Man who called police on black woman at North Carolina pool no longer has job

[Peter King]

I am sure they have, when giving an incorrect address that doesn't exist to a board member as "proof" they live in the community then refusing to provide verification of proper access or leaving. It's impossible to prove, though, as the media wouldn't bother with that story. Just as it appears that only black non-customers and never white non-customers have been asked to leave a private business by cops, when we know that just is not true.

But if there is no ID showing rule at that pool, then there is no need for that woman to provide it. There was confusion about her address, the man could have checked the number of the key card to know whether or not the address was correct. If that database does not exist, then that is the fault of the homeowners association IMHO, it should not be made her problem.

I seriously doubt people who go to their neighborhood pool will take their ID with them to go swimming.

 

[buck]

But if there is no ID showing rule at that pool, then there is no need for that woman to provide it. There was confusion about her address, the man could have checked the number of the key card to know whether or not the address was correct. If that database does not exist, then that is the fault of the homeowners association IMHO, it should not be made her problem.

I seriously doubt people who go to their neighborhood pool will take their ID with them to go swimming.

You don't know what the rules for the pool are, nor what is contained in their HOA rules book. So, there is no way you could know that.

Regardless, they do have a rule about only residents using the pool. If someone gives you an address that you know does not exist.. would you think they are a resident, or how would you go about determining if they are? If they are non-black, ask for an ID but if they are black let them do as they please, I guess is the rule.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

You don't know what the rules for the pool are, nor what is contained in their HOA rules book. So, there is no way you could know that.

Regardless, they do have a rule about only residents using the pool. If someone gives you an address that you know does not exist.. would you think they are a resident, or how would you go about determining if they are? If they are non-black, ask for an ID but if they are black let them do as they please, I guess is the rule.

Or perhaps clear the issue up before calling the police? Somehow her address and residency was cleared up when the police got there. Had the pool boy remained clear headed I am sure it could have been cleared up with out the police

 

[Napoleon]

But if there is no ID showing rule at that pool, then there is no need for that woman to provide it. There was confusion about her address, the man could have checked the number of the key card to know whether or not the address was correct. If that database does not exist, then that is the fault of the homeowners association IMHO, it should not be made her problem.

I seriously doubt people who go to their neighborhood pool will take their ID with them to go swimming.

Then you’d be surprised. His role in the HOA was to police the pool and he didn’t recognize her as a resident. I know an Asian guy who was asked to provide ID or proof of residence at the pool of his complex by a black property manager here in Columbus. It happened to me once too. This guy was fired for doing his job.

These things happen all the time and we can blame zealous enforcement of HOA or property rules by people on a power trip. Looks like pretty standard enforcement of private pool rules to me and this situation could have been easily resolved without the police. Instead she put on a show and made unnecessary drama that required the police to convince her she did have to demonstrate that she had legitimate access to private property.

 

[Peter King]

Then you’d be surprised. His role in the HOA was to police the pool and he didn’t recognize her as a resident. I know an Asian guy who was asked to provide ID or proof of residence at the pool of his complex by a black property manager here in Columbus. It happened to me once too. This guy was fired for doing his job.

These things happen all the time and we can blame zealous enforcement of HOA or property rules by people on a power trip. Looks like pretty standard enforcement of private pool rules to me and this situation could have been easily resolved without the police. Instead she put on a show and made unnecessary drama that required the police to convince her she did have to demonstrate that she had legitimate access to private property.

Well again, that is not a certainty, the homeowners association did not think he did his job.

And she was a resident. Pure and simple and showing an ID might have not solved a frigging thing. And he is a private citizen who can ask, but I doubt there is a rule/law that says she had to comply.

 

[Peter King]

You don't know what the rules for the pool are, nor what is contained in their HOA rules book. So, there is no way you could know that.

Regardless, they do have a rule about only residents using the pool. If someone gives you an address that you know does not exist.. would you think they are a resident, or how would you go about determining if they are? If they are non-black, ask for an ID but if they are black let them do as they please, I guess is the rule.

