[dmz]

I like how Craig’s water carriers like to mention only the toe tapping and not the hand under the partition into the stall where the cop was.

C’mon folks.

How many men on this forum, ever, even once in their lives have
a) stared so intently at a guy in a stall that he knew the color of your eyes, and
b) played footsie with the guy in the next stall by accident, and
c) placed your hand in a stall known to be occupied (by virtue of the earlier footsie incident), not once or twice but 3 times, and
d) pled guilty to a disorderly conduct charge for these same events.

In a court of law, sure, we can go with the presumption of innocence. But while we’re all here shooting the breeze around the virtual water cooler, does this not strain credibility to the max?

Comments? Confessions?

[Balt]

I like how Craig’s water carriers like to mention only the toe tapping and not the hand under the partition into the stall where the cop was.

A good point, but part of my point was: How do we know there was a hand under the partition? Because the cop says so? That's not good enough for me.

[theDentist]

I can perhaps understand someone tapping his foot a few times, idly thinking to himself, “I need more salads for lunch”. I can even understand how someone’s foot *might* bump into the next guy’s foot (if he were hovering over the toilet, not wanting to sit), but beyond that, his story just swirls round the bowl.

[gundog]

"...does this not strain credibility to the max?

Isn't it credulity that gets strained?

[Eva]

Look, the toe tapping and hand under the partition are still not enough to prove anything. I am not defending the man, I just think that he was stupid to admit to anything. It’s not a crime to be gay, and they actually have no proof of any illegal behavior.

[dooltotheend]

You’re right on.