The Gray Lady’s Debauchery: Karen’s Story

 

This is yet another recommendation of a Bari Weiss podcast, this one featuring fellow writer Kmele Foster and his coverage of The Central Park Karen. It isn’t a story to which I paid much attention when it was big last year, but it’s interesting to hear an actual investigative journalist (yes, there still are a few) covering what the bigshots at the New York Times didn’t think was worth revealing to their readers.

Quick recap: a white woman, Amy Cooper, was walking her unleashed dog in Central Park when a black man, Christian Cooper (no relation), asked her to tether her dog as required by the park rules. In the ensuing exchange, Ms. Cooper reports (and Mr. Cooper confirms) that Mr. Cooper said:

Look, if you’re gonna do what you want, I’m gonna do what I want, and you’re not going to like it.

Ms. Cooper says that was the basis for her claim, on her subsequent 911 call, that she was being threatened.

So how does the New York Times report this statement, which would seem to be an essential element of the story?

They don’t — at least, they don’t for the first couple of stories. The first story simply, well, lies about it, claiming that it was Mr. Cooper’s decision to make a video recording of the encounter that upset Ms. Cooper. It isn’t until two weeks later that the paper finally mentions the quotation. But, as Mr. Foster describes it in the podcast (at 54:35):

Two weeks later… where they did in fact at least mention that [Ms. Cooper and Mr. Cooper] had quote “exchanged words,” in that article the Times does eventually get around to quoting Christian Cooper saying, “if you’re gonna do what you wanna do I’m gonna do what I wanna do, but you’re not gonna like it,” but not until 2,300 words into a 2,500 word story. You don’t get the actual threat that he issued to her until you’ve already read about Amy Cooper’s years-old affair with a married man that ended in a lawsuit, and Mr. Cooper’s childhood history of birdwatching, his love of comic books, his graduation from Harvard. They made an editorial decision to bury the question marks around the bit of moral clarity that they seemed to be going for with this story.

I have no strong opinions about Ms. Cooper and Mr. Cooper, other than that I probably wouldn’t enjoy hanging around with either of them. Once you’ve learned the detail of the account, he comes across as an insensitive righteous jerk, she as a perhaps not entirely stable woman. But we should all have an opinion about a national press that is so willing to sacrifice integrity to further a narrative.

PS And if you listen as far as the last 15 minutes of the interview, to Ms. Cooper’s description of how quickly and how horribly people responded to the appearance of Mr. Cooper’s 40-second video on Twitter, perhaps you’ll conclude — if you haven’t already — that Twitter is a loathsome and destructive force, a platform that excels at empowering mobs of angry and vicious people to lash out without thought or knowledge. Twitter is a force for civic evil.

Published in Journalism
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 110 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Men threatening women should be forbidden.

    I guess kedavis disagrees. Threats are OK.

    “Threatening” is a relative term, and if this is a Karen we’re discussing, welll…..

    It’s pretty likely that “Karen” would have taken anything anyone said, as a “threat,” especially given awareness that she was violating the law…

    If he’d said “You need to leash your dog, it’s the law” and she thinks/says “or what, you’ll attack me? THREAT!!!”

    What’s the difference? I don’t accept that someone else gets to decide what someone means based on their neuroses, or sexist or racist attitudes… If you believe that, then crazy people must be left alone to wreak whatever havoc they might wish, since otherwise they might feel “threatened.” And we can’t have THAT!

     

    Hey, you think it is just and fair for her to be in hiding from the witch hunt because she is a “Karen”.

    Over her dog not being leashed, which is a stupid sort of law. Leash laws exist to make it easier for law enforcement. Out of control dogs is the problem. This man was seeking a confrontation about her dog not being leashed.

    Bully for you and your support of cancel culture. From someone who hides his or her real identity. What a bold, bold stand you take.

    Either way, it’s not really HIS fault.  Blame the TV stations if you want, or Twitter, or whoever spread it around.

    • #61
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Caryn (View Comment):

    Chauvin’s situation will only be helped by the police body cameras, not by anything collected by the group of cellphone cameras pointed at him. Those latter cameras–and the viral video sold around the world–launched riots, mayhem, murder, and a complete upending of our cultural narrative. You call this a good thing? And it’s a good thing for someone to have a bad day, a bad few minutes melt-down or lack of courtesy in a store or on an airplane, filmed and posted on the internet for…what? For what good end? To humiliate a perfect stranger? To entertain? Whom? You think this is a good way to go about in society? I certainly don’t want to live where you do. Are you so perfect that you never say or do something that you’d find embarrassing were it to be filmed without your knowledge and posted on the internet? Kudos to you if that’s the case; I’ve never met someone so perfect.

