Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Specter: "Larry Craig Should Fight Bathroom Arrest"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:34 PM
Original message
Specter: "Larry Craig Should Fight Bathroom Arrest"
Sunday, September 02, 2007
Specter: Larry Craig Should Fight Bathroom Arrest
By Rob on September 2, 2007 at 08:32 pm
6 Comments View blog reactions


I’m inclined to agree, but not for the reasons Senator Specter puts forth.

Sept. 2 (Bloomberg)—Senator Arlen Specter said Idaho Republican Larry Craig should try to withdraw his guilty plea to disorderly conduct in connection with an incident in an airport men’s room and fight the case.

``I think he could be vindicated,’’ Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on the ``Fox News Sunday’’ program.

Specter, of Pennsylvania, said that Craig ``hasn’t resigned’’ from the Senate, only that he ``intends to resign’’ as of Sept. 30. That gives Craig a month to fight the case in court, Specter said. If the case went to trial, Specter said Craig ``wouldn’t be convicted of anything.’’

I don’t think Craig should fight his conviction so that he can remain in the Senate. It’s pretty obvious that he went into that bathroom looking for sex, and that means he was being unfaithful to his wife. Both of those things are conduct unbecoming a US Senator, and because of that he should resign.

But he should fight the conviction in order to challenge Minnesota’s current laws which allow someone to be arrested ostensibly for engaging in lewd conduct in public before they ever actually did anything lewd. As I’ve said over and over again since this scandal broke, Senator Craig may be guilty of looking for homosexual love in a bathroom and cheating on his wife, but he didn’t do anything worthy of arrest.

“Conspiring to do something lewd in public,” which is essentially what Craig did though he eventually plead guilty to a vaguely-written “disorderly conduct” catch-all law, just isn’t a crime in my book.

Certainly the state of Minnesota’s tax dollars (along with the tax dollars of a lot of other places) could be better spent on something other than undercover vice cops lurking in bathroom stalls.


more at.........
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/specter_larry_craig_should_fight_bathroom_arrest/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. what the hell is Specter uo to here? I don't think he gives a rats ass about Craig.
whats his real motivation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Specter's A Lawyer And Rather Good One
I think he should take Craig's case...

That's a Democrat's dream come true...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. i know he's a lawyer and he had some high profile cases but this doesn't sound right.
i suspect Arlen is up to something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Sometimes A Cigar Is Just A Cigar
And I'm not so convinced he could get Craig off...

They dropped the "interferance with privacy" charge... If it becomes a swearing match I'll put my money on the undercover cop...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. Arlen, are you proposing the "Single Stall Theory" as a defense?
Edited on Tue Sep-04-07 06:44 PM by mitchum
edit: the kitten was walking on my keyboard
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
partylessinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
6. Is Specter hiding something that may come out and he is setting the
stage with Craig. Craig said he had the intent to resign. Let him go!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
7. Sending a message to other Republicans soon to be outed. He doesn't want mass resignations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I Hope It Takes More Than Orientation To Get Shitcanned
But the GOPU base is pretty homophobic...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Dems wouldn't have to lift a finger.
They can just say how unfortunate it all is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
never_get_over_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
10. I don't know what Specter is up to
and I really don't give a crap about Craig - but I have been wondering about this since it happened. What exactly was illegal about what Craig did - he tapped his foot, he waved his hand - even if that is a homosexual "proposition" when the hell did it become illegal to proposition someone - he didn't offer to pay for it - no sex went on in the bathroom - really all I've read or heard is he waved his hand under the stall, tapped his feet and touched the other guy's foot maybe

Jesus if everyone who ever propositioned anyone gay or straight got arrested police would be pretty darn busy - think it is a COMPLETE waste of police resources

I think Craig could have won in court easy - not so sure now....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. It Became Illegal When Craig Peeked Through A Crack In A Closed Bathroom Stall For Two
Minutes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
never_get_over_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. OK
still think he could have avoided all this if he got a lawyer up front - and still think its a MASSIVE waste of police resources BUT on the KARMIC level it might just be big bad bitchin payback to Mr gay basing homophobe freak Craig....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. I'm Not Convinced He's Acquitted...
Most district attorney's office have ninety percent plus conviction rates...It becomes a swearing match between him a cop and there is no benign explanation for peeking into an occupied stall for two minutes...The cop could identify the color of Craig's eyes for pete's sake...

