I hope that everyone is nice to Billy today!

yeah...i don't quite buy the wide stance defense. at all. there's a specific thing that you do to solicit gay sex in the bathroom. it's been the routine for years. and, senator craig did it.

he just needs to come clean already...and then stop voting for anti-queer legislation.

8:48,

Maybe not perjury, because Alford pleas are generally acceptable. I don't believe that's what happened here, but he can claim that the government had enough evidence to convict him while still maintaining his innocence. Alternatively, and perhaps what Craig is saying now, is that he didn't know what he was saying, so his plea was not voluntary.

8:48.
No its not perjury. Criminal defendants are allowed to enter a plea for convenience because it is in there best interest to resolve the case. Besides, at least in my prior state court prosecution experience, perjury is such a pain in the ass to prove up. I only remember it being used once in a murder case where a juror who ended up on the panel lied about having no criminal convictions and then the jury ended up hanging and we had to try it again. We were pissed and figured that was a healthy outlet for our aggression. It also made us feel less bad about not catching it up front.

*taps Billy's shoe under the stall door*

here's another "take" on the craig matter by anonymous lawyer:

http://anonymouslawyer.blogspot.com/2007/08/i-was-in-restroom-today-and-i-saw.html

8:48 - A guilty plea alone, as noted by 9:08, is not perjury. Normally, those who plead guilty are not required to testify under oath, but instead to allocute, in which they make unsworn statements in open court. Because the statements are unsworn, they do not expose the declarant to liability for perjury.

*pulls ink cartridge and end cap off white Bic pen*

*tears off a corner of sheet of paper and inserts into mouth*

*raises Bic pen tube to mouth and blows now-perfectly-soggy paper wad through pen tube and directly into Billy's ear*

9:25 and 9:08 must be talking about state court. In fed. court, a defendant pleading guilty is required to be sworn prior to allocution, and is warned that making false statements is a crime. I'm not aware of anyone having been prosecuted for perjury for falsely pleading guilty, but it would pretty clearly constitute perjury to do so.

*cruises Billy Merck*

8:57, 9:09 and 9:50 = Billy Merck

Okay . . . now, I think Craig is a total weirdo . . . But I'm a little concerned that this push from the GOP that he resign from a leadership positions comes with a heavy dose of homophobia in tow. Anyone else have that concern? I really think the GOP is less concerned about the guilty plea than they are about the fact that there might be a gay man (gasp!) in their mix. Senator Craig, HRC Man of the Year? Anyone?!? Anyone?!?

homophobic republicans? NO WAI

Here is his actual guilty plea (which he did not make in person).

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/08/28/craig.guilty.plea.080807.pdf

I'll let you legal scholars make your own conclusions.

I don't think its homophobic to think that a man in a leadership position should not be soliciting anonymous sex in a public bathroom. It would be just as creepy if he had been in the ladies room doing the same thing..

Merck to 300 (lbs)!

Agreed, 10:33.

Besides, no one will cry political homophobia this time, because the victim is a guy who secretly cruised guys in bathrooms and publicly voted to amend the constitution to ban gay marraige. I dougt the gay community has found its spokesman.

I am ordinarily as happy as the next Democrat see another Republican get embarrassed, particularly on so-called "family values" (my favorite was the recent Allen incident, which blows this one out of the water) but seriously, even assuming that Sen. Craig was cruising for booty, since when is it a crime to engage in a course of conduct that says "I want to do you" to the recipient in a private, one-on-one communication? More suggestive conduct occurs at junior high school dances. It's not like Craig started ripping his (or the officer's) clothes off.

The peering into the stall, if true, is a whole different story. But, as the complaint alleges, there were multiple other people present in the restroom... which, to me, makes it rather hard to believe that a Minnesota senator would stand in the middle of a men's room -- in Minneapolis -- for two minutes, with other men around, on a Monday at noon, unrecognized, and peering into a closed stall. My guess is that he tried to wait for a stall to open up and briefly looked through the crack to see if he could determine whether a person was using the stall.

Under the circumstances, I can't say I blame Craig for trying to sweep this under the rug, paying the fine, and avoiding public discussion. Not handled in the smartest way possible, but he had to have known what his GOP colleagues would do to him once he came under the blue tint.