    I’m not perfect, but I strive not to “act up/out” in public, and if I did, and if it was recorded and exposed, I certainly wouldn’t blame the recorder. Plus since I’m a nobody, there would be no reason for anyone to be interested in anything I do.

    I think the vast majority of viral videos are about “nobody” people, such as the persons in this story. They are not usually about celebrities or well known people.

    In this case, Amy Cooper’s apparent/plausible racism likely played a part.

    Unlike you I have actually done some study of this case. And I can say without a doubt the only person here who has been showing any apparent/plausible bigotry on this case is you.

    She is not a racist, as was determined by multiple accounts and at trial. She is on the spectrum and was terrified by an encounter in the park and as was determined by the judge who dismissed her case WITH PREJUDICE. Something that apparently you have a great deal of knowledge.

    I am leaving this thread at this time. I have exceeded my tolerance of ignorant bigots for today.

    So she would have overreacted to anyone, big whoop.  Still, I don’t think everyone else has an obligation to let someone do illegal things because to do anything about it might cause them to “freak out.”

    • #62
  3. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Men threatening women should be forbidden.

    I guess kedavis disagrees. Threats are OK.

    “Threatening” is a relative term, and if this is a Karen we’re discussing, welll…..

    It’s pretty likely that “Karen” would have taken anything anyone said, as a “threat,” especially given awareness that she was violating the law…

    If he’d said “You need to leash your dog, it’s the law” and she thinks/says “or what, you’ll attack me? THREAT!!!”

    What’s the difference? I don’t accept that someone else gets to decide what someone means based on their neuroses, or sexist or racist attitudes… If you believe that, then crazy people must be left alone to wreak whatever havoc they might wish, since otherwise they might feel “threatened.” And we can’t have THAT!

     

    Hey, you think it is just and fair for her to be in hiding from the witch hunt because she is a “Karen”.

    Over her dog not being leashed, which is a stupid sort of law. Leash laws exist to make it easier for law enforcement. Out of control dogs is the problem. This man was seeking a confrontation about her dog not being leashed.

    Bully for you and your support of cancel culture. From someone who hides his or her real identity. What a bold, bold stand you take.

    Either way, it’s not really HIS fault. Blame the TV stations if you want, or Twitter, or whoever spread it around.

    He made a threat and he admitted it.

    But you don’t care.

     

    • #63
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Men threatening women should be forbidden.

    I guess kedavis disagrees. Threats are OK.

    “Threatening” is a relative term, and if this is a Karen we’re discussing, welll…..

    It’s pretty likely that “Karen” would have taken anything anyone said, as a “threat,” especially given awareness that she was violating the law…

    If he’d said “You need to leash your dog, it’s the law” and she thinks/says “or what, you’ll attack me? THREAT!!!”

    What’s the difference? I don’t accept that someone else gets to decide what someone means based on their neuroses, or sexist or racist attitudes… If you believe that, then crazy people must be left alone to wreak whatever havoc they might wish, since otherwise they might feel “threatened.” And we can’t have THAT!

     

    Hey, you think it is just and fair for her to be in hiding from the witch hunt because she is a “Karen”.

    Over her dog not being leashed, which is a stupid sort of law. Leash laws exist to make it easier for law enforcement. Out of control dogs is the problem. This man was seeking a confrontation about her dog not being leashed.

    Bully for you and your support of cancel culture. From someone who hides his or her real identity. What a bold, bold stand you take.

    Either way, it’s not really HIS fault. Blame the TV stations if you want, or Twitter, or whoever spread it around.

    He made a threat and he admitted it.

    But you don’t care.

    A threat to what?  Beat her up, stab her?  Drag her back to his place and tie her up in the basement?  No.

    If you’re trespassing and someone says “if you don’t get off my property, I’m going to call the police” do you call that a “threat?”  I hope not.

    • #64
  5. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    Wasn’t there something about Mr. Cooper enticing the unleashed dog with “treats” he carried for the purpose of disconcerting or threatening the owners of unleashed dogs?

    He did carry treats. According to the report, he used them to entice dogs so he could put a leash on them. There was no mention of anything more sinister than that, but I’m sure that was scary enough.

    He carried dog treats and a dog leash on his birding expeditions?