The cops were there in response to citizen complaints...I suspect more folks were creeped about having guys looking at them on the can than two guys getting busy in another stall...I know the former trips me out a lot more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
never_get_over_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. I'm a woman
and until this case broke I never heard anything about foot tapping, hand waving eye peering - privacy interfering in public restrooms. All I'm saying is IF this is a form of homosexual propositioning which I guess from what I hear now it is and its purpose is to identify someone who might be interested - or to identify someone who isn't interested and move on - as the person being propositioned wouldn't you just say something like EXCUSE me I'm in this stall would you quit it - or just say HEY cut it out or EXCUSE ME - or do you mind I'm in here or something and it would end there. I just don't see the need for police for something so STUPID as eye peering, foot tapping and hand waving.... and I do think a good lawyer when this first happened could have made this go away..... a well trained observant cop could identify Craig's eye color in seconds whether or not he stared into the stall....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. The Second He Peeked Through A Crack In A Bathroom Stall He Violated The Law
You don't have a right to go into a public restroom, peek through a crack in a closed bathroom stall to see if someone is or isn't interested in sex...

It's not incumbent on the person on the crapper to tell him to stop...His privacy has already been pierced...

It's no different than peeking through a crack in your neighbor's drapes , even for a second, while they are having sex...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Well, peeking through the crack was supposed to be
Edited on Tue Sep-04-07 07:23 PM by lizzy
interfering with privacy charge. Which was dropped. So in fact Craig plead guilty to foot tapping and hand gesturing, which apparently is disorderly conduct. Who knew you can't tap your feet when in the bathroom. I sure didn't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. That's not how the legal system works
If it were going to go to court, it would be under the original charges, including interfering with privacy. He's clearly guilty.

Pleading to a lesser charge is the entire point of offering lesser charges, to send someone a message at minimal cost to the justice system.

I'm sure most people making these wild defenses of Craig know that the charges would be much more serious if he were being tried in court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. How can you say "he is clearly guilty" without a trial?
If it went on trial, cop would say he was peeking, he would say he was checking for occupancy. The jury then would decide if he was guilty or not.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Maybe Because He Plead Guilty
Why do I believe the cop?

Because the principle of "cui bono" is at work ...Craig had every incentive to lie... The cop had no incentive...It was just another bust...

If you check for occupancy you look through the bottom of the stall and not peek through a crack in the stall door for two minutes...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. He plead guilty to disorderly conduct, not to interference with
privacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. He Plead Guilty To The Lesser Charge To Avoid A Trial On The More Serious Charge
In the unlikely event the state withdrew his guilty plea the D A would resurrect the more serious "interferance with privacy" aka Peeping Tom charge...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. I get to do that, since I'm not on his jury
and never will be. That First Amendment and all. I can look at evidence and come to a logical conclusion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Don't Let The Facts Get In The Way Of A Good Argument
He plead guilty to the lesser charge to avoid trial...

The disorderly conduct charges emanates from Craig rubbing his foot against the undercover cop's foot and sticking his hand on the undercover cop's side of the stall...

Oh, and I am sure the district attorney would resurrect the "interference with privacy" charge if it went to court...

If you don't want to get arrested in a public restroom don't peek into an occupied stall through a crack in a bathroom stall, don't rub your foot against the man or woman in the next stall, and don't put your hand on the other occupant's side of the divider...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
14. I'd kick in $10 to his legal defense fund just for the entertainmet value. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Olney Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-04-07 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
18. I think this is just a song and dance to tamp down the accusation that
the GOP threw Larry off the bus too quickly. It's only to appear "compassionate" and to plant seeds of doubt about Larry's guilty plea.

Political theater, that's all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC