Bob Dylan Arrested for Walking
Bob Dylan was on the pavement, thinking about the government. And they arrested him.
Rock legend Bob Dylan was treated like a complete unknown by police in a New Jersey shore community when a resident called to report someone wandering around the neighborhood.
Dylan was in Long Branch, about a two-hour drive south of New York City, on July 23 as part of a tour with Willie Nelson and John Mellencamp that was to play at a baseball stadium in nearby Lakewood.
A 24-year-old police officer apparently was unaware of who Dylan is and asked him for identification, Long Branch business administrator Howard Woolley said Friday. “I don’t think she was familiar with his entire body of work,” Woolley said.
The incident began at 5 p.m. when a resident said a man was wandering around a low-income, predominantly minority neighborhood several blocks from the oceanfront looking at houses. The police officer drove up to Dylan, who was wearing a blue jacket, and asked him his name. According to Woolley, the following exchange ensued:
“What is your name, sir?” the officer asked.
“Bob Dylan,” Dylan said.
“OK, what are you doing here?” the officer asked.
“I’m on tour,” the singer replied.
A second officer, also in his 20s, responded to assist the first officer. He, too, apparently was unfamiliar with Dylan, Woolley said.
The officers asked Dylan for identification. The singer of such classics as “Like a Rolling Stone” and “Blowin’ in the Wind” said that he didn’t have any ID with him, that he was just walking around looking at houses to pass some time before that night’s show.
The officers asked Dylan, 68, to accompany them back to the Ocean Place Resort and Spa, where the performers were staying. Once there, tour staff vouched for Dylan.
The officers thanked him for his cooperation. “He couldn’t have been any nicer to them,” Woolley added.
Alex Knapp is less than pleased:
That’s just utterly disgusting to me. A 68 year old man out for a walk shouldn’t have to offer his ID to the police. Was he committing a crime? No. Was he suspected of committing a crime? No. Were there any indications that a crime was going to be committed? No. He was just “suspiciously” enjoying public rights-of-way.
Look, someone calls in suspicious behavior and I understand the need to check it out. But an old man walking down the street isn’t “suspicious.” And there’s no law that says that a person has to have ID with them at all times, so I fail to see what justified the need to have two police officers detain somebody until someone could vouch for their identity.
I concur completely. If it were, say, 2 a.m., Dylan’s actions might have been a bit more suspicious. But late afternoon in broad daylight?
The Supreme Court has been very deferential to police on these matters. In the landmark 1968 case Terry v. Ohio, the court held that “Where a reasonably prudent officer is warranted in the circumstances of a given case in believing that his safety or that of others is endangered, he may make a reasonable search for weapons of the person believed by him to be armed and dangerous regardless of whether he has probable cause to arrest that individual for crime or the absolute certainty that the individual is armed.” The so-called Terry Stop doctrine has expanded over the years to the point where, arguably, Americans have little in the way of 4th Amendment rights outside their homes because policemen simply claim that they feared for their safety and judges are, not surprisingly, loathe to overrule them.
The most recent case of which I’m aware that applies here is Hiibel v. 6th Judicial Circuit of Nevada (2004), in which the Supremes upheld the arrest of a man for “refusing to identify himself to a police officer during an investigative stop involving a reported assault” in violation of Nevada’s “stop and identify” statute. The Court did not rule on whether an ID requirement would be unreasonable; Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion did, however, note that “the Nevada Supreme Court has interpreted the instant statute to require only that a suspect disclose his name. It apparently does not require him to produce a driver’s license or any other document. If he chooses either to state his name or communicate it to the officer by other means, the statute is satisfied and no violation occurs.”
UPDATE: Several other accounts of the story make it clear that Dylan’s activities were indeed more suspicious than taking a walk in the broad daylight. It was pouring rain and he had no umbrella or raincoat. And he had wandered off of the sidewalks and was peering into the windows of a house that was for sale. ABC’s Chris Francescani speculates that Dylan may have been looking for the house where Bruce Springsteen wrote “Born to Run;” it was only two blocks away.
Two other points. Several commenters object to my use of the term “arrested” since Dylan apparently was not slapped in irons. But when the police detain you and you are not free to leave, you are under arrest. The Supreme Court says so.
That said, Tom Maguire makes a fair point:
Finally, who says that the police are only responsible for possible criminal activity? Dylan may have been a confused old man who was having a mild stroke, or had slipped in the rain and hit his head, or was a hit-and-run victim – the non-criminal possibilities are endless.
