying motive that assailants might seek to conceal with a sophisticated avoidance of hate language. Hate crime perpetrators cannot be allowed to get away with throwing their fists by holding their tongues.
I hasten to add that our organization is not making any accusations against anyone. But the troubling question of the arresting officer?s conduct in the course of injuring Mr. Scott needs to be investigated, in the interest of justice and fair play. We entreat that the investigation be thorough, fair, and impartial. If violations of Police Department disciplinary rules took place, appropriate action should follow.
I would be happy to discuss our concerns at greater length if you like. I can be reached at dgorton@verizon.net. The Anti-Violence Project would also be available to cooperate in and support Provincetown?s ongoing efforts to counter hate-motivated violence and protect civil rights. In my former capacity as Co-Chair of the Governor?s Task Force on Hate Crimes, I worked closely with former Town Manager Keith Bergman and former Police Chief Robert Anthony to help implement the Hate Crimes Reporting Act. Provincetown was given a Gubernatorial Citation by former Governor Weld in recognition of the outstanding strides it had made in preventing and responding to hate crimes.
Given Provincetown?s reputation for tolerance and respect for civil rights, I have every confidence that this matter will be addressed fairly and effectively. I hope to be of assistance to you in the future.
Sincerely,
Donald Gorton
Chairperson
The Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project
This DJ is famous for playing old music, he’s not exactly Howard Stern or something. This was a gay birthday party, and we are talking about an approximate time of 9:30PM on a Saturday night. Many witnesses have come forward to parrot the same exact things Mr. Scott has said, and some of them took video on their cell phones of the attack. I use the word attack because of the unnecessary violence of the act. The man in question is tiny, and even if he were drunk and belligerent there would be no need for police to use excessive force. Plenty of people were arrested that night without an incident like this, and we haven’t even gotten to the Guantanamo style abuse they received once at the police station. In my eyes it is not up for debate that the police went out of their way to abuse Mr. Scott, the only fact left to explain is why. Many people want to foo-foo away the idea this was hate motivated, so let’s open the discussion for another motivation. Instead of saying “we don’t know because we weren’t there”, give me a viable alternative, because the people who were there are calling it hate.
No one wants to “foo-foo away” the idea that this incident was hate motivated. It’s entirely plausible. Perhaps even probable.
<
p>There seems to be a group of people that have taken the default position that because the police used excessive force against a gay man that this must have been hate motivated, as if this was Stonewall 2007. Until someone presents facts to the contrary- not intuition or innuendo- this incident should be treated as a sorry incident of overzealous cops running amuck, and investigated as such.
The arresting officer is not facing criminal charges (yet) so he is entitled to no presumption of innocence. Since evidence of motive must be developed through painstaking investigation, we cannot assume what the motive was one way or other, except to the extent that we know that bias indicators may be in play (inconclusive at this point.) But the absence of another identifiable motive for assault and battery is in itself a bias indicator. This is not an abstruse process: big people usually have some reason when they thrash little people, and if no good explanation holds up on the facts, then logically we arrive at a bad motive.
When people were saying the same things about the Larry Cirignano incident, I gave a similar point of view that I have in this incident with Barry Scott. Let’s explore the alternative motives aloud so we can compare their plausibility.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Scott announce to the party that the police were closing it down? Even if done without any intent whatever to incite anger at the police, in my experience, they hate that, and are very quick to perceive an intention to humiliate them. And that can be true even if they might be fine with grabbing the mike themselves and saying ‘this party’s over folks, go home.’ Like showing up a home plate umpire: the batter can say what he wants, but he’d better not turn around and let the crowd know he disagrees.
<
p>
I’m not saying anything justifies brutality, or that this was indeed their motive, and I’m not saying it wasn’t a gay-bashing. I’m just saying there clearly are other possibilities.
<
p>
You seem to be setting up a false choice: either it was justified use of force, or it was gay-bashing. Excessive, unjustified force (brutality) happens for lots of reasons other than gay-bashing, and sometimes for no reason at all.
“Excessive, unjustified force (brutality) happens for lots of reasons other than gay-bashing, and sometimes for no reason at all.”
<
p>
That’s true. We are looking for viable alternative reasons why these policemen did what they did. As I mentioned before, I’ve been to parties where the police ended it, the DJ announced the end, and it was not in any way perceived as riotous. Even if he was trying to be a smart ass, it is not a license for police to break his nose, or deny his friend the bathroom. These actions are impossible to defend logically.
