New Haven Independent

Dial 777-7777 For … Epithets?

by Allan Appel | May 19, 2009 10:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (13)

Dave Britto called for a cab. A driver picked him up — then someone else from Metro Taxi left an irritated voice message laced with the N word.

Now police are investigating the incident.

Click here to listen to the message.

The incident occurred in the late afternoon on Sunday, May 3. Britto (at left in photo) called Metro Taxi from Whalley Pizza. He had locked himself and his wife out of their truck, while the truck was still running.

Leaving his wife to watch the truck, he called Metro Taxi to go home to retrieve the back-up keys. Five minutes after he called, a Metrocab cruised by.

“I asked,” said Britto, “if ‘you’re the one for Whalley Pizza,’ and he said yes. So I slid in.”

That was at 4:14, according to the company’s customer service log.

At 4:28, while he was riding to his West Haven home, Britto said, his phone vibrated. He picked up and retrieved this message: “Yo niggah … you call for a taxi and you have no decency to pick up a phone and cancel the job? Niggah.”

Britto’s lawyer, civil rights attorney Michael Jefferson (on the right in the photo) said that in the era of Obama, there should be zero tolerance for racist verbal assaults on people, even if the perpetrators are careless enough to leave them on a cell phone.

Britto and Jefferson played the recording for the Independent during an interview in Jefferson’s Dixwell Avenue law office.

It appears the cab Britto had gotten into had been nearby and was in fact not the one that was sent in response to the call. When the dispatched car arrived, Britto was gone with the first Metro taxi. There was no fare for the second.

Britto doesn’t know who left the message. The original dispatcher he talked to he described as female. The voice of the epithet-spewing caller appeared to be male.

Whoever made the call, it upset Britto.

“I felt it was disrespectful, demeaning, very degrading,” said Britto. “And he used the word twice.”

“That tells me,” said Jefferson, “that there was an intent here to hurt, to cause injury.”

According to Britto, the West Haven police (Metro Taxi is headquartered in West Haven) said they’d get back to him Tuesday with a report.

“I feel clearly that this could rise to the level of a hate crime,” Jefferson said.

He cited section 53-A/181, subsections j, k, and l of the state penal code, as possible legal bases to prosecute. “There is certainly intimidation here based on bigotry or bias.”

“There just should be zero tolerance for this kind of thing,” Jefferson said. “We’ve gone through too much for someone to feel comfortable saying this. Racism today is generally subtle. If people feel this way, they should shut up, but not be allowed to convey it on the phone. And say it twice.”

As a past chairman of the state’s African-American Affairs Commission, Jefferson said a year ago he fielded complaints from African-American drivers, some from Metro Taxi, complaining of conditions that made them feel “indentured.” That is, they felt unable to move ahead in the industry given the relationship between drivers and fleet owners.

That eventually led to an announced statewide review of the industry by the General Assembly’s Program Review and Investigations Committee.

That situation, said Jefferson, is entirely separate from the Britto incident, which appears to be an instance of individual racial animus.

Still Jefferson held out the possibility that there may be some liability for the company as well, when the facts come out.

Reached by telephone, Metro Taxi President William Scalzi said he can’t speak to who would have made that call. “We have checked our recordings for that day, gone through them all. I listened to the person who took the call, and it was all OK.”

Having said that, he added, if such an incident occurred and “if it was one of our drivers, even though the drivers are not employees but independent contractors, then that driver would not meet the criteria to be driving a car for Metro Taxi. We would not continue a contractural relationship with a driver who would say anything like that.”

Scalzi went on to say if the call was made by an employee, that person would be terminated.

Scalzi added that there was much at this point that he did not understand about the allegation, based on a reporter’s summary. “First of all, we sent only one cab. Second, the technology we’ve installed is such that it’s highly unlikely any driver would have access to the customer’s phone number.”

He said if a driver comes to a location and the caller/customer is not there, the driver presses a button on his screen and the computer dials the number without the driver becoming aware of it.

While the mystery remains to be worked out by the West Haven police, Scalzi said his company would wait and take whatever action the police directed. “In the absence of that, we wait.”

A call placed to number from which the call to Britto originated led to this taped response: “At the customer’s request, this number does not accept incoming calls.”

“Any decent person should be outraged by this behavior,” Jefferson said, “and the person, when found, fired.”

West Haven Police’s Sgt. Garcia said on Friday that the investigation is ongoing and incomplete.

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: nfjanette | May 19, 2009 11:11 AM

This is wonderful news. Why? Because if this is the amount of insult that it takes to cause the hiring of a civil rights attorney and press coverage, we have truly progressed from previous generations of authentic racism directed toward Americans "of color" (including many different groups).

Now, here's my question: if this incident is the litmus test for a civil rights action, how are the many young adults in my area that commonly refer to people with lighter skin as "crackers", and that called each other "nigga" in almost every sentence going to handle being dragged to court on these charges?

What happened was rude and bizarre. It does not seem, however, to be a civil rights matter.

Posted by: Get Real | May 19, 2009 11:49 AM

How does the lawyer proceed when the caller turns out to be a black man? Get over it. Remember sticks and stones will break your bones, but names will never hit you.

Posted by: Alphonse Credenza | May 19, 2009 12:15 PM

What if the caller himself is black?

Posted by: jackie | May 19, 2009 12:21 PM

Ditto on NFJanette.

Out of curiosity, is there an assumption that the caller who used the word 'nigga[h]' is white or non-black? I couldn't listen to the recording.

What if it turned out he wasn't? Would every "what up nigga?" [overheard repeatedly] then become cause for civil rights action?

Discuss.

Posted by: Ms. Smith | May 19, 2009 12:55 PM

I truly hope that the Independent will follow this to it's conclusion, so we can see who called in. I think it's a set up. And by the way, just what are the damages? Don't you have to have damages in order to file suit?

Posted by: norton street | May 19, 2009 1:31 PM

uggg. you all know theres a difference between two friends talking to each other and a stranger leaving a message on your phone, the same language can be used but it is perceived entirely different. youre being purposefully incompetent.

a group of lifelong friends casually saying "whats up, n-word" is no where near the same as a stranger leaving a message on your phone using that word.

just like how so many college girls call their group of friends "b----hes" is completely different from me calling your grandmother one.

just because some people are comfortable saying it, absolutely does not mean the man in the article has to be okay with it. so ridiculous. what is clear, is that the man feels awful because someone used a horribly offensive word against him, so hes trying to figure out who did this and hopefully get some money out of his distress (this shouldnt be about money, but dont kid yourself, this is america, home of the greed). and if it turns out the caller is black, then im sure some of mr. britto's feeling bad for himself will shift to feeling bad for the caller for being so ignorant and for being the type of person that is used by internet bloggers to make sweeping statements about entire races.

also, i know the article uses the word in a quote but the doesnt mean everyone who posts afterward has to as well. general rule of thumb, if you wouldnt say it in person, dont say it over the internet behind your protective little box.

Posted by: jackie | May 19, 2009 1:39 PM

well, dont forget this one:

http://blogs.bet.com/news/newsyoushouldknow/tag/quinnipiac-university/

Posted by: nfjanette | May 19, 2009 2:46 PM

[some text deleted]

You call several people "purposefully incompetent" and then wag your finger at name calling, all while posting with a pseudonym as a signature? I don't think that has much credibility.

I was raised to believe the word "nigger" was absolutely forbidden speech - foul and offensive language forbidden by my "lily white" Irish mother of blessed memory and by my father of Italian/"Rebel Southern"/Cherokee ancestry. Despite that, I have spent a lifetime being exposed to the common usage of such words (including the disparaging ones directed toward "whites" I previously mentioned) by many in the "black community". I understand your point about language being evaluated contextually, but only agree in part.

I genuinely feel bad for Mr. Britto - no one should experience such hatred. I don't want to be called a "kike" as a Jew, and don't want my gay and lesbian friends to be called "fags" and "dykes" - even though they may use that language within their social circles. But I have a hard time understanding how this is a civil rights matter involving law enforcement.

Posted by: Edward_H | May 19, 2009 2:56 PM

As there was no warning of offensive language in the article I plan on suing the NHI for violating my civil rights and making me feel uncomfortable.

Posted by: East Rocker | May 19, 2009 3:18 PM

I have two questions:

1) How did the caller know that Mr. Britto was black? Do we know for sure that the caller does not use the n-word in reference to everyone, regardless of race?

2) Regarding the legal action being contemplated here, I'm just assuming they are talking about filing criminal charges, not a civil (monetary) suit. Thoughts?

Posted by: bebe1222 | May 19, 2009 9:10 PM

i agree with everyone. the caller's use of the n word ended with"ah" which according to many young people that i talk to is differernt from ending the n word with "er". i'm sure his caller id on his cell phone or even voicemail was able to pick up the number where the call originated from as proven by the fact that the lawyer and him called it back. a trace can be put on the number so i suggest hold off on the lawsuit if the call didnt come from metro taxi. also, fyi when you call a number and you get the message "this number doesn't accept incoming calls" its usually a payphone. this was done years ago by the phone co. to deter drug deals in the era of beepers.

Dial 777-7777 For … Epithets?

Comments

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed