Roll Call reports: Craig Arrested, Pleads Guilty Following Incident in Airport Restroom
Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in June at a Minnesota airport by a plainclothes police officer investigating lewd conduct complaints in a men’s public restroom, according to an arrest report obtained by Roll Call Monday afternoon.Craig’s arrest occurred just after noon on June 11 at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. On Aug. 8, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct in the Hennepin County District Court. He paid more than $500 in fines and fees, and a 10-day jail sentence was stayed. He also was given one year of probation with the court that began on Aug. 8.
The story has the details of the allegations. The short version is that it appears that Craig was seeking a sexual encounter in a Minneapolis men’s room.
The key issue here is that he pled guilty. If this was all a misunderstanding, as Craig has alleged, then one would think one would have pled not guilty. Who in the right mind would plead guilty to disorderly conduct simply because they accidentally bumped feet with someone? Indeed, Craig’s statement makes little sense (source: story linked below):
“I was not involved in any inappropriate conduct. 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.”
What, is he asserting that he is smart enough to be a Senator, but not smart enough to know how to plead?
The Idaho Statesman has a lengthy piece which details a series of long-term allegations about Craig’s sexuality and behavior: Men’s room arrest reopens questions about Sen. Larry Craig.
The whole thing strikes me as, among other things, quite sad and pathetic. The evidence suggests a life plagued by an internal struggle over identity that lead to actions such as the one that got him arrested in Minneapolis.
Marc Ambinder has a run-down of some of the political implications.
Sphere: Related Content
Pleading guilty when you’re not is perjury.
In almost every jurisdiction the defendant is required, under oath, to state that he is pleading guilty because he is fact guilty and is required to described with particularity the nature of his crime
Comment by KipEsquire — Tuesday, August 28, 2024 @ 8:59 am
He pled guilty to “disorderly conduct.” It’s easy enough to say “sure, I may have been disorderly, and what’s $50″ (or whatever the fine was, especially compared to fighting it at trial — just try getting a lawyer for $50).
Reading the officer’s account of things ( http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/08/gop_senator_larry_craig_arrested_for_lewd_conduct.html ), I have to say (1) my gut feeling is that he was guilty, and (2) my other gut feeling is that the case would have been thrown out had it gone to trial (”I put my bag down by the door and tapped my foot? That’s all you got? How is that disorderly?”).
But, hey, what’s the fun of taking on “gay causes” if you don’t get to smear the other side for being gay? (Directed at the hypocritical Democratic Party, not our gracious host). I mean, why isn’t Hillary out in front saying that Senator Craig needs our understanding and support?
Comment by Max Lybbert — Tuesday, August 28, 2024 @ 9:11 am
Kip: Interesting point.
Max: I suppose I just can’t see pleading guilty to anything, especially if I were a Senator, if, indeed, all I did was tap my foot and put my bag down. My sense of righteous indignation at being arrested for going to the bathroom would make it impossible for me to simply plead guilty. As such, the guilty plea speaks volumes to me.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Tuesday, August 28, 2024 @ 9:29 am
On the way to work, I heard on the radio that he’s paid over $500 in fines. So it’s not the kind of punishment I originally though of based on the charge.
I don’t know what the standard of proof is. I can’t say if it’s “beyond reasonable doubt,” or something less. But, yes, my gut reaction is that there is probably something there. OTOH, I don’t think it would stick in a legal case. But then he’d be in the news for fighting the accusation. It’s a lose-lose. I think his plan was to keep things quiet, which almost worked.
Comment by Max Lybbert — Tuesday, August 28, 2024 @ 11:45 am
What happened with Sen. Craig is indicative of what happens when people who really aren’t religious pretend to be, just to conjure up votes from groups that wouldn’t otherwise vote for them. That’s why the public shouldn’t buy into the “my faith is a true part of me” trickery from certain presidential candidates whose views otherwise show their disdain for religion and largely the Christian faith.
Comment by CJ Madden — Wednesday, August 29, 2024 @ 4:11 pm
Craig says he’s not gay. Sure, with his wife by his side, he’s bi. But this is typical cruising for perverted gay sex.
Comment by N Waff — Wednesday, August 29, 2024 @ 6:17 pm
I appreciate the logical tone of this article. So, if Craig wasn’t guilty, why did he plead guilty? Two reasons come to mind. One, he didn’t trust the judicial system, Two, he simply didn’t want this type of exposure. I think the latter is most likely. Still, giving him the benefit of the doubt, as Kip stated, saying you are guilty when you are not is purjery. So even if he is innocent regarding the incident, he is openly not innocent on this fact.
Would he would have got this thrown out of court if he confronted it (pled not guilty)? If he did, it would likely only be because he had access and funds for the best legal defense. And…if he did, I suppose all others that have been caught in Minneapolis and other cities would use his success to fight their own legal battles. The fact is, what worked to catch others caught him.
I think his behavior as observed by the police was very unlikely to be a coincidence and an accidental mis-interpretation. That he denies doing so is most heartbreaking to Idahoans like myself - we care most about truth, not (even being a Republican state) personal preferences.
Comment by Dianne — Wednesday, August 29, 2024 @ 10:40 pm
So why would you plead guilty if you were in fact not? Was he told to and if so by who? He didn’t seek any legal advice, stange..
But who knows its seems to me more and more everyone loves a scandal.
Maybe he was set up? I trust nobody but my close friends, family and cat!
Comment by Angela — Friday, August 31, 2024 @ 9:14 pm