    Not that hard to believe. Where I lived in Phoenix, people often let their dogs run loose, illegally. Being able to catch them and turn them over to Animal Control was a good thing. A leash and treats would often be needed. That he had a leash and treats with him suggests only that he’d been to the park more than once and knew what went on there.

    Arsenic and Old Leash?

    • #65
  6. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    On a thread about a Karen this ending was really inevitable….

    • #66
  7. Doug Watt Moderator
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    The problem is that a leash law is a violation, not a crime. A private citizen cannot threaten another private citizen over a violation, or detain a citizen, or place a citizen in fear of immediate action for not complying with their demands.

    One wonders if Mr. Cooper would say the same thing to a man who weighs about 24o pounds and is about six foot four with a Belgian Malinois.

    • #67
  8. Doug Watt Moderator
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Men threatening women should be forbidden.

    I guess kedavis disagrees. Threats are OK.

    “Threatening” is a relative term, and if this is a Karen we’re discussing, welll…..

    It’s pretty likely that “Karen” would have taken anything anyone said, as a “threat,” especially given awareness that she was violating the law…

    If he’d said “You need to leash your dog, it’s the law” and she thinks/says “or what, you’ll attack me? THREAT!!!”

    What’s the difference? I don’t accept that someone else gets to decide what someone means based on their neuroses, or sexist or racist attitudes… If you believe that, then crazy people must be left alone to wreak whatever havoc they might wish, since otherwise they might feel “threatened.” And we can’t have THAT!

     

    Hey, you think it is just and fair for her to be in hiding from the witch hunt because she is a “Karen”.

    Over her dog not being leashed, which is a stupid sort of law. Leash laws exist to make it easier for law enforcement. Out of control dogs is the problem. This man was seeking a confrontation about her dog not being leashed.

    Bully for you and your support of cancel culture. From someone who hides his or her real identity. What a bold, bold stand you take.

    Either way, it’s not really HIS fault. Blame the TV stations if you want, or Twitter, or whoever spread it around.

    He made a threat and he admitted it.

    But you don’t care.

    A threat to what? Beat her up, stab her? Drag her back to his place and tie her up in the basement? No.

    If you’re trespassing and someone says “if you don’t get off my property, I’m going to call the police” do you call that a “threat?” I hope not.

    That’s a different scenario. First of all you have lawful control over your own property. Second of all you are going to call a police officer to deal with someone who refuses to leave your property. “You’re not going to like it” as Mr. Cooper said can be interpreted as a threat.

     

    • #68
  9. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Men threatening women should be forbidden.

    I guess kedavis disagrees. Threats are OK.

    “Threatening” is a relative term, and if this is a Karen we’re discussing, welll…..

    It’s pretty likely that “Karen” would have taken anything anyone said, as a “threat,” especially given awareness that she was violating the law…

    If he’d said “You need to leash your dog, it’s the law” and she thinks/says “or what, you’ll attack me? THREAT!!!”

    What’s the difference? I don’t accept that someone else gets to decide what someone means based on their neuroses, or sexist or racist attitudes… If you believe that, then crazy people must be left alone to wreak whatever havoc they might wish, since otherwise they might feel “threatened.” And we can’t have THAT!

     

    Hey, you think it is just and fair for her to be in hiding from the witch hunt because she is a “Karen”.

    Over her dog not being leashed, which is a stupid sort of law. Leash laws exist to make it easier for law enforcement. Out of control dogs is the problem. This man was seeking a confrontation about her dog not being leashed.

    Bully for you and your support of cancel culture. From someone who hides his or her real identity. What a bold, bold stand you take.

    Either way, it’s not really HIS fault. Blame the TV stations if you want, or Twitter, or whoever spread it around.

    He made a threat and he admitted it.

    But you don’t care.

    A threat to what? Beat her up, stab her? Drag her back to his place and tie her up in the basement? No.

    If you’re trespassing and someone says “if you don’t get off my property, I’m going to call the police” do you call that a “threat?” I hope not.

    That’s a different scenario. First of all you have lawful control over your own property. Second of all you are going to call a police officer to deal with someone who refuses to leave your property. “You’re not going to like it” as Mr. Cooper said can be interpreted as is a threat.

     

     

    • #69
  10. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Men threatening women should be forbidden.

    I guess kedavis disagrees. Threats are OK.

    “Threatening” is a relative term, and if this is a Karen we’re discussing, welll…..

    It’s pretty likely that “Karen” would have taken anything anyone said, as a “threat,” especially given awareness that she was violating the law…

    If he’d said “You need to leash your dog, it’s the law” and she thinks/says “or what, you’ll attack me? THREAT!!!”

