Man asked woman to leash her dog in a public park -- she called the police on him

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I agree she was 100% responsible , and I am not trying to shift the blame, but I’m curious - why did he have treats? Is this a routine thing that he encounters dogs off leash in the ramble and asking them to be leashed doesn’t work?

Yes. And many people who seem confused by this would apparently prefer: That he carry pepper spray? That the unleashed dogs ruin the protected bird sanctuary area? That something, SOMETHING must be a clear sign of problematic behavior and ill intent in a soft-spoken, Harvard educated, pleasantly nerdy, middle aged birdwatcher? I bet most people who read that description— without also reading “African American — would have viewed the dog treat solution as being both ingenious and commendable.

+1

How on earth is having treats to deal with off leash dogs weird or a threat in any possible way?! WTF?

It's a threat when someone says something like 'you're not going to like this' to the owner and then calls the animal toward them. How is that not clear? Note that it's completely separate from the fact that this woman is a racist and put this man in great harm with her actions. But what he said was creepy.

Please tell me exactly what threat is being made — clearly. Because it’s really not as clear — or, dare I say: not as black and white as you’re making it out to be. What exactly is the threat that’s being made?

The threat he made was that her dog would get non-organic dog treats.

Amy Cooper was angry enough to threaten his life! Don’t mess with white ladies and organic food.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As cra-cra as Amy is, because he was a Karen first, I'm able to offer her a little more grace than I did initially. She likely would have acted similarly had the guy been white, because...entitled people. But being black, his dog treat threat escalated racism she probably never even knew existed. Media has long portrayed the big, black man as bad - and she capitalized on white woman syndrome - and the fact that both of these played out from her subconscious is a reminder racism is rooted deeply. It's unfair of her employer to paint her as a racist.

Her employer didn't "paint" her as racist. You admit that she is racist, although how you know it's subconscious, I can't imagine. Regardless, her racist ACTIONS are what we can all see and what her employer commented on. There are plenty of people who may have racist thoughts or fears running through their subconscious who don't get on the phone and try to get an innocent man arrested or worse because he called her out on breaking the law and frightening the wildlife.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I agree she was 100% responsible , and I am not trying to shift the blame, but I’m curious - why did he have treats? Is this a routine thing that he encounters dogs off leash in the ramble and asking them to be leashed doesn’t work?

Yes. And many people who seem confused by this would apparently prefer: That he carry pepper spray? That the unleashed dogs ruin the protected bird sanctuary area? That something, SOMETHING must be a clear sign of problematic behavior and ill intent in a soft-spoken, Harvard educated, pleasantly nerdy, middle aged birdwatcher? I bet most people who read that description— without also reading “African American — would have viewed the dog treat solution as being both ingenious and commendable.

+1

How on earth is having treats to deal with off leash dogs weird or a threat in any possible way?! WTF?

It's a threat when someone says something like 'you're not going to like this' to the owner and then calls the animal toward them. How is that not clear? Note that it's completely separate from the fact that this woman is a racist and put this man in great harm with her actions. But what he said was creepy.

Please tell me exactly what threat is being made — clearly. Because it’s really not as clear — or, dare I say: not as black and white as you’re making it out to be. What exactly is the threat that’s being made?

The threat he made was that her dog would get non-organic dog treats.

Amy Cooper was angry enough to threaten his life! Don’t mess with white ladies and organic food.

This legit made me LOL, thank you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As cra-cra as Amy is, because he was a Karen first, I'm able to offer her a little more grace than I did initially. She likely would have acted similarly had the guy been white, because...entitled people. But being black, his dog treat threat escalated racism she probably never even knew existed. Media has long portrayed the big, black man as bad - and she capitalized on white woman syndrome - and the fact that both of these played out from her subconscious is a reminder racism is rooted deeply. It's unfair of her employer to paint her as a racist.

Aww you're right. Poor little Amy was tricked into being a racist b!tch. How dare she be held responsible for her actions and fired like the embarrassment that she is.

Why is it always one person is right and one is wrong? Just because there are racial nuances doesn't make it black and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As cra-cra as Amy is, because he was a Karen first, I'm able to offer her a little more grace than I did initially. She likely would have acted similarly had the guy been white, because...entitled people. But being black, his dog treat threat escalated racism she probably never even knew existed. Media has long portrayed the big, black man as bad - and she capitalized on white woman syndrome - and the fact that both of these played out from her subconscious is a reminder racism is rooted deeply. It's unfair of her employer to paint her as a racist.