And neither do you, but you all pretend like you do and know that the man was in his right to demand an idea and that she was mandated to show her ID. Things that are not really something a private person can demand IMHO, he can ask, she can refuse.

And he could have checked that by checking the card because the homeowners association must know who they hand them out. This may not the man's fault, it may be the homeowners association who is to blame. They should print the address on those cards to make the address is known complete with name and picture, that would solve the problem.

 

[buck]

Well again, that is not a certainty, the homeowners association did not think he did his job.

That's not necessarily true either. :

The attorney added that Bloom has had to ask for IDs of pool patrons and removed those who did not have valid memberships an average of four times every season, in an effort to enforce the pool's adopted regulations, and that the people removed have included people of all ages and races.

Vermitsky went on to say that another board member approached Bloom with concerns that Abhulimen didn't live in the neighborhood.

UNless youi realyl dont think the board members know what is allowed at the pool.

 

[phattonez]

Again, one did not have to provide ID's to use the pool, just be a homeowner/resident there and she had the correct card with her to gain entry to that pool and he did not have a right to ask to provide her ID.

Are you arguing that the pool owner doesn't have a right to make sure that only those authorized to be there are using the pool? Because a pool card isn't proof of authorization.

 

[justabubba]

Are you arguing that the pool owner doesn't have a right to make sure that only those authorized to be there are using the pool? Because a pool card isn't proof of authorization.

having apologized for his actions, his employer expressed its opinion that he did not

 

[phattonez]

having apologized for his actions, his employer expressed its opinion that he did not

Yeah, I'm sure that had NOTHING at all to do with the media backlash. I'm sure he received complaints the previous times he did this with non-blacks.

 

[Peter King]

Are you arguing that the pool owner doesn't have a right to make sure that only those authorized to be there are using the pool? Because a pool card isn't proof of authorization.

He is not the pool owner, the homeowners association is the owner and if they give out those cards they should be able to check whether or not the card is valid.

 

[Excon]

A stupid reply. At no point did he over step his authority. The woman falsely made it a racial issue is why it turned out as it did.
Had this been a White person complaining the HOA would likely just supported what he did.

then put up or shut up: offer us an instance where such a scenario happened to a white woman at the pool; a situation where the police were called on a white woman being denied access to this private pool for which she was eligible to enter

i look forward to reading your example

iLOL Wut? Saying something is "likely" is supposition, not something in which you can demand verification. Duh!

Secondly; Maybe you should read the reported information where he has requested ID from several in the past.

Again.

Bloom's job as pool chair included removing people from the pool who were not authorized to be there. [highlight]He did so several times a year, and people who have been removed include a variety of ages and races[/highlight], Vermitsky told the paper.​

Ever heard of any of those other folks making it a racial issue like this person did?
I sure haven't.

Additionally, since his inquiry was based on a report from another board member, which included the false info she gave to that member (which of course justifies further inquiry), only someone having stupid thoughts would call this man a racist for doing his job.


The above, buck's replies to you, as well as you liking Peter King's post just establishes the hilarity of your position.

---

Good!

That is a very sad position to take.
He was terminated over an incident she created and than lied about by making it a racist issue.
She is the one who should be fired from her job for doing so.

Black folks at all levels of society have for decades been saying that almost daily they are [URLhttps://tinyurl.com/yal4kfgt"]subjected to some sort of racially aligned denigrating behavior or remarks[/URL] that whites just don't endure, and for just as long, the retort has been tantamount to saying that they're all makin' it up. They aren't and they weren't, and finally we're seeing regular and recurring evidence that they are not.

Unfortunately you are not correct.
Incidents such as this just confirm that false claims are being made.

The woman gave a false address and was reported to him by another Board Member. It is a valid reason for him to request identification.
There is nothing racist in what he did.

---

A lot of those being removed could have been for being drunk, not controlling their children, or in general creating a disturbance more than normal for a pool

We do not know how many residents in this community who have access to the pool are black, or how many blacks go to the pool on a regular basis.