    What’s the difference? I don’t accept that someone else gets to decide what someone means based on their neuroses, or sexist or racist attitudes… If you believe that, then crazy people must be left alone to wreak whatever havoc they might wish, since otherwise they might feel “threatened.” And we can’t have THAT!

     

    Hey, you think it is just and fair for her to be in hiding from the witch hunt because she is a “Karen”.

    Over her dog not being leashed, which is a stupid sort of law. Leash laws exist to make it easier for law enforcement. Out of control dogs is the problem. This man was seeking a confrontation about her dog not being leashed.

    Bully for you and your support of cancel culture. From someone who hides his or her real identity. What a bold, bold stand you take.

    Either way, it’s not really HIS fault. Blame the TV stations if you want, or Twitter, or whoever spread it around.

    He made a threat and he admitted it.

    But you don’t care.

    A threat to what? Beat her up, stab her? Drag her back to his place and tie her up in the basement? No.

    If you’re trespassing and someone says “if you don’t get off my property, I’m going to call the police” do you call that a “threat?” I hope not.

    That’s a different scenario. First of all you have lawful control over your own property. Second of all you are going to call a police officer to deal with someone who refuses to leave your property. “You’re not going to like it” as Mr. Cooper said can be interpreted as a threat.

     

    “I’m going to call the police/report you for violating the law” is something that most people wouldn’t like.

    • #70
  11. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Men threatening women should be forbidden.

    I guess kedavis disagrees. Threats are OK.

    “Threatening” is a relative term, and if this is a Karen we’re discussing, welll…..

    It’s pretty likely that “Karen” would have taken anything anyone said, as a “threat,” especially given awareness that she was violating the law…

    If he’d said “You need to leash your dog, it’s the law” and she thinks/says “or what, you’ll attack me? THREAT!!!”

    What’s the difference? I don’t accept that someone else gets to decide what someone means based on their neuroses, or sexist or racist attitudes… If you believe that, then crazy people must be left alone to wreak whatever havoc they might wish, since otherwise they might feel “threatened.” And we can’t have THAT!

     

    Hey, you think it is just and fair for her to be in hiding from the witch hunt because she is a “Karen”.

    Over her dog not being leashed, which is a stupid sort of law. Leash laws exist to make it easier for law enforcement. Out of control dogs is the problem. This man was seeking a confrontation about her dog not being leashed.

    Bully for you and your support of cancel culture. From someone who hides his or her real identity. What a bold, bold stand you take.

    Either way, it’s not really HIS fault. Blame the TV stations if you want, or Twitter, or whoever spread it around.

    He made a threat and he admitted it.

    But you don’t care.

    A threat to what? Beat her up, stab her? Drag her back to his place and tie her up in the basement? No.

    If you’re trespassing and someone says “if you don’t get off my property, I’m going to call the police” do you call that a “threat?” I hope not.

    That’s a different scenario. First of all you have lawful control over your own property. Second of all you are going to call a police officer to deal with someone who refuses to leave your property. “You’re not going to like it” as Mr. Cooper said can be interpreted as a threat.

     

    “I’m going to call the police/report you for violating the law” is something that most people wouldn’t like.

    You are not really so stupid as to think a large man looming over a woman saying “you are not going to it” is the same as “I am going to call the police.”

    The way I know is that you moved from denying he said this sentence, to denying it was a threat to a reasonable person. You have moved the goal posts. 

    Seems to me, all you want to do is cry racism.

    • #71
  12. OkieSailor Member
    OkieSailor
    @OkieSailor

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Just for the record, the media narrative was that she felt threatened by being filmed. Her claim, and it is supported by Mr. Cooper’s comment, is that she felt threatened when he said that he would do something she wouldn’t like.

    Just for the record, the media narrative was that she felt threatened by being filmed. Her claim, and it is supported by Mr. Cooper’s comment, is that she felt threatened when he said that he would do something she wouldn’t like.

    Given that she was in an isolated place, that her call to 911 could not be completed because of the poor connection, that he was trying to entice her dog away from her, and that he had said something threatening, I don’t find her reaction particularly unreasonable. What is captured on video – again, for those who haven’t bothered listening to the podcast – is her increasingly frantic attempts to talk to the 911 operator who simply said, again and again, that she could not hear her.

    If the lady chose to violate the leash rules, it isn’t up to some random citizen to threaten her and attempt to force compliance. The lesson to be learned here is not that we should simply comply with all the rules so that people don’t threaten us in isolated places. …… will misrepresent a story in order to sell a narrative, and that people can be punished far beyond anything the situation warrants by our censorious and hyper reactive mobs.

    Are you suggesting, as seems to be common on the left, that individual citizens have no ability, let alone any degree of obligation, to intervene when they see a crime being committed? If anything, it seems far less risky to deal with someone letting their dog run unleashed, than someone beating their child in public, or a spouse, or a stranger…

    My interpretation of “if you want to do what you want to do, then I’ll do something you won’t like” easily translates to “report you for violating the leash law.” Mental escalation seems uncalled for, and arguably under the circumstances, racist. Why jump to a belief that, because you don’t have your dog on a leash, someone is threatening you with bodily harm? It does sound rather female, but that doesn’t make it logical or reasonable. And I don’t think the populace at large should feel limited by what the smallest, weakest, silliest woman might think of something.

    I’m curious how many people share your view. I suspect it’s a minority.

    There is a right way to confront someone who needs to be aware that others don’t like their behavior including when breaking something like a leash law. This man overstepped the bounds in my view. Politely pointing out the fact that leash laws are extant for our protection and safety is a good step.

    • #72
  13. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Al Sparks (View Comment):

    So I listened to the podcast.

    I found it jaw dropping (figuratively). My perception of the incident changed considerably and I became more sympathetic towards Amy Cooper. Before I listened to the podcast, I had a plague on both their houses attitude towards both. Even before the podcast, I had a jaundiced eye over Chris Cooper’s filming (visually recording) of her in the first place. He was approaching her not the other way around.

    Here are the facts that changed my perception. Chris Cooper doesn’t have a dog, but he’s carrying dog treats. The reporter investigating the incident says that there had been other incidents by Chris doing the same thing to other dog owners, in the same threatening way. Chris does not dispute this.

    Amy Cooper says that Chris’s whole demeanor changed from a threatening one to passive aggressive (my phrasing) after filming started (which creeped her out even more).

    As a part of the piece some background was also provided. It turns out that there have been tensions (and some hostilities) between two groups of people in Central Park – between dog owners and bird watchers. Chris is an activist on the bird watcher side, and has basically been engaged in behavior that smacks of vigilantism, but doesn’t quite cross the line. There is no doubt that he knows what he is doing and knows just how far to carry it.

    He seems to have been deliberately provocative, and as part of his schtick he hides behind his enhanced status as an African American.

    I am a city boy at heart, but I’ve lived most of my life in smaller towns that are rural in nature. Since Covid I’ve become grateful I live where I live. But the small window into city politics over dog walking makes me even gladder I don’t live in the big city.

    I like dogs, but don’t love them enough to own and care for one. But if I did, I live in an area that would be a heck of a lot friendlier towards my dog ownership.

    Oh, and it’s clear with the facts presented, she did not file a false police report. It’s also clear the DA had the same facts that were presented by the podcast.

    You just reported things to us better than reporters do. You are overqualified to work for the NYT.

    • #73
  14. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Men threatening women should be forbidden.

    I guess kedavis disagrees. Threats are OK.

    “Threatening” is a relative term, and if this is a Karen we’re discussing, welll…..

    It’s pretty likely that “Karen” would have taken anything anyone said, as a “threat,” especially given awareness that she was violating the law…

    If he’d said “You need to leash your dog, it’s the law” and she thinks/says “or what, you’ll attack me? THREAT!!!”

    What’s the difference? I don’t accept that someone else gets to decide what someone means based on their neuroses, or sexist or racist attitudes… If you believe that, then crazy people must be left alone to wreak whatever havoc they might wish, since otherwise they might feel “threatened.” And we can’t have THAT!

     

    Hey, you think it is just and fair for her to be in hiding from the witch hunt because she is a “Karen”.

    Over her dog not being leashed, which is a stupid sort of law. Leash laws exist to make it easier for law enforcement. Out of control dogs is the problem. This man was seeking a confrontation about her dog not being leashed.

    Bully for you and your support of cancel culture. From someone who hides his or her real identity. What a bold, bold stand you take.

    Bryan. It’s fine to disagree. But you don’t need to ramp everything up to eleven all the time. Do you notice that you have been doing that alot? With many different subjects? 

     

     

    • #74
  15. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Zafar (View Comment):

    On a thread about a Karen this ending was really inevitable….

    To seek comity on this controversial subject, I blame the lizard people, vaccines and motherhood.

    • #75
  16. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    On a thread about a Karen this ending was really inevitable….

    To seek comity on this controversial subject, I blame the lizard people, vaccines and motherhood.

    birthgiverhood…

    • #76
  17. Henry Racette Moderator
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Zafar (View Comment):
    It’s interesting that the interviewers presented her version of events as facts rather than claims.  Why are we assuming that she’s telling the truth while the man is being dishonest in his presentation?

    I thought the interview avoiding leaping to conclusions and was quite fair. Do you have a specific aspect in mind? I’m trying to think of a significant disputed point between the account of Ms. Cooper and the account of Mr. Cooper.

    Mr. Cooper declined to be interviewed, but acknowledged that he made the statement she claims he did, acknowledged that he attempts to lure dogs, acknowledged that his behavior has led to physical altercations in the past, acknowledged that he can be an intimidating figure, and acknowledged that he values his anti-dog reputation.

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Yes it’s easy to argue that she shouldn’t have had as many consequences as she did, but that’s really not HIS fault.  Blame the media, etc, for making such a big stink about it.

    Well… no.

    While the point of my post was to call out the New York Times (and similar ersatz “news” agencies) for their grotesquely unethical behavior, it was Mr. Cooper who initiated the encounter, Mr. Cooper who behaved in a plausibly threatening way, Mr. Cooper who recorded the event, and Mr. Cooper who allowed it to become a viral sensation. Had he not made his video public, no one would know about this unpleasant event and Ms. Cooper would not be living in hiding.

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):
    He carried dog treats and a dog leash on his birding expeditions?

    Yes. And I understand how a man might not find that particularly threatening. I also understand how a woman alone with such a man might find that alarming. It is a calculated and deliberate preparation that, when coupled with an ambiguous threat, would, I think, alarm many women in that situation.

     

    • #77
  18. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    While the point of my post was to call out the New York Times (and similar ersatz “news” agencies) for their grotesquely unethical behavior, it was Mr. Cooper who initiated the encounter, Mr. Cooper who behaved in a plausibly threatening way, Mr. Cooper who recorded the event, and Mr. Cooper who allowed it to become a viral sensation. Had he not made his video public, no one would know about this unpleasant event and Ms. Cooper would not be living in hiding.

    You mean a POC can be a POS?

    • #78
  19. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    While the point of my post was to call out the New York Times (and similar ersatz “news” agencies) for their grotesquely unethical behavior, it was Mr. Cooper who initiated the encounter, Mr. Cooper who behaved in a plausibly threatening way, Mr. Cooper who recorded the event, and Mr. Cooper who allowed it to become a viral sensation. Had he not made his video public, no one would know about this unpleasant event and Ms. Cooper would not be living in hiding.

    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private?  Was he responsible for predicting what the MSM would do with it, and what the consequences might be?  That seems like a formula for never making anything public, because of what “might” happen.  Should DUI arrests etc be kept secret, because if it gets out the suspects – or guilty persons if convicted – might kill themselves out of shame or whatever?  Even if one or more of them DO kill themselves, is that proof that DUI cases should be kept secret?

    • #79
  20. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    While the point of my post was to call out the New York Times (and similar ersatz “news” agencies) for their grotesquely unethical behavior, it was Mr. Cooper who initiated the encounter, Mr. Cooper who behaved in a plausibly threatening way, Mr. Cooper who recorded the event, and Mr. Cooper who allowed it to become a viral sensation. Had he not made his video public, no one would know about this unpleasant event and Ms. Cooper would not be living in hiding.

    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private? Was he responsible for predicting what the MSM would do with it, and what the consequences might be? That seems like a formula for never making anything public, because of what “might” happen. Should DUI arrests etc be kept secret, because if it gets out the suspects – or guilty persons if convicted – might kill themselves out of shame or whatever? Even if one or more of them DO kill themselves, is that proof that DUI cases should be kept secret?

    Sad.

    • #80
  21. Henry Racette Moderator
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Either way, it’s not really HIS fault.  Blame the TV stations if you want, or Twitter, or whoever spread it around.

    I think it’s in large part his fault: if not for his actions in initiating the encounter, his threatening comment, and his decision to allow the video to go viral, we would never have heard about it and Ms. Cooper would still have her job and her home and her anonymity. He couldn’t predict the outcome; no one can in situations like this. But I think he bears a huge responsibility for it, and I would like to think he feels bad about it, though I don’t suspect he does.

    kedavis (View Comment):
    If you’re trespassing and someone says “if you don’t get off my property, I’m going to call the police” do you call that a “threat?”  I hope not.

