I would say what a GREAT job the officer was doing in aggressively pursing sexual preditors, and thank him for his public service. I would then say that I understand how my actions could have been interpreted as such, however the officer simply misinterpreted them, and that his desire to protect the public is very much appreciated.. I would then state that I would be happy to have the officer present his case to a jury who I am certain would agree that my actions in the bathroom were just simply misinterpreted by the officer... and then I would make a public offer to pay for the arresting officer to attend a "refresher class" on sexual preditors so that he could be more effective at his job....
HOWEVER, on the other hand IF I WAS GUILTY.. I would plead guilty and HOPE the public believes me when I say "I LIED to the judge when I plead guilty..." which is VERY unlikely..
But you haven’t done anything to prove your innocence. Your wife, your children, your relatives, and the community in which you live will now know that you’ve been charged with an act of indecency that bears upon the essence of your character. The fact that you might escape the charge on a technical detail doesn’t prove your innocence in their eyes, and doubt will always exist; your name and reputation will remain inextricably married to the idea that you went out soliciting gay sex in a public restroom.
You might be willing and able to tolerate that situation. Many people wouldn’t, and would opt for what they considered the lesser of two evils. My point is that it gives the authorities immense power over the citizenry; not that it makes Senator Craig any less worthy of condemnation. Although I think it’s plain to see that he’s going to receive that condemnation, whether he’s worthy of it or not—and that reinforces my point.
The officer claims he saw Craig do