Aww you're right. Poor little Amy was tricked into being a racist b!tch. How dare she be held responsible for her actions and fired like the embarrassment that she is.

Why is it always one person is right and one is wrong? Just because there are racial nuances doesn't make it black and white.

She broke the leash law and made a false 911 call. Two wrongs, absolutely black and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are definitely people on this board that know/went to school or ran into her professionally -- any stories?

And what about the weird guy filming the crazy lady? We need to investigate him as well.

You need to read better. The weird guy filming the crazy lady is the victim. He realized when she started to get crazy that he needed to record her. Because of exactly what happened, he needed to record her being unreasonable and she delivered the pot at the end of the rainbow. She ended up crazier than he probably even thought he would be. He did what he did for his own protection since we have now seen so many white people trying to take advantage of their white privilege to abuse, injure and possibly kill black men. She had absolutely no reservations with calling the police and possibly making him yet another statistic of police brutality of black men by hysterically calling 911 and reporting him as a black man who was threatening and attacking her, a white woman, and her dog in the park. If the police had shown up while they were both there, there is no doubt that they would have acted first and asked questions later and taking him down and handcuffed him at best, beaten and or shot him at worst before trying to figure out the situation. When going into a situation of reported hostilities, the police will act first for safety reasons and secure the area and the threat (e.g. the falsely accused) before they try to sort out the problem. She is an intelligent woman and knew that and yet she still maliciously lied to the police about the situation knowing that this was a likely scenario. She basically wanted to exact retribution for the gall of asking her to follow the law and put her dog on a leash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I agree she was 100% responsible , and I am not trying to shift the blame, but I’m curious - why did he have treats? Is this a routine thing that he encounters dogs off leash in the ramble and asking them to be leashed doesn’t work?

Yes. And many people who seem confused by this would apparently prefer: That he carry pepper spray? That the unleashed dogs ruin the protected bird sanctuary area? That something, SOMETHING must be a clear sign of problematic behavior and ill intent in a soft-spoken, Harvard educated, pleasantly nerdy, middle aged birdwatcher? I bet most people who read that description— without also reading “African American — would have viewed the dog treat solution as being both ingenious and commendable.

+1

How on earth is having treats to deal with off leash dogs weird or a threat in any possible way?! WTF?

He threatens a woman with a small dog. Once he has the dog in his possession by calling it over who knows what will happen next. There are creeps even in parks. He is a total stranger to her. I wouldn’t let some creepy guy feed or touch my dog.
It's a threat when someone says something like 'you're not going to like this' to the owner and then calls the animal toward them. How is that not clear? Note that it's completely separate from the fact that this woman is a racist and put this man in great harm with her actions. But what he said was creepy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As cra-cra as Amy is, because he was a Karen first, I'm able to offer her a little more grace than I did initially. She likely would have acted similarly had the guy been white, because...entitled people. But being black, his dog treat threat escalated racism she probably never even knew existed. Media has long portrayed the big, black man as bad - and she capitalized on white woman syndrome - and the fact that both of these played out from her subconscious is a reminder racism is rooted deeply. It's unfair of her employer to paint her as a racist.

Her employer didn't "paint" her as racist. You admit that she is racist, although how you know it's subconscious, I can't imagine. Regardless, her racist ACTIONS are what we can all see and what her employer commented on. There are plenty of people who may have racist thoughts or fears running through their subconscious who don't get on the phone and try to get an innocent man arrested or worse because he called her out on breaking the law and frightening the wildlife.

I don't know it's subconscious, I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt. From his own tweet, his actions were threatening an animal. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he wasn't threatening with a poisoned dog treat, but I also don't KNOW that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are definitely people on this board that know/went to school or ran into her professionally -- any stories?

And what about the weird guy filming the crazy lady? We need to investigate him as well.

