He obviously tried a pick up, but I don’t believe his actions constituted enough for an arrest or charge. Secret hand signals and foot tapping may be suspicious but they’re hardly illegal. The senator should have been arrested if he agreed to have public sex or exposed himself or agreed to have sex for money.
One thing that isn’t clear to me is was is there an allegation of soliciting prostitution here? Agreeing to have sex for money is illegal, but simply agreeing to have sex is not. The key here is whether the Senator planned to have sex in public (in the bathroom) or planned to pick a guy up and go to a hotel or other private place. That may be immoral, but it ain’t illegal.
Very clear points and I agree with you.
At one point in the recording, Craig says something to the effect of "I'm not going to argue this in court..." Remember, this arrest came after that Idaho newspaper confronted him with similar allegations and he denied them. Craig knew that if didn't minimize the case, it would lend credibility to all the nasty anecdotes the Statesman had in reserve but wouldn't use because of Craig's denials.
These busts in bathrooms have been going on for some time. I worked with an army officer years ago who had this happen to him. The vice people caught him with the same footsie moves known to those seeking sex in public bathrooms. This was in about 1989, so footsie signals are nothing new.
How could a cop justify an arrest based on such things? I assume they’d have to have an entire body of research on that behavior to prove that it is the common signal used to solicit sex in public. They would also have to have local ordinances making such things illegal. I assume all those were in place in Minnesota where Craig was picked up.
On the tapes, the thing that really got my attention was the arresting officer’s insistence that he’d seen Craig’s left hand with his wedding ring on it even though he was in a stall to the right of Craig. The officer was certain because he saw Craig’s ring. How could a man get his left hand under a stall? Only if he turned and stooped or knelt is all I can figure.
Of if it was an attempted drop of espionage material.
I believe he did meet the elements of an arrestable offense. He made contact with the undercover officer with his foot - which constitutes assault in most states if the contact is unwelcome. To do this, he had to have crossed under the stall partition, which constitutes something like an invasion of privacy violation, according to Idaho law. This would be disorderly conduct in Texas, an arrestable office if witnessed by a peace officer.