If we were to know that say 10% or more of pool users are black, then I would go with the guy was just an overreacting idiot. If it turns out that very few users are black, then I would hazard a guess the guy is an idiot and a racist

His involvement was based on a report from another HOA Board Member to which she had given a false address. His involvement had not a damn thing to do with race on his part.

I doubt people of all races have had police called because they wanted to use a pool they had paid access to (community fees)

And yet he requested ID from several others before and we haven't heard about it. Do you think that just maybe it could be because those other races aren't prone to thinking this was racist racist like this lady wrongly did?

Or perhaps clear the issue up before calling the police? Somehow her address and residency was cleared up when the police got there. Had the pool boy remained clear headed I am sure it could have been cleared up with out the police

1. He wasn't a pool-boy. He was a "HOA Board member and" "the HOA pool Director".
2. Clear up the issue before calling? He tried but she would not cooperate to relieve the situation she created by giving a false address.
3. No, her address wasn't cleared up when the police got there.
What happened when the police got there was is it was established that her access card worked. That was good enough for the police and the HOA Board member acquiesced to their decision.

 

[Excon]

No, it is just a fact, you keep trying to claim things that fly right in the face of truth and reality. This case is no different.

The comment above is you posting a lie.

Even others have been informing you how you are wrong but you wont listen and just resort to "IMHO". *sigh*
Well your opinion is meaningless when it is not based in reality.

It is like you do not understand that folks trespassing into private pools can be a problem over here and not just the posted rules apply.

Nope.

:lamo Yes you are "wrong", as already established, not just by me, but by others as well, "as usual".

Well, I posted the shield at the pool with the rules. And again, she had a valid card and he had no right to ask for her ID, the police sided with her, not him.

You are speaking nonsense and just further establishing that you know not of what you speak.

Yes you posted the rules. So ****ing what?
Again; How do you ensure a person is a resident in accordance with the posted residency requirement? Huh? You do that by asking for ID as he has done for several others (as reported).
He most certainly did have the "right" to ask her for identity to establish she was allowed access. As reported, it was his job.

As already pointed out, her having an access card means diddly squat, the card itself does not establish that the person is a resident or a valid guest.
And your comment about the police is absurd, that is how the Police chose to let it go so as to not have to do anything further, which is what the guy allowed. He did not have to.
It was part of his job and he would be fully in his right to have her evicted for not producing ID if he had wanted and the Police would have honored that request.
You really need to learn about what you want to argue before attempting it because it is clear you do not have a clue here.

 

[Excon]

Don't you ever get tired of not making sense? The sign in sheet was mentioned on the rules posted on the pool. Who knows, the sign in sheet pool could very well mean she would have to write down her address, fact is that the homeowners made public that they would reinstate that sign in sheet to prevent further issues.

iLOL You saying that it could include writing down the address proves you understood what I spoke to, and therefore it did make sense. So all you are doing is being dishonest, as usual.

But she was a resident,

Irrelevant to the circumstances that she created by given a false address.

Prove that. She lived where she said she lived as was ascertained.

Prove something that is self evident? ilOL
That is a stupid reply.


Seriously. You do not understand that by her giving a false address that she created the situation?
And that she further complicated it by refusing to provide ID proving she was a resident? Really? You do not understand these things? iLOL

The position you have taken is very stupid, untenable and ignorant of reality.

 

[Excon]

He had no leg to stand on, he did not have a legal right to demand an ID.

Wrong as usual. As reported, it was his job.
Do you really not understand what the phraseology of "his job" means?

You also apparently do not understand that this was not a public pool. Doh!

[COLOR="#00004"]iLOL What was ascertained after the fact is irrelevant to the circumstances at the time of the event.
That you do not understand that is a severe lack of logic problem.[/COLOR]

Sure. because you always now best

This comment of yours just confirms that second sentence.

Were you there? Me neither, she gave an address and it was verified as her actual address, that is the only fact that matters.