    This is I think the second time you’ve referenced an instance of trespass on one’s own property. Perhaps this relates to that empathy aspect I mentioned earlier.

    We are talking about a woman alone with a strange man in an isolated place. The strange man is physically imposing, makes a vague threat (saying he’s going to do something she won’t like), and then attempts to lure her dog away. 

    I would be interested to hear how many women here would find that situation threatening and very uncomfortable. I suspect it’s quite a lot.

    OkieSailor (View Comment):
    There is a right way to confront someone who needs to be aware that others don’t like their behavior including when breaking something like a leash law.

    Agreed. However, Mr. Cooper seems to be something of a “Karen” himself — a Karen of the vigilantist sort.

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    A private citizen cannot….

    Doug, particularly appreciate your input and perspective here. Thanks. — H.


    Interestingly, Mr. Cooper left the scene when another person arrived — despite having previously expressed his support for her calling the police. I wonder why, if he felt that his actions were justified and defensible, he didn’t stay.

    • #81
  22. Henry Racette Moderator
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private?

    KE, I haven’t said that he should have been expected to keep the video private, nor that he should have kept the video private. I said that his failure to do so was essential to this becoming a disaster for anyone involved. Had he done so, it would have remained nothing more than a brief and unpleasant encounter without substantive consequence.

    Mr. Cooper’s actions were essential to the matter becoming a personal disaster for Ms. Cooper. They were causative. But I didn’t say that he should have done anything differently.


    Having said that: I think he should have done everything differently. I think, based on this report, that he’s a self-righteous jerk who feels entitled to intimidate lone women into following the rules that he happens to value.

    • #82
  23. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private?

    KE, I haven’t said that he should have been expected to keep the video private, nor that he should have kept the video private. I said that his failure to do so was essential to this becoming a disaster for anyone involved. Had he done so, it would have remained nothing more than a brief and unpleasant encounter without substantive consequence.

    Mr. Cooper’s actions were essential to the matter becoming a personal disaster for Ms. Cooper. They were causative. But I didn’t say that he should have done anything differently.


    Having said that: I think he should have done everything differently. I think, based on this report, that he’s a self-righteous jerk who feels entitled to intimidate lone women into following the rules that he happens to value.

    He might also “value” other rules, but when you’re in a public park, “valuing” leash laws makes sense.

    Context matters too.  Apparently dogs off-leash is a widespread problem there.  Which is a big part of how you get “vigilantism” about it, coupled with the likelihood that there are very few official enforcers doing the job that THEY should be doing.  If there were, and if one of them told Karen to leash her dog or leave – and assuming the city official wasn’t a black man who scared her by “threatening” to write a citation – this also doesn’t escalate.

    • #83
  24. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private?  Was he responsible for predicting what the MSM would do with it, and what the consequences might be?

    I think he knew exactly what he was doing. She was an example of racism and used her threat of calling the police as evidence of a deadly threat because everyone knows the police shoot threatening black men. He wanted people to see how racist she was for that line.

    • #84
  25. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Stina (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private? Was he responsible for predicting what the MSM would do with it, and what the consequences might be?

    I think he knew exactly what he was doing. She was an example of racism and used her threat of calling the police as evidence of a deadly threat because everyone knows the police shoot threatening black men. He wanted people to see how racist she was for that line.

    Well maybe. But the dude is pretty sus.

    • #85
  26. Doug Watt Moderator
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    Who knows what Mr. Cooper was thinking. The big danger for a private citizen is they think they know the law. Emotional responses will have no bearing because the elements of a statute contains defenses as well. The judge in this case did the right thing by dismissing the case. Unless new evidence comes to light this case is ended.

    If Mr. Cooper felt so aggrieved because a dog was off leash he should have called the non-emergency number for the NYPD. After all it wasn’t like Ms. Cooper turned her dog loose in his backyard. He still would have no right to leash the dog in a park until police responded to his call. A violation is not a crime. At least in Oregon if he leashed her dog he could be charged with theft, and unlawful detention of Ms. Cooper if she felt she couldn’t leave without her dog.

    I get that Mr. Cooper might be upset, and some commenters might be upset, but when it comes to statutes it’s your elected representatives that write, and pass statutes.

    • #86
  27. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private?

    KE, I haven’t said that he should have been expected to keep the video private, nor that he should have kept the video private. I said that his failure to do so was essential to this becoming a disaster for anyone involved. Had he done so, it would have remained nothing more than a brief and unpleasant encounter without substantive consequence.

    Mr. Cooper’s actions were essential to the matter becoming a personal disaster for Ms. Cooper. They were causative. But I didn’t say that he should have done anything differently.


    Having said that: I think he should have done everything differently. I think, based on this report, that he’s a self-righteous jerk who feels entitled to intimidate lone women into following the rules that he happens to value.

    He might also “value” other rules, but when you’re in a public park, “valuing” leash laws makes sense.

    Context matters too. Apparently dogs off-leash is a widespread problem there. Which is a big part of how you get “vigilantism” about it, coupled with the likelihood that there are very few official enforcers doing the job that THEY should be doing. If there were, and if one of them told Karen to leash her dog or leave – and assuming the city official wasn’t a black man who scared her by “threatening” to write a citation – this also doesn’t escalate.

    Assume Christian Cooper was white and Amy Cooper was black. Same take?

    • #87
  28. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private?

    KE, I haven’t said that he should have been expected to keep the video private, nor that he should have kept the video private. I said that his failure to do so was essential to this becoming a disaster for anyone involved. Had he done so, it would have remained nothing more than a brief and unpleasant encounter without substantive consequence.

    Mr. Cooper’s actions were essential to the matter becoming a personal disaster for Ms. Cooper. They were causative. But I didn’t say that he should have done anything differently.


    Having said that: I think he should have done everything differently. I think, based on this report, that he’s a self-righteous jerk who feels entitled to intimidate lone women into following the rules that he happens to value.

    He might also “value” other rules, but when you’re in a public park, “valuing” leash laws makes sense.

    Context matters too. Apparently dogs off-leash is a widespread problem there. Which is a big part of how you get “vigilantism” about it, coupled with the likelihood that there are very few official enforcers doing the job that THEY should be doing. If there were, and if one of them told Karen to leash her dog or leave – and assuming the city official wasn’t a black man who scared her by “threatening” to write a citation – this also doesn’t escalate.

    Assume Christian Cooper was white and Amy Cooper was black. Same take?

    For me, absolutely.  And while I think others might claim that their position is objective, that they point out how Amy Cooper felt “threatened” by a (larger?) black man, proves otherwise.

    • #88
  29. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    Why should he have been expected to keep the video private?

    KE, I haven’t said that he should have been expected to keep the video private, nor that he should have kept the video private. I said that his failure to do so was essential to this becoming a disaster for anyone involved. Had he done so, it would have remained nothing more than a brief and unpleasant encounter without substantive consequence.

    Mr. Cooper’s actions were essential to the matter becoming a personal disaster for Ms. Cooper. They were causative. But I didn’t say that he should have done anything differently.


    Having said that: I think he should have done everything differently. I think, based on this report, that he’s a self-righteous jerk who feels entitled to intimidate lone women into following the rules that he happens to value.

    He might also “value” other rules, but when you’re in a public park, “valuing” leash laws makes sense.

    Context matters too. Apparently dogs off-leash is a widespread problem there. Which is a big part of how you get “vigilantism” about it, coupled with the likelihood that there are very few official enforcers doing the job that THEY should be doing. If there were, and if one of them told Karen to leash her dog or leave – and assuming the city official wasn’t a black man who scared her by “threatening” to write a citation – this also doesn’t escalate.

    Assume Christian Cooper was white and Amy Cooper was black. Same take?

    For me, absolutely. And while I think others might claim that their position is objective, that they point out how Amy Cooper felt “threatened” by a (larger?) black man, proves otherwise.

    What if she simply felt threatened by a larger man?

    • #89
  30. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    I thought the interview avoiding leaping to conclusions and was quite fair. Do you have a specific aspect in mind? I’m trying to think of a significant disputed point between the account of Ms. Cooper and the account of Mr. Cooper.

    Until he started recording we have no physical evidence. She said that he started out shouting at her and then changed his voice once he started recording. Is that true or an ambit claim? Why should I believe her?

    She said she was unable to leave and so she called the police. Why couldn’t she leave? What was stopping her?

    There was no really satisfactory explanation of why she told him she would call the police and tell them he was threatening her life.

    Theres no interrogation of why her response to her life being threatened was to walk towards the guy to shout about being filmed rather than trying to get away. (Yup, I think she’s a fraud.)

    And tellingly – her take away a year later is she wants to tell him how she felt. No interest, I note, in how anybody else who was there felt, including him, or how her own actions contributed to that situation.  And that, imho, is why she is truly Central Park Karen.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.