<
p>
Let’s think from beginning, with two policemen needing to explain why they went so far against a non-threatening obviously gay man.
I second your respectful request
We all have our suspicions, one way or the other. We await swift and brilliant action by the Town Manager and Acting Police Chief.
How would the cops have known that Scott was gay in the first place?
but in some cases it is pretty obvious. Given the setting (Hosty says it was a “gay birthday party”) it may have been quite apparant to the po po.
I wasn’t there, and I’m not a cop. I don’t know what a “gay birthday party” is, so maybe Scott is well-known as a homosexual in those parts, or the area was decorated with inflatable phalluses, rainbow streamers, and iced pictures of naked men copulating on the cake. All I’m trying to figure out is for this to be gay bashing, it not only requires evidence that the police attacked because Scott was gay, and not just that the cops are jerks, but also that they knew Scott was gay.
<
p>
As I say, I’m no cop. Perhaps while delivering complaint, there was easily accessible evidence that it was a “gay party” hosted by a “gay DJ”. It’s not as in racial crimes, where it’s easy to identify the victim as belonging to a different race…
If 50 men only dancing to the Partridge Family is not obvious enough for you, my suspicion is that police in the area have been to a few gay parties, and know one when they see it.
<
p>
Barry Scott is a famous DJ who is openly gay, and is also a small man. Even if they couldn’t identify him as gay, there was no need for there actions. In fact, their actions warrant an explanation, which leads us back to the question of motivation.
<
p>
Shoot the gay bashing idea right out of the water for all I care, just give us something else to think about first. there were many people arrested that night without all this drama and brutality, so why him?
I’ve been to Provincetown several times, not least of all because it was for a period in the early- and mid-nineties the best port from which to depart for my annual whalewatch (I took the Dolphin boats until the whales’ migration patterns began to be effected by that non-existent global warming.)
<
p>
I’m familiar with Provincetown, just not this party. I guess I’m hesitant to embrace stereotypes, such as the one that a gay man celebrating a birthday would scour the guest list of any women. I’ve been in gay bars, drag shows, etc., and their main clientele is not always apparent at first glance. Furthermore, it wouldn’t come to me to think that in such an event, the celebrant would demand all people associated with the party be gay as well. The DJ is hired — maybe it’s a straight guy earnin’ some bucks.
<
p>
All I’m saying is that per some here, such as yourself, the cops figured out that the DJ was a gay man at a gay event much more quickly than I could have. Maybe I can’t form conclusions as quickly and inerrantly as these brownshirts-cum-cops can and I’m extremely naive.
that you don’t automatically think stereotypical things when you hear the word “gay”. but there are just so many ways the police could have known everything about who they were dealing with. you know, maybe the DJ jilted the cop’s 2nd cousin all these years ago. Maybe the cops didn’t know the DJ, but knew others at the party and made ugly assumptions that you would never make. As I said in my other post, the possibilities are endless.
That is the nature of small towns. I guess I’m holding off and seeing something about the fulfillment of these possibilities before I’m going to raise a “hate crime” alarm.
but you did ask
maybe you weren’t aware that there was an endless list of plausible answers?
I asked “How would the cops have known that Scott was gay in the first place?”, not “What are some possible ways…”
<
p>
I was hoping that some people had access to facts they hadn’t shared before they started diluting the idea of a “hate crime” by throwing it around on little evidence.
I think the way bloggers blogged about this, and BayWindows puts his story on display at every bus stop, is probably very costly to him. He does weddings, and has a syndicated radio show, not as a “gay dj” but as a guy who really loves lost 45’s.
…that they’ll hire a DJ irrespective of his or her sexual orientation.
<
p>
Also, I have a feeling that the people who would discriminate against Scott because he is gay don’t spend much time reading Bay Windows.
Who’s to say what the effect will be on his future earnings. He does Bar Mitzvahs and Weddings, and his specialty of Oldies caters to rather conservative clientelle. Now he’s going to be passed over by some planners for sure.
<
p>
I think BayWindows was shameless about using this story for publicity, hoping to reach out to the every wedding party he’s ever done and make them all think “Oh, the DJ was gay?” or “oh, that guy I listen to all the time is gay?” He isn’t “out” on his webpage. And his lawyers have asked people to stop writing about it, haven’t they? But he’s useful, apparently.