Okay, I just realized the distinguished gentleman is from Idaho, not Minnesota, so he may not have been immediately recognized. Even then, I don't buy the thought of even a Joe Blow standing in the middle of an MSP restroom at noon on Monday with other people around and peeping into a stall for two minutes.

"If you plead guilty before a judge in a court of law, and then say that you did not, in fact, do what you pled guilty to, are you not admitting to perjury?"

ANS: No, not unless the defendant is sworn during the plea proceeding which they are not in my jurisdicton, CA.

But it is typical in misdomeanor plea cases to 1. have the defendant stipulate to a factual basis to the plea--and belive me there s one here bssed on the police report, the perv was peaping into the cops stall for 2-3 minutes, not just tapping his foot--and 2. have the defendant sign and initial an advisement of rights, waiver and plea form, which cuts the legs out of a later attempt to set the plea aside.

Read the police report (easily found through goggle). The guy clearly sought sek in the toilet, peeped at the cop, and ws acting really wierd.

I have never waived at the guy "next door" under the stall partition--let alone three times--have you? The perv here did.

1102, he's an idaho senator, so i doubt he feared being recognized in minnesota.

I have no sympathy for Craig. He was caught, had the opportunity to fight it in court, but decided to strike a plea bargain.

He could have pled nolo, or even an Alford plea, which would be a whole different ballgame.

He could also have negotiated a plea involving pre-trial diversion - adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, accellerated rehabilitative disposition, probation before judgment, whatever the hell it's called in Minnesota. That would have guaranteed he could have petitioned to have his record expunged after completing whatever unsupervised probation the court put him on.

Instead he pled guilty to the disorderly conduct charge, so he basically admitted that by peeping into the stall and tapping his foot/running his hand under the stall, etc., he acted in a disorderly manner.

End of story.

I think what everyone is missing is that not only did he engage in lewd conduct, but he also tried to use his position as a US Senator for personal benefit. "What do you think of that?"

Oh, and by the way, in response to 11:02 -

The point is not that he tried to cruise for man sex, but that he did so in public. I'm gay, so the fact that he was cruising for gay sex doesn't bother me - but I sure don't want some idiot touching my foot when I'm trying to take a dump just because he wants me.

Sex should be done in private. I have no patience for people who think it's cool to cruise in public (or have sex in public). With things like the internets and such, there's no reason to be soliciting in public.

Oh, and btw, there is a whole ritual of covert communications that goes on with guys trying to cruise for sex in toilets. Google "tea room gay" and research it. This isn't anything new.

Ok, what exactly did he allegedly do? There's been some vague references to "tapping" toes, but what does that mean?

Was this at a urinal stall, or were Craig and the cop in separate toilet stalls (i.e., wherre you'd make #2)?

If so, how the heck was he able to "tap" the cop's foot? The "wide stance" explanation proffered seems ludicrous if these are the facts.

Dear 11:27:

Read the police report:

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/ssi/craig_police_report_082807.pdf

The perv spent 2-3 minutes peeping into the stall of an undercover cover cop while figetinng with his hands at his waste.

The perv then got into the stall next to the cop, started taping his right foot. When the cop started moving his left foot up and down, the perv stuck his foot under the partition on the cop's side and touched the cops foot with his.

The perv then stuck his left hand--wedding ring visible--under the partition palm up, and waived it from the front of the stall to the back near the seated cop. The perv did this three times.

Only then was the perv busted.

The perv first tried to get out of it by playing the "Iam a Senator card", then made up an excuse about having a wide poop stance and picking up a paper from the floor. But as the police report notes, there was no paper on the floor in the pervs hand ant ahy time.

GUILTY*GUILTY*GUILTY

And no, the Republican leadership has not thrown Craig under the bus due to homophobia, but to protect the party vis a’ vis the upcoming elections.

Its hard to cliam to be the family values party with Senators like this.

Dear 11:27:

Read the police report:

The perv spent 2-3 minutes peeping into the stall of an undercover cover cop while figetinng with his hands at his waste.

The perv then got into the stall next to the cop, started taping his right foot. When the cop started moving his left foot up and down, the perv stuck his foot under the partition on the cop's side and touched the cops foot with his.

