The Volokh Conspiracy

Senator Craig Arrested, Pleads Guilty in Airport Restroom Incident:
I don't really know how to blog a story like this, but the Roll Call story is here, the arrest report is here, and the docket sheet for State v. Craig is here. Craig's statement released today: "At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions. I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

  Notably, though, the court hearing was about two months after the arrest. If I read the docket sheet correctly, the arrest occurred on June 11 and the plea hearing was August 8. Two months seems like more than enough time to consult with an attorney, even for someone hoping to resolve such a matter quickly and expeditiously. (Note that the statement doesn't necessarily reject the possibility that Craig spoke with an attorney about the case before he pled guilty; "advice of counsel in resolving this matter" may be different from "advice of counsel about the matter before resolving it.")

  UPDATE: I kept comments open for a bit, but decided to close them.
Jacob Berlove (mail):
Anything's possible, but I wouldn't be surprised if Craig came into the bathroom, looked thru a stall initially to see if anyone was inside, and then, upon seeing that someone was inside, wanted to check just how bad the crack in the door was. If Craig has OCD, two minutes fidgeting around the stall is perfectly explainable, and of course someone who has decided that the crack in the stall is too wide would want to block the crack of his own stall. An officer looking for trouble no doubt would be real quick to interpet any tap arguably meant to solicit sex in that fashion, so it's quite possible that the taps were meaningless. From what I've seen and heard, America (and possibly Canada) is the only place in the world where there are these terrible cracks on the sides of doors to toilet stalls in any event. We should just adopt the system everywhere else in the world where the door offers real privacy, and live and let live. In all probability, Senator Craig, whose refusal (unlike the Senate's so-called moderate Republicans) to compromise on certain provisions of the Patriot act helped modify it somewhat, feels the same way.
8.27.2007 11:35pm
Christopher Cooke (mail):
No, he's just in the closet and repressed, so he gets his jollies this way. Sad and kind of pathetic.
8.27.2007 11:42pm
Glenn W. Bowen (mail):

Anything's possible,



According to the police reports, a man, later identified as Craig, kept watching the undercover police officer through a crack in the stall. Craig then entered the next-door stall and placed his luggage against the opening under the stall door.

“My experience has shown that individuals engaging in lewd conduct use their bags to block the view from the front of their stall,” said the officer, Sgt. Dave Karsnia, in the report.

“At 1216 hours, Craig tapped his right foot. I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct. Craig tapped his toes several times and moves his foot closer to my foot. I moved my foot up and down slowly. While this was occurring, the male in the stall to my right was still present. I could hear several unknown persons in the restroom that appeared to use the restroom for its intended use. The presence of others did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area,” the report states.

The report said Craig swiped his hand beneath the stall divider several times, and Karsnia showed his police identification under the stall.

“With my left hand near the floor, I pointed towards the exit,” the report said. “Craig responded, ‘No!’ I again pointed towards the exit. Craig exited the stall with his roller bags without flushing the toilet. ... Craig said he would not go. I told Craig that he was under arrest, he had to go, and that I didn’t want to make a scene. Craig then left the restroom.”

Craig was detained about 45 minutes and questioned by officers at the Airport Police Operations Center. At one point, the police report said, Craig handed the arresting officer a business card that identified him as a U.S. Senator and said “What do you think about that?”

Craig denied any lewd intentions and told police he has a “wide stance” in the bathroom and reached down to pick up a piece of paper from the floor.

“It should be noted that there was not a piece of paper on the bathroom floor, nor did Craig pick up a piece of paper,” Karsnia wrote in the report.

http://idahostatesman.com/eyepiece/story/143517.html


[Edited by OK to delete the use of bold for the quote]

nope.
8.27.2007 11:42pm
theobromophile (www):
Maybe it's the crazy libertarian in me, but I really don't like the idea of criminalising the following behaviour:
-fidgeting outside of a restroom door;
-bringing one's luggage into the stall with oneself;
-tapping one's foot;
-reaching down towards the floor.

Yes, this could be some secret handshake (footshake?) ritual for those who are soliciting sex, but it is so benign - and so far away from actually engaging in lewd behaviour in a bathroom - that the entire thing sounds absurd.