You need to read better. The weird guy filming the crazy lady is the victim. He realized when she started to get crazy that he needed to record her. Because of exactly what happened, he needed to record her being unreasonable and she delivered the pot at the end of the rainbow. She ended up crazier than he probably even thought he would be. He did what he did for his own protection since we have now seen so many white people trying to take advantage of their white privilege to abuse, injure and possibly kill black men. She had absolutely no reservations with calling the police and possibly making him yet another statistic of police brutality of black men by hysterically calling 911 and reporting him as a black man who was threatening and attacking her, a white woman, and her dog in the park. If the police had shown up while they were both there, there is no doubt that they would have acted first and asked questions later and taking him down and handcuffed him at best, beaten and or shot him at worst before trying to figure out the situation. When going into a situation of reported hostilities, the police will act first for safety reasons and secure the area and the threat (e.g. the falsely accused) before they try to sort out the problem. She is an intelligent woman and knew that and yet she still maliciously lied to the police about the situation knowing that this was a likely scenario. She basically wanted to exact retribution for the gall of asking her to follow the law and put her dog on a leash.

Oh give it a rest. He set her up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does every article mention that the man went to Harvard? Would it have made a difference if he went to the University of South Podunk?

The short answer is, of course, NO. Or rather it shouldn't and wouldn't make a difference if we all had equal standing in this country.


But here's another question: What does it take for African Americans to be treated as citizens -- with all the protections and supports and entitlements that white American citizens commonly receive? The centuries of institutionalized racism are not factors that African Americans can control -- either individually or collectively. In this instance, Mr. Cooper is a soft-spoken, middle aged, appealingly nerdy gentleman -- who graduated from Harvard. Harvard, as many DCUM posts would suggest, seems to serve as shorthand for a host of things like intelligence, diligence, academic accomplishment, and even as a stamp of cultural and social achievement and approval.

Every article mentions that Mr Cooper went to Harvard to highlight the fact that even the most accomplished African American man is still subject to the whims of an entitled racist who is flouting the law. Without the video, and with a faster response from the NYPD -- this soft-spoken, accomplished, HARVARD graduate could easily have become another dead statistic instead of a force for much-needed discussions and, hopefully, positive social change.

[Anonymous]

Let's focus on Treatgate some more. I mean, yes, the woman was an entitled liar who tried to get an innocent man arrested by filing false police reports. I know she got fired for it, lost her dog for it, and Central Park is trying to ban her for life because of it.

But lets post hundreds and hundreds of times about how weird, absolutely weird and inexplicably weird that someone who spends time in public parks where there are uncontrolled dogs roaming around would have dog treats on them. It's weird! So weird! I mean, she maybe let her dog off the leash simply because the birdwatcher was carrying treats and she knew he would try to lure her dog over with his weird dog treats!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are definitely people on this board that know/went to school or ran into her professionally -- any stories?

And what about the weird guy filming the crazy lady? We need to investigate him as well.

You need to read better. The weird guy filming the crazy lady is the victim. He realized when she started to get crazy that he needed to record her. Because of exactly what happened, he needed to record her being unreasonable and she delivered the pot at the end of the rainbow. She ended up crazier than he probably even thought he would be. He did what he did for his own protection since we have now seen so many white people trying to take advantage of their white privilege to abuse, injure and possibly kill black men. She had absolutely no reservations with calling the police and possibly making him yet another statistic of police brutality of black men by hysterically calling 911 and reporting him as a black man who was threatening and attacking her, a white woman, and her dog in the park. If the police had shown up while they were both there, there is no doubt that they would have acted first and asked questions later and taking him down and handcuffed him at best, beaten and or shot him at worst before trying to figure out the situation. When going into a situation of reported hostilities, the police will act first for safety reasons and secure the area and the threat (e.g. the falsely accused) before they try to sort out the problem. She is an intelligent woman and knew that and yet she still maliciously lied to the police about the situation knowing that this was a likely scenario. She basically wanted to exact retribution for the gall of asking her to follow the law and put her dog on a leash.

Oh give it a rest. He set her up.

Yes, birdwatcher asks a woman to leash her dog in a protected area. Such a classic sting operation. The keyboard geniuses of DCUM are at it again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How did she know the treats weren't laced with poison after what he said? He literally said that she wouldn't like whatever he was about to do to her dog. I'm guessing he was simply going to attract the dog with treats and then leash the dog? Absolutely harmless, but the words he said left a question mark.

Some of you people need to stop watching spy movies or something.

Why would you ever assume that there are people walking around with poison in their pockets? Or poisonous dog treats? How many cases do you know of people intentionally poisoning dogs in parks? Google has nothing listed.