The perv then stuck his left hand--wedding ring visible--under the partition palm up, and waived it from the front of the stall to the back near the seated cop. The perv did this three times.

Only then was the perv busted.

The perv first tried to get out of it by playing the "Iam a Senator card", then made up an excuse about having a wide poop stance and picking up a paper from the floor. But as the police report notes, there was no paper on the floor in the pervs hand ant ahy time.

GUILTY*GUILTY*GUILTY

And no, the Republican leadership has not thrown Craig under the bus due to homophobia, but to protect the party vis a’ vis the upcoming elections.

This is ridiculous. None of these accusations are bad. None of them.

Merck is worse than... I don't know what. At least your qualifications for the job likely have a lot in common with Larry Craig. I wonder how you met Lat?

Are any of you MUCh more careful about what you do in the bathroom stalls now. I know I am.

My wife claims she has stuck her hand under the partition to ask for toilet paper. She claims this is "common." Should I be concerned?

12:22: First real attempt at a Merck-slam in this, the most appropriate thread for it, and it is weak as hell. Nice job.

Dragging Lat into the Merck-hate really falls outside the genre of proper Merck-bashing, and your poorly constructed "insult" requires too much effort to parse. Do better or don't bother.

12:54,

If she's not letting you watch, yes.

12:54,

If she can't spare a square, then yes. What a bitch!

Does this mean Elaine is lesbian then?

"None of these accusations are bad. None of them." (?!!!!)

I don't know what planet you are from, but in Idaho (and most of the rest of the country) seeking sex in a public toilet, peeping at a guy trying to take a dump, geting busted, then trying to get out of the bust with his "I am a US Senator" routine, then pleading guilty in a long typewritten signed form attesting that he/she is pleading guilty ONLY because he/she IS guilty, and adknowledging that THE GUILTY PLEA WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED if he/she is innocent, is:

1. Tawdry low class behavior unbecoming of a US Senator;

2. Evidence of serious psychological problems;

3. Evidence of criminality;

4. Not exactly consistent with Republican Right Wing Family Values.

5. Evidence that Craig has lied for years about accusations he has cruised toilets for sex.

THAT IS WHY ROMNEY, THREE SENATORS, AND THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP THREW CRAIG UNDER THE BUS YESTERDAY.

Presumably he could not be charged and convicted of perjury based on his plea unless the prosecution could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was actually innocent of the charge to which he pled. That would be a weird trial.

methinks the good Senator doth protest too much:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20467347/

Audio of Craig arrest reveals new details

Spokesman denies three-term Idaho
lawmaker preparing to quit

WASHINGTON - Sen. Larry Craig denied soliciting an undercover police officer shortly after being arrested for alleged lewd conduct in a bathroom at a Minneapolis airport, an audio recording of the arrest revealed.

Craig said on the recording, released Thursday by the Minneapolis Police Department, that he may have touched the officer's foot with his foot while they were in stalls. "You said our feet bumped; I believe they did," Craig said, adding that he was scooting over. "Next thing I knew, underneath the bathroom divider comes a card that says 'Police.'"

The Republican senator from Idaho also said he placed his hand underneath the stall to pick up a paper, not to solicit the officer.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

'I'm not gay," Craig said. "I don't seek activity in bathrooms."

The officer said he was disappointed in the senator.

"You are sitting here lying to a police officer," the officer responded. "People vote for you. Unbelievable."

"THAT IS WHY ROMNEY, THREE SENATORS, AND THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP THREW CRAIG UNDER THE BUS YESTERDAY."

Wow. Well, I stand corrected. These folks and their actions are certainly FABULOUS indicators of moral impairment. Senator Craig should be sent to the lynch mob and everyone should totally overreact. If Mitt Romney isn't a fan . . . well, then!

I don't think wiggling your foot in a bathroom -- EVEN IF IT IS TO SOLICIT SEX -- is a big deal. Don't wiggle back if you're not interested.

Freaking red necks.

I'm just really pissed that this Craig thing AND Gonzales' resignation happened while the Daily Show is on hiatus for two weeks. I swear AG timed it on purpose.