“many people” and “some planners”. for someone who likes to call people on the nebulous use use of the mythical but elusive “they”, i just found this amusing.
<
p>
i have yet to read the bay windows article, so can’t comment. however, his lawyer may have asked for his story to be removed from other places for strategic legal reasons. just a possibility.
Every wedding party seems to have a bigoted uncle or mother in law, even if the people planning the wedding are tolerant, open-minded people. But they will think twice about hiring someone famous for being a “gay DJ” if Uncle Phil is going to be there, just because they don’t want any catalysts for anything embarrassing to happen at their wedding. They’ll play it safe.
<
p>
I hope when you see the BW article (just go wait for a bus, you can’t miss it), you’ll agree they abused his ordeal for their own purposes of making people know that he is gay.
do you think Provincetown Banner, Cape Codder and Edge Boston were also using the story for shameless self-promotion, or just BayWindows? If not, why not?
Being Gay isn’t controversial anymore. That is, except amongst bigots who want to make it controversial.
<
p>
He’s not out on his web page? I didn’t realize that it was proper form to identify one’s orientation on webpages. I mean, your BMG profile doesn’t say whether you are male or female, perhaps we should assume that you are undecided about your gender, since you are not “out” as either a man or a woman?
“Being Gay isn’t controversial anymore.” Huh? I mean, really? Perhaps not among most BMGers, but “out there” being gay is quite controversial. How many openly gay professional athletes, cops, teachers are out there?
I think finding out someone like an athelete is gay is sensational, but not controversial. Any time someone famous is outed, there is the sensationalism and titilation factor, but eventually the persons sexuality becomes a footnonte or a non issue.
<
p>
Unfortunately, “out there” is still populated with bigots. I hope that is changing.
I hate disagreeing with you, tblade but I don’t believe that “any time someone famous is outed…eventually the persons sexuality becomes a footnonte or a non issue. ” If you were to do a word association game with 500 Americans, and you offered Rosie O’Donnell, Ellen DeGeneris, or Melissa Etheridge, you don’t think gay/lesbian would be at the top of the list?
<
p>
Fact is, being gay is a big deal for most people, even otherwise urbane, open-minded people. This is what we’re fighting.
But both of us are just kind of guessing.
<
p>
When people talk about the shows and music of Ellen and Melissa (Rosie may be a special case), I hardly ever hear sexuality discussed.
<
p>
I wonder out loud what real data would show us in terms of openly gay celebrities and the buzz around their sexuality? Much of the buzz comes just from the sexuality being a secret, once the secrecy is gone and the novelty of a newly out celebrity wears off, to me, it seems that the focus moves from that celebrity to who else might be gay.
<
p>
I’m thinking about Nathan Lane. I sometimes think ‘Oh, that’s right, he’s gay’. But there are certain other celebrities where rumors of that celebrity being gay (rumors based on tenuous evidence) is discussed far more extensively than the gayness of Elton John, Sean Hayes, Ian McKellen, Alan Cumming, Barney Frank, Ellen, or Melissa.
<
p>
Just speculation, though.
with sabutai here. If being gay were not controversial amongst the majority of americans, we wouldn’t have anti-marriage statutes and amendments in 38 states, LGBT people wouldn’t face legal firing or refusal of services in 31 (for LGBs) to 38 (for Ts) states, and there would not be an epidemic of gay youth homelessness. there wouldn’t be entire industries dedicated to crushing the very spirit of LGBT individuals. major candidates of both parties wouldn’t be running from civil rights and running on positions of institutionalized bigorty. no one would even think to consider that a cop beating up a DJ was anything other than run of the mill knuckle dragging. AND…i wouldn’t have to be here on BMG, yes even “progressive” BMG!, defending our right to exist visibly and equally!
<
p>
i hope that your vision of reality is becoming more true each passing day. i think perhaps it is, because there are wonderful people like you out there speaking out and not caring if people assume therefore that they are gay. however, like John Edwards is so fond of saying, we just aren’t there yet.
I listen to that show once in a while, if it’s on while I’m in the car. Not a bad show. I had no idea the dj was gay…and I don’t really care. Better a gay dj with good music than a straight one with bad music.
the man who answered the door and announcing “Ooooo! i don’t know what i love more, a man in uniform, or a man fresh out of one. honey, the strippers are here!!!”
<
p>
or maybe it was the sign in the neighbors lawn saying “queer bashers: faggots live over there”.
<
p>
or maybe it was the neighbor who called to complain that “those fucking fags next door won’t stop playing that damn petula clark at decibels too low for me to hear clearly, those selfish bastards!”
<
p>
or maybe the cop who was assigned to check out the noise realized that he had been left from the guest list for the birthday party of someone he USED to think of as his best friend.
<
p>
or maybe a neighbor called to complain about the fucking fags next door, not because they were doing anything you wouldn;t do at your kid’s birthday party, but because they’re just fucking fags and therefore oh so fun to harass.
<
p>
not that any of this necessarily happened, but if we’re looking for creative reasons as to how the peace officers might have had an inkling that there were gay men afoot, the possibilities are endless.
http://www.provincet…
Did you read this article? They were on the premises for the third time and the shouted ?The Provincetown Police are here to ruin our night. We hate them.?? Hello, my name is handcuffs, and we’re going to be friends for the rest of the night! Some people say he didn’t say those things…but the cops were still there for the 3rd time. I’ve been to parties where people get arrested for having a noise violation the first time the cops come. Help! The police are biased against college students. The humanity of it all.
<
p>
The fact is John, is that this guy is a potential victim of police brutality. Potential, because we haven’t heard a side of the story besides yours. He says he was smashed and hit his head. From experience, I can tell you that I have, on occasion, suffered injuries as a result of tripping. Has a credible source verified the police didn’t let his friend use the bathroom?
<
p>
John, while I respect that you want to make sure your community is safe and treated fairly, you can’t call for a crusade every time a gay guy gets in trouble with the popes…ESPECIALLY when we haven’t heard both sides of the story. This article gives a seriously different view than the the one of asshole pigs who hate homos that you have propagated.
<
p>
The fact you seemed to be offended by the fact people on this side dared to question that this was a hate crime, and that you went and zeroed those comments that questioned your reasoning in the post you deleted only goes to show that you wanted this to be a call to arms by the gay community, whether the police were hateful or not. This is dangerous stuff, John, and could do a lot to tarnish the reputation that the GLBT community in Massachusetts has work incredibly hard to build.
<
p>
While I hope this gets investigated and any who did commit hate crimes get what they have coming, in the future it would do you very well to approach this from a non-biased view before you go crying wolf and causing everyone in the room to disregard you. This is something I know from experience, I have on occasion, said stupid things I shouldn’t have and gotten people upset or angry and embarrassed myself.
JoeTS, the editors have removed my previous response to your comment. Although I stand by the sentiments expressed in that post, I do agree that this is not the best forum for them in the manner expressed. I therefore support the editors’ decision to remove the post. I apologize to the BMG community for wasting space.
<
p>
joe, you raise and interesting point about losing credibility by crying wolf. i’m not convinced that anyone is crying wolf here. rather, what i see is people crying “there may be a wolf afoot – watch out!” perhaps this is a too finely split hair for some to tolerate, but there is a difference.
<
p>
additionally, no single gay person represents “the gay community” any more than any one cadet represents all reserve officers in training. using your interpretation of the perceived actions of one person to generalize to a whole population is another way to lose credibility. it bears keeping in mind.
I think it’s a shift we can both appreciate.
<
p>
It’s very true, what you say about the splitting hairs. However, I did not find that hair to be split, really. John’s original post really didn’t leave a lot of room for one to question his rationale that there is no other plausible explanation for the actions of the police officers. While this post did a great job as far as not being outright accusatory, I think there are still those who are having a tough time swallowing the fact that this DJ fellow might have had a pissy attitude and pissed off some cops who were sick of showing up to his party. While this is not a defense for any sort of assault, I think that people must maintain a level of suspiciousness in any case that can lead to significant amount of monetary damages.
<
p>
My concern: That this man may potentially have rendered himself into a situation that he sustained injuries and is going to use his standpoint as a man of small stature and a homosexual to bring suit against the police department, use said orientations as a means to attain sympathy in a trial of his peers, and be awarded a lot of dough, which could lead to financial problems for the town.
<
p>
However, if this was a hate crime, people need to get in trouble. This guy needs to get his settlement, and the perpetrators need to do their time.
<
p>
You’re right that no one person represents the gay community, but one person can do a lot to make the others look bad. Someone’s community is going to come out of this with a tarnish on them from the actions of few; the police or the gays.