Holy ****!
That happened after the fact of her giving a false address. It was her giving of a false address that justified requesting an ID to verify the second address she gave.
Are you really not going to acknowledge the reality of that?

Fact, she was a resident, she had her card, all the rest is nonsense.

Wrong as usual.
She created a situation where it was justifiable to request an ID. That is fact.
Simply having an access card does not verify that the person is a resident or valid guest.

 

[Excon]

Now you are just lying.
When she was initially questioned she gave a false address. That was reported.
That she gave a different address when questioned again (regardless of it's accuracy) of course causes confusion. Duh! It is also an indication that the person may be lying.

No, you are giving me the opinions of a man who has resigned and who was afterwards rebuked by his homeowners association for having done the wrong thing.

:lamo
I did not have to be there to argue what was reported.
And his resignation is irrelevant to what I argued. Duh!
Rebuked? Wrong thing? Stop making things up. There was no harsh criticism by them.

This is what they actually said.

[COLOR="#00004"]“We sincerely regret that an incident occurred yesterday at our community pool that left neighbors feeling racially profiled,” the association said in its statement.

“In confronting and calling the police on one of our neighbors, the pool chair escalated a situation in a way that does not reflect the inclusive values Glenridge seeks to uphold as a community.”[/COLOR]​

That is nothing more than CYA speak.

No, he could ask whatever he wanted, there is no reason whatsoever that this woman had to comply with his questions, how difficult is that to understand that she was in compliance and the pool manager was not?

You are again making things up to believe.
Again, how do you ensure a person is a resident or authorized guest if they do not produce an ID upon request?
Again, as reported, it was his job and she would not prove she was. That is him being in compliance while she was not.
That you fail to acknowledge this shows how dishonest you are being.

And he called the police because he was on a power trip and he failed.

Wrong as usual.
Another HOA Board Member asked him to check on this specific person because she gave an address that does not exist. That is not being on a "Power trip" except in deluded thoughts.

 

[Excon]

I will not stop making relevant arguments, just because you have no leg to stand on with your views is not my problem.

iLOL You have yet to make a valid argument simply because you know not of what you speak.
And in this discussion between the two of us, I am the only one with the leg to stand on, because again, you know not of what you speak.

Except that is not the view of the people who ran the pool.

iLOL
1. He was at the time one of the people who ran the pool. Duh! So you are wrong on that account.
2. You do not know that. They clearly did not say he overstep his authority, only that they did not like how he escalated it to the police. Nor do you know what they really think of this woman for acting the way she did. So stop with the bs argumentation, it doesn't fly.

 

[Excon]

But if there is no ID showing rule at that pool, then there is no need for that woman to provide it.

Where in the world do you get this idea? Huh?
If the rules require you to be a resident, just how in the world do you think that is verified?

 

[Excon]

There was confusion about her address, the man could have checked the number of the key card to know whether or not the address was correct. If that database does not exist, then that is the fault of the homeowners association IMHO, it should not be made her problem.

She created situation by providing a false address. Stating a different street with a totally different name, where no homes exist, is an attempt at deceit and not confusion
Your argument here is meaningless nonsense to what actually occurred.
If you want to suggest that to the HOA, go ahead, but it is still nonsense to what occurred.

And if you do take it upon yourself to make the suggestion, make sure you tell them to include an image of the person on it, or it too wouldn't mean **** as cards can be lent out or stolen.

I seriously doubt people who go to their neighborhood pool will take their ID with them to go swimming.

Oy vey!
In a small community, sure, but that would not relieve them from having to show ID if requested to establish they indeed have authorization to access.
But in larger communities it is more than likely they will be driving, in which they definitely would have an ID to produce.

 

[Excon]

Well again, that is not a certainty, the homeowners association did not think he did his job.

More dishonesty.
He was a member of that HOA board.
After he resigned the HOA said they did not like that he escalated it, not that they did not think he did not do his job.

And she was a resident. Pure and simple and showing an ID might have not solved a frigging thing. And he is a private citizen who can ask, but I doubt there is a rule/law that says she had to comply.

