Do you know the definition for 'disorderly conduct' in MA?
If he was insulting, uncooperative, and aggressive, and if he responded to really reasonable requests with insults, that's good enough for me.
If I may summarize your answer in my own words, it is that, no, you don't know the definition for "disorderly conduct" in Massachusetts. And you can't be bothered to look it up. Your own, subjective, seat-of-the-pants sentiment is "good enough" for you. Frankly, I find this remarkable. You've been dwelling on the issue of disorderly conduct from page one. Is it really too much trouble for you to run a Google search on "disorderly conduct Massachusetts"? It would have quickly yielded a fine summary by a lawfirm specialized in these things -- a secondary, but professional source unrelated to the case, easily good enough for our discussion. Here's what it says:
A "disorderly person" is defined as one who:
* with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or
* recklessly creates a risk thereof
* engages in fighting or threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or
* creates a hazard or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose.
May I suggest that you work from the actual definition for a change, and that you show us specific documentation of Gates's behavior fitting the definition? How did Gates cause public
inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm? How did he recklessly create a risk thereof? How did he engage in fighting or threatening, violent, or tumultuous behavior, as opposed to just being uncooperative? How did he gratuitously create a hazard or physically offensive condition?
I'm willing to be persuaded -- but don't expect to persuade a lot of people by hiding behind lines like "that's good enough for me".
At the end of the page I linked to, they reprint the relevant part of the actual statute:
MGL CHAPTER 272. Mass General Laws, excerpt.
Section 53. Common night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female, common railers and brawlers, persons who with offensive and disorderly acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite sex, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, idle and disorderly persons, disturbers of the peace, keepers of noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent exposure may be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than six months, or by a fine of not more than two hundred dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
It is blatantly obvious that this does not apply to anyone's conduct in their own home, no matter how much the police may dislike it.