Where do you people get these ideas? Besides, this supposed threat was basically "control your dog or you won't like what I will do". She had several opportunities in the earlier exchange to put her dog on a leash, hold the dogs collar or leave. She was breaking the law, and he asked her not to, for the preservation of the bird habitat, the very reason that the leash law was there and prominently documented. He even pointed to the sign that said so right near where she was violating the law.

She had many chances to do the reasonable thing and she refused. She had many ways to avoid the supposed threat and she deliberately chose none of them in defiance. Just another entitled dog owner who is trying to blame others for everything. She should have controlled her dog and followed the law. Period. Anything else that happened was a consequence of her crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I agree she was 100% responsible , and I am not trying to shift the blame, but I’m curious - why did he have treats? Is this a routine thing that he encounters dogs off leash in the ramble and asking them to be leashed doesn’t work?

Yes. And many people who seem confused by this would apparently prefer: That he carry pepper spray? That the unleashed dogs ruin the protected bird sanctuary area? That something, SOMETHING must be a clear sign of problematic behavior and ill intent in a soft-spoken, Harvard educated, pleasantly nerdy, middle aged birdwatcher? I bet most people who read that description— without also reading “African American — would have viewed the dog treat solution as being both ingenious and commendable.

+1

How on earth is having treats to deal with off leash dogs weird or a threat in any possible way?! WTF?

It's a threat when someone says something like 'you're not going to like this' to the owner and then calls the animal toward them. How is that not clear? Note that it's completely separate from the fact that this woman is a racist and put this man in great harm with her actions. But what he said was creepy.

She felt threatened as he was threatening her and his actions were basically to take her dog via treats. She was racist in how she handled the call but she was in every right to call the police as he was acting in a threatening manner by calling her dog over and escalating it with videoing her. He set hit up for his sister. His sister is nobody who needed the publicity in the tv industry who likes to sensationalize things. And, that she did. Most normal people would walk away on both ends. As a woman, I would walk away and if he followed I would call the police. If he didn't like the dog off the leash he could have called and let them handle it. As a man, you do not approach a woman in an empty area and offer her dog treats without her consent. Both were wrong on many levels.

THANK YOU! The hatred for this woman astonishes me. Yes she was in the wrong with her little dog off the leash. Geez.

+2. And someone’s going to have to explain to me why she’s a racist for simply describing the guys race to the police. She obviously went a bit nuts and overreacted but I can’t climb into someone else’s mind and determine the level of threat she felt, even if it was misconstrued.[/quote

- If you can explain to me how you've managed to make it through this week, let alone life, without recognizing that African American males are treated very differently by police compared to, say, other American males, I'd be glad to explain to you how Ms Cooper's realized threat, repeatedly belting out the phrase "African American" is correctly seen as "racist" vs as a simple description. I'm sure you noticed that she didn't describe Mr Cooper's clothing, or height, or any other distinguishing characteristics that could be used to identify him. She taunted him with what she was going to do and say -- and she did it. I bet you know that already though. And I bet you haven't bothered to "climb into someone else's mind and determine the level of threat" that HE felt -- when Ms Cooper threatened HIM by weaponizing the NYPD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did she know the treats weren't laced with poison after what he said? He literally said that she wouldn't like whatever he was about to do to her dog. I'm guessing he was simply going to attract the dog with treats and then leash the dog? Absolutely harmless, but the words he said left a question mark.

Some of you people need to stop watching spy movies or something.

Why would you ever assume that there are people walking around with poison in their pockets? Or poisonous dog treats? How many cases do you know of people intentionally poisoning dogs in parks? Google has nothing listed.

Where do you people get these ideas? Besides, this supposed threat was basically "control your dog or you won't like what I will do". She had several opportunities in the earlier exchange to put her dog on a leash, hold the dogs collar or leave. She was breaking the law, and he asked her not to, for the preservation of the bird habitat, the very reason that the leash law was there and prominently documented. He even pointed to the sign that said so right near where she was violating the law.

She had many chances to do the reasonable thing and she refused. She had many ways to avoid the supposed threat and she deliberately chose none of them in defiance. Just another entitled dog owner who is trying to blame others for everything. She should have controlled her dog and followed the law. Period. Anything else that happened was a consequence of her crime.

This sounds scarily familiar.