Let us not forget, the only evidence of this "sex solicitation" was from the officer. There is absolutely not other evidence that Sen. Craig was attempting to solicit sex in a public restroom. Of course, he wears his wedding ring on his right hand, so that's gotta mean something, right? /sarcasm
8.27.2007 11:50pm
Sebastian (mail) (www):
Anything's possible, but I wouldn't be surprised if Craig came into the bathroom, looked thru a stall initially to see if anyone was inside, and then, upon seeing that someone was inside, wanted to check just how bad the crack in the door was. If Craig has OCD, two minutes fidgeting around the stall is perfectly explainable, and of course someone who has decided that the crack in the stall is too wide would want to block the crack of his own stall.

What's surprising to me is that he just plead guilty. If he wasn't, in fact, trying to proposition for gay sex, then he should have fought the charge. I think he could have easily beaten anything they could have thrown at him. A police officers words against an ordinary joe would be no contest, but a police officers word against a senator? I'd be willing to try that in court if I were his attorney.

It's possible he could have miscalculated the the minor charge would go unnoticed, and that was preferable to a trial. But I'm inclined to believe the Senator is hiding something.
8.27.2007 11:53pm
Dave D. (mail):
[Deleted by OK. Dave D, I don't want you to hijack the thread with that discussion; it's not relevant to the story.]
8.27.2007 11:54pm
Jacob Berlove (mail):
I think the police report is consistent with my hypothesis, assuming the truth of Craig's "wide stance and "paper pickup" defense. The defense seems plausible to me.
8.27.2007 11:54pm
Gaius Marius:
Even if Senator Craig wasn't soliciting sex, the very fact that he would plead guilty to such a charge without consulting an attorney illustrates what a moron he is and that he is too stupid, even by the low intellectual standards for the U.S. Senate, to serve as a U.S. Senator for Idaho.
8.28.2007 12:01am
Jacob Berlove (mail):
[Deleted by Ok, as it was a response to Dave D above.]>
8.28.2007 12:01am
Townleybomb (mail) (www):
Jacob Berlove-- Does the fact that he's been reported for quite a while to have had a habit of public gay sex fit in with your hypothesis as well?

[Edited by OK, as part of it was a response to Dave D.]
8.28.2007 12:11am
Gonerill (mail) (www):
It has to be said that the "wide stance" thing is a nice touch. "I'm totally not gay, but I've got a wide stance, if you know what I mean."
8.28.2007 12:13am
Thomas_Holsinger:
I sooo love political sex scandals! The only downside here is that gay Democrats are so humorless these days. This one is plain MADE for guerrilla theater.

I'd park some leather boys outside Craig's D.C. office with some more guys with digital cameras, have the leather boys yell "Yoo-Hoo!" at people inside the office whenever the door opens, and put the whole thing on Youtube. If possible, do this for all of Craig's offices especially including those in Idaho (better chance of an entertaining reaction).

The real problem with Democrats having gone so lefty is that they've forgotten how to have fun.
8.28.2007 12:17am
Clayton E. Cramer (mail) (www):
From reading the various accounts of what happened, it is barely possible that Craig's actions were misconstrued--but why plead guilty? This would have been Senator Craig's word against some undercover police officer. I find it hard to believe, if this was just a matter of a "misunderstanding," that a jury would have trusted an undercover police officer's word against a member of the U.S. Senate who could have claimed, "Hey, I'm from Idaho. We don't do that kind of thing in airport restrooms where I'm from." (That's normally done in the restrooms in city parks in Boise.)

Craig needs to resign, right away, and let someone who is straight (or, at least has a bit better control over his sexual urges) fill out the remainder of his term. I don't think that this would be acceptable even in California for a statewide office; it sure isn't in Idaho.
8.28.2007 12:35am
Larry (no, really):
If Craig was traveling to/from Washington during a session of Congress, could he have successfully invoked his Article 1 Section 6 privilege against arrest?
8.28.2007 12:35am
Gonerill (mail) (www):
Craig needs to resign, right away, and let someone who is straight (or, at least has a bit better control over his sexual urges) fill out the remainder of his term

Clayton, Craig is obviously straight, as I am sure he would tell you himself. It's just that all these gay men keep sucking his cock .
8.28.2007 12:45am
Flash Gordon (mail):
Craig hasn't covered himself with honor on this but he's no Ted Kennedy either.
8.28.2007 12:46am
Gonerill (mail) (www):
You're saying Ted would have crashed his rolly bag into the toilet bowl first? Or afterward?
8.28.2007 12:50am
OrinKerr:
Folks, I'm going to close up comments here. There have been some good points made, but the discussion seems to want to veer off topic and I don't want it take the direction it seems to be taking. -Orin
8.28.2007 12:59am