But a brief conversation should have been able to ascertain that Dylan was not a danger to himself or others. Once that’s established, the police have done their jobs and should go. It really doesn’t matter whether he’s really Bob Dylan at that point.
It doesn’t sound to me like he was arrested. People who get arrested are taken to the local precinct, not to their hotel.
They might have suspected dementia, not knowing his work, wondering if the tour was mental.
The ID would presumably help them check Alzheimer’s check-lists.
(Sad that they didn’t know him though.)
I think people should be glad the police checked it out, it could have been a totally different situation. are you taking the offensive because hes a singer?? shouldn’t matter who you are. it could have been a person with dementia or something. its not like they harassed him, they were checking it out making sure everything was ok!!
They might have suspected dementia, not knowing his work, wondering if the tour was mental.
This is what I was thinking.
Once again though police didn’t initiate the confrontation-they responded to a call from a citizen.
At the very least he was “detained,” and there was no good reason for that detention. Hogwash.
Dementia? In New Jersey? They need to be hanging out at the State House in Trenton, they’ll find plenty of dementia there.
No excuse. None. And Lord knows I don’t say that because I have any sort of love for Bob Dylan.
One report, I read, said he was in an “projects” type area. So if he was reported, it was probably by a citizen concerned about the safety of a crazy old white dude wandering around where it might not be healthy to do so. As to asking for ID from someone who is wandering around in an area where it might not be safe, don’t you think its just prudent? If the cops had just let him wander around and something happened to him what would your reaction be? mpw
Apparently, getting a bit of exercise is frowned upon at the Jersey shore. Plus, nice way to treat the tourists there NJ. Call the cops if they try to do something that doesn’t cost money.
As for the verification of his identity, we don’t know the whole conversation. However, NJ has been very rabid in denying gun rights so perhaps they slipped through a few police state law as well such as the requirement to have and present your papers on demand.
Ain’t that America? Tell you to get some exercise , then they’ll stone ya when you’re walkin’ ‘long the street.!
Well I would not feel so all alone..
everybody must get stoned!
When he said “Dylan” they thought he was talking about Dylan Thomas… Whoever he was!
I guess the answer is “Blowin’ in the Wind” but… Don’t think twice, It’s alright!
If it has been Richie Havens he would have been taken to the station and probably tased for good measure.
He wasn’t arrested. If had been, there would be a bruise on his forehead from when he was helped into the back of the car.
The behavior of the police is everywhere the will of the people who hold power in the community. In dysfunctional democracies that may be some junta or oligarchy. But in a well-functioning democracy such as I assume this suburb to be, the behavior of the police represents the will of at least a majority of the voters.
I think it’s messed up that people get scrutinized just for looking like they would be inclined to forage in dumpsters for aluminum cans. But that’s pretty clearly what the locals pay the police to do there. Blame the voters, not the police who are carrying out their desires.
If we were all more vigilant in life, we would all call the police on those walking around our neighborhoods. I see strangers every day in mine. I even saw blacks here before, and we don’t have any that live here. 911 operators, get ready, cuz you are gonna be real busy soon. After all, just trying to be diligent.
I agree with Joyner on the Terry stop issue: In effect, cops have a blank check when confronting citizens on the street.
In this case, from reading other news reports, the responding officer did believe he might have been a head case who wandered out of one of the local hospitals. It was pouring rain, Dylan was dressed a tad unusually (two raincoats plus a hoodie, black sweatpants tucked into black rain boots), and he had apparently at one point wandered onto the lawn of the people who called it in. Plus, he said “I’m on tour with John Mellencamp and Willie Nelson.” Most likely explanation is some mental issue. They needed to check it out for his own safety. How would you have handled it (assuming you were 24 and had no idea who Dylan is)?
This is all because he’s black. 😉
This is the direction we are headed in. “You have the right to remain silent, and we suggest you use it”.
No problem Just Me, why don’t you give me your home address, and I will call the police and tell them I think you might be a drug dealer. Let’s see how that goes for you.
I’m with odograph, this sounds more think the police thought he was crazy old man who didn’t know where he was.
If it’s any conciliation, I’m sure those two officers will never be allowed to forget this. The rest of their careers with the force will filled with “Hey, remember that time you accidentally arrest Bob Dylan?”
Dito…..lol.
I personally found it appalling. At no point has anyone articulated any evidence that he was under suspicion for having committed a crime or was about to commit a crime, which is the standard for a proper Terry stop. (the only story I could find that said he was walking on anyone’s property was NOT the people who called it in, rather it was an empty house that was for sale) The fact that it was called in to the police by a bystander means nothing. Just because he looked like a confused old white guy in a latin neighborhood, doesn’t mean that we can just throw the constitution out the window “for his safety”.
The interesting question is what would have happened if he had refused to get in the police car or to identify himself. From what I understand, NJ does NOT have a stop-and-identify statute.
They didn’t arrest him.
Interesting, this isn’t the first time. LINK
No, PD, but he was certainly “detained,” which why I was talking about Terry and reasonable suspicion, rather than probable cause. The 4th and 5th Amendments still apply even if you’re not formally arrested.
They certainly took him into their custody which is one step shy of a true arrest I guess….
They didn’t search him.
They didn’t frisk him.
About nine levels of outrage to one level of information here.
They questioned and ordered a man to identify himself, and then detained him until they could verify his identity. He had committed no crime, and was walking down a street minding his own business. According to a single report, he had allegedly walked onto the lawn of an empty house that was posted for sale and looked in a window. That was the extent of his “wrongdoing.”
I was TOTALLY thinkin’ the same thing. It’s like, whut if GWB were in office and this happened????.
Anyhow, is there any record of which his voice that he was was using at the time of his incarceration?. I mean, was it early period Dylan?..cause that’s the only stuff I like.
j/k
Gawd……
In the “olden days” cops walked a “beat.” They knew the neighborhood and the people who lived there. They knew when something didn’t seem right. They investigated.
We’ve lost that.
I’m one of those guys…….there’s so many of us……who when asked our political affiliation say Economic: “conservative.” Social: “libertarian.”
But issues like this is where libertarian zeal loses the support of the masses. And that’s too bad, and distructively un-neccessary. I recently recounted a cops – Drew issue on this board. No need for a rehash. The punch line is: the cops behaved professionally and collaboratively. Drew behaved professionally and collaboratively. Nothing was “pure.” Biut the issue went away……. fast, because of the behavior of the principals.
Making this issue a cause celeb may fuel zealot fires. But its really nothing more than juvenile masturbation.
The world is not perfect. This imperfection does not merit further consideration.
I don’t know. I find it pretty depressing.
There was a time when we condescendingly used the term “your papers, please†to distinguish ourselves from Eastern Block countries and other authoritarian states.
Post-Hiibel, America has become a place where a harmless, 68-year-old man out on a stroll can be stopped, interrogated, detained, and forced to produce proof of identification to state authorities, despite having committed no crime.
Let’s remember that Dylan is a commie, Hollywood, east coast liberal, hippie.
The whole thing is likely a publicity stunt to generate interest in his sagging career.
Being an opportunist liberal, he saw how Skip Gates used the cops and the media to drum up book sales and thought he would do the same.
Look for a beer with B. Hussein as the next stop on his “tour.”
One of my college roommates worked his entire career as a police officer. The neighborhood in which I live is a popular one with police officers, particularly high-ranking ones. I’ve spoken with many, many police officers over the years at parties and other social gatherings.
Many police officers do not believe that their job is to enforce the law. They believe that their job is to preserve or even create order. Those are two very different things.
Laws are enforced selectively and only to the degree to which doing so preserves order, at least to the particular officer’s likes. That there may be no applicable law makes little difference.
I don’t know that all police officers think this way but I certainly believe that many do. I’m not quite sure how that could be changed.
It’s also no new phenomenon. It goes back for decades, maybe forever.
You know the only reason this is a buried story? Mr Bob Dylan did not swear and lash-out at a couple of Law Enforcement officers that did not know who he was, (some famous cultural icon and singer/songwriter).
In fact the Officers reported he was very cooperative and polite. You know, this is the flip-side of the Gates’ incident. And I think the only reason ANYTHING was said was because it shows how these situations are normally handled.
Yeah, great insight, Shoe–that’s just Public Administration 101. Lipsky made this point 25 years ago in Street Level Bureaucracy.
He was not arrested. A Terry stop is not an arrest (I’m not even sure this was a Terry stop).
He wasn’t searched for a weapon, so it’s not a Terry stop. He was 1)detained by the police, 2) not free to leave, and 3) escorted by police to another location. How was he not under arrest.
Alex, Alex, Alex, Alex,
This is your government keeping you safe, what’s the problem. They are just being tough on crime…proactive if you will. Sure he hasn’t committed a crime…yet. Its just a matter of time before this guy, whoever he is, goes completely off the rails, IMO.
I’m not positive, but I think he was stopped on 4th Street.
Heh, reminds me of a line in Paul Simon’s “A Simple Desultory Philippic”:
“He doesn’t dig poetry. He’s so unhip that/When you say Dylan, he thinks you’re talkin’ about Dylan Thomas,/Whoever he was.