You "do not think" is right.
You do not know what you are talking about and therefore can not speak on it.
Do yourself a favor and look up multiple HOA pool rules and see just how wrong you can be.

 

[Excon]

Things that are not really something a private person can demand IMHO, he can ask, she can refuse.

IMHO? iLOL Like I said, you know not of what you speak.
Thank you for confirming that.
They have to have a way to enforce their rules. To establish a person is a resident, as required by the rules, you would need to ID them.

And he could have checked that by checking the card because the homeowners association must know who they hand them out. This may not the man's fault, it may be the homeowners association who is to blame. They should print the address on those cards to make the address is known complete with name and picture, that would solve the problem.

And as you were already told, those cards can be stolen and lent out. Simply having the card is not evidence that the person is a resident.

 

[Excon]

He is not the pool owner, the homeowners association is the owner and if they give out those cards they should be able to check whether or not the card is valid.

The community owns the pool. The HOA manages it.
He was a board member of the HOA which managed it.


Your arguments are pathetic.
Simply having a card does establish residency.

 

[Xelor]

iLOL Wut? Saying something is "likely" is supposition, not something in which you can demand verification. Duh!

Secondly; Maybe you should read the reported information where he has requested ID from several in the past.

Again.

Bloom's job as pool chair included removing people from the pool who were not authorized to be there. [highlight]He did so several times a year, and people who have been removed include a variety of ages and races[/highlight], Vermitsky told the paper.​

Ever heard of any of those other folks making it a racial issue like this person did?
I sure haven't.

Additionally, since his inquiry was based on a report from another board member, which included the false info she gave to that member (which of course justifies further inquiry), only someone having stupid thoughts would call this man a racist for doing his job.


The above, buck's replies to you, as well as you liking Peter King's post just establishes the hilarity of your position.

---

That is a very sad position to take.
He was terminated over an incident she created and than lied about by making it a racist issue.
She is the one who should be fired from her job for doing so.


Unfortunately you are not correct.
Incidents such as this just confirm that false claims are being made.

The woman gave a false address and was reported to him by another Board Member. It is a valid reason for him to request identification.
There is nothing racist in what he did.

---

His involvement was based on a report from another HOA Board Member to which she had given a false address. His involvement had not a damn thing to do with race on his part.


And yet he requested ID from several others before and we haven't heard about it. Do you think that just maybe it could be because those other races aren't prone to thinking this was racist racist like this lady wrongly did?


1. He wasn't a pool-boy. He was a "HOA Board member and" "the HOA pool Director".
2. Clear up the issue before calling? He tried but she would not cooperate to relieve the situation she created by giving a false address.
3. No, her address wasn't cleared up when the police got there.
What happened when the police got there was is it was established that her access card worked. That was good enough for the police and the HOA Board member acquiesced to their decision.

I really don't want to get into the "back and forth" this matter will necessarily entail, but I do want to point out several things (red or blue text) you wrote that aren't conclusively probative (logically sound). I don't because I can't get into that man's head (or that of the other board member) any more than you can. I can see the matter from both sides and I don't know which is more accurate, but I do know the pool has secured access, she was inside the secured area and she had an access card but not an ID. Why her access card was inadequate was not indicated in the article.

I will respond to two of your comments:

• Pink --> I'm sure some false claims happen; that they do has no bearing on whether the currently considered matter involves a false claim.
• Tan --> The nature, timing and extent of the police's role in determining the woman's address is not made clear in the article. The attorney says the woman's address was verified "later." Was that later with regard to when the woman told the pool guy her address? Was that later with regard to the police's departure? I don't know and the article doesn't say.

 

[Excon]

I really don't want to get into the "back and forth" this matter will necessarily entail, but I do want to point out several things (red or blue text) you wrote that aren't conclusively probative (logically sound).

Contrary to what you think, they really are logically sound in this argument. The first in red and highlighted, is verbatim as reported, and as pointed out, we never heard of those folks claiming racism. These are both relevant to this issue and to that which I was replying that you apparently wanted to jump into.

