Ditkaless Wonders, I've given your post a lot of thought, in part because I always respect your posts, and also because as a prosecuter (former? current?) you carry an authority on this issue that is important. You raise several fascinating points, and even though we have all been over this issue ad nauseum, I think they're worth replying to:
1. You state that Gates broke the law when he refused to give the officer his ID. But to date, Gates has always denied this refusal. According to him, he gave the officer his ID, and then starting berating the officer AFTER the fact. This is a discrepency which has not been resolved, and it never can be resolved to anyone's satisfaction because there are no witnesses except Crowley and Gates (this occurred inside the house.)
Gates initially refused to give his ID to Crowley. You say that is up for debate, I'll give you that point. However, what Gates ultimately produced was his Harvard ID which while having a picture and name did not have an address. This ID did little to help the cop identify that Gates was the owner of the home. At that point Crowley called the Harvard Police and they came to the seen and identified Gates as the owner of the home. At this point Crowley decides to leave.
4. Finally, I think you're correct that if Gates had simply cooperated, none of this would have been necessary. But I have to keep stressing that Gates and many other African-Americans view the police as the enemy who cannot be trusted. This does not excuse Gates' behavior, but it should clarify matters a little bit to white people who shake their heads in wonder as to why a Harvard professor would be so uncooperative.