The man ain’t got no culture”
James, the encounters between police and citizens range from voluntary exchanges to shootouts:
(1) consensual encounters;
(2) investigatory stops (including Terry stops);
(3) arrest or criminal detention
I don’t think there is any evidence in the slightest that it’s (3). It’s a question of (1) or (2).
An example of a consensual encounter would be where a cop stops to check a motorist parked alongside the road and asks the motorist for an accounting of himself and asks him to accompany the officer to a service station where he can call for assistance. That may be the case here, or the officers might have asked Dylan to get in the car or else. There is simply not enough information for the level of outrage here.
What is generally appalling to me is that these two police officer didn’t know who Bob Dylan was. How is that possible! Not recognizing him I understand, but they didn’t even know who he was! People with that lack of knowledge should not be entrusted with authority and guns.
The linked article confirms #3. Do you have another link that confirms #1 and #2?
If I can’t leave and go on about my business then it is effectively (3).
Given that the officers had people at the hotel “vouch” for Dylan I think it is safe that the most likely explanation is “or else”.
Steven D
You must be kidding. Just because someone didn’t know a Celebrity or politician doesn’t disqualify them from being a Officer, IMO just the opposite. The rich and famous should be treated the same way as us common folks.
From what little sketchy information we have Bob did break some minor laws including jaywalking and looking in windows could be considered a peeping tom incident. However Dylan and the Officers acted calmly and resolve the situation. It is hard to determine someone’s intent and mentality if they don’t cooperate and yell insults at you. Part of an Officers job is to protect the public not just to arrest someone after a crime is committed.
This type of incident can be avoided in the future with a drum machine and some fresh beats.
Right! This is why I’m in favor of pre-emptive law enforcement.
Well, Wayne, I did have my tongue a little in my cheek, but seriously, they haven’t heard of Bob Dylan? I know it’s New Jersey, but you’d think they’d have a little knowledge beyond the Boss and Bon Jovi. It’s probably a good thing Willie and Mellencamp weren’t with him or things might have gotten ugly.
Who is Bon Jovi? Seriously, famous people are often limited within in their time period and groups. Older generation saying who doesn’t know of Bob Dylan, President Reagan, etc strikes me like the younger generation saying who don’t know of the FOB, Pink, etc.
“Right! This is why I’m in favor of pre-emptive law enforcement.â€
Knowing you Steve, I’m sure you are being sarcastic. However I do believe in pre-emptive law enforcement. Patrols to deter crimes are a good thing in my book. Security checks at airports once again mostly a good thing. Checking out the a stumping girl who is being follow by two suspicious characters and about to enter a dark area, once again a good deal. Placing a Police Cruiser at a high danger intersection during rush hour to slow traffic down, etc, etc.
Steven
Thanks for clarifying your intent. It is hard to determine intent sometimes especially since some are seriously with their outrageous claims. Sometimes I think they are yanking my chain but then I meet some like them out in the real world.
The question is how far do you take it? Patrols are one thing, but rousting people who have yet to engage in criminal activity is quite another. For example, traffic stops looking for drunk drivers amazingly almost never find drunk drivers. They do catch people on parole violations and other crimes. I despise them because it really is a case of, “Your papers please.”
Let’s not underestimate how unclear a conversation with Bob Dylan might be–on his radio show, at least, he is often difficult to understand.
“The question is how far do you take it?â€
That is a hard one to answer and I agree it can be taken too far but also it isn’t taken far enough. I am afraid that too much PC stuff will harm the safety of people. We need to keep a reasonable balance and not go too much one way or the other.
Someone should ask Henry Louis Gates what he would have done in this situation :>) .
A better question is what would you (the collective you) have done in this situation…
I live in Long Branch, and trust me it is weird to see an old white man walking around in the area that he was in, not to mention in the rain with no umbrella.
The police simply asked him for ID, which is LEGAL. It was a field interview, not a Terry stop like someone else attempted to cite.
I love how people complain when police question someone saying he was doing nothing wrong. Basically these people want the police to stay inside until something DOES happen. Here is the kicker, these SAME people will be the first ones to complain that the police are not doing their jobs.
I forgot to mention, he was NOT arrested and he was NOT detained. He voluntarily spoke with the officers. He was not brought into custody, put in cuffs, put into the police vehicle, or even told a single thing. He was ASKED things.
I have seen Bob Dylan in action , he’s a very cleaver cat . Im sure he was in control of the sitation every second , he may be one of the most adept persons alive who can use situational jew-jitsu at will.