The second one in red is of course subjective, but you do not usually see intelligent folks jumping to such conclusions when they are the reason for the inquiry in the first place.
She should know that providing a false address would raise suspicion and likely lead to further investigation. But no, not her. She just jumps to claiming racism.

As for your comment about getting into his head? iLOL We are debating a known sequence of events that that in no way speaks to racism on his part.
Additionally, maybe you should watch his interview.

, but I do know the pool has secured access, she was inside the secured area and she had an access card but not an ID.

And? How in the world do you think that is even relevant? That she was within a perimeter does not mean she was allowed to there.

Why her access card was inadequate was not indicated in the article.

Oy vey. We can make an assumption here by what didn't occur.
We can assume that the card did not identify the person it was given to as it was never requested as a form of ID.
Secondly, after the Officer showed it opened the gate, Bloom still said he would prefer an actual ID. So yeah, we can make assumptions.
Additionally, why in the world would a card be sufficient when cards can be stolen or lent? The card could have a persons name and address on it and it still is not identification of the person holding it. And if it did it certainly would not explain why she gave two separate addresses and amount of times living there, she would have just presented the card saying this is me.

I will respond to two of your comments:

You already responded to more than two.

Pink --> I'm sure some false claims happen; that they do has no bearing on whether the currently considered matter involves a false claim.

Good thing I never indicated that, huh? But since you replied with it you clearly chose to reply with nonsense to what was actually said.

Again; "Incidents such as this just confirm that false claims are being made."
There is a series of events here in which nothing suggests he was acting out of racism or was a racist.

Tan --> The nature, timing and extent of the police's role in determining the woman's address is not made clear in the article. The attorney says the woman's address was verified "later." Was that later with regard to when the woman told the pool guy her address? Was that later with regard to the police's departure? I don't know and the article doesn't say.

The video certainly didn't show it being given to the Police and he clearly still indicated that he would have preferred an actual ID, and the video ends shortly after that.
So that is to what I speak, the information we have.

 

[justabubba]

iLOL Wut? Saying something is "likely" is supposition, not something in which you can demand verification. Duh!

Secondly; Maybe you should read the reported information where he has requested ID from several in the past.

Again.

Bloom's job as pool chair included removing people from the pool who were not authorized to be there. [highlight]He did so several times a year, and people who have been removed include a variety of ages and races[/highlight], Vermitsky told the paper.​

Ever heard of any of those other folks making it a racial issue like this person did?
I sure haven't.

Additionally, since his inquiry was based on a report from another board member, which included the false info she gave to that member (which of course justifies further inquiry), only someone having stupid thoughts would call this man a racist for doing his job.


The above, buck's replies to you, as well as you liking Peter King's post just establishes the hilarity of your position.

---

That is a very sad position to take.
He was terminated over an incident she created and than lied about by making it a racist issue.
She is the one who should be fired from her job for doing so.


Unfortunately you are not correct.
Incidents such as this just confirm that false claims are being made.

The woman gave a false address and was reported to him by another Board Member. It is a valid reason for him to request identification.
There is nothing racist in what he did.

---

His involvement was based on a report from another HOA Board Member to which she had given a false address. His involvement had not a damn thing to do with race on his part.


And yet he requested ID from several others before and we haven't heard about it. Do you think that just maybe it could be because those other races aren't prone to thinking this was racist racist like this lady wrongly did?


1. He wasn't a pool-boy. He was a "HOA Board member and" "the HOA pool Director".
2. Clear up the issue before calling? He tried but she would not cooperate to relieve the situation she created by giving a false address.
3. No, her address wasn't cleared up when the police got there.
What happened when the police got there was is it was established that her access card worked. That was good enough for the police and the HOA Board member acquiesced to their decision.

what establishes the validity of my position is that the employer agrees with me, as demonstrated by the termination of the racist pool manager

and it appears there is no instance which can be shown where the police were called to address a white woman's attempt to gain access to the pool. clearly, there was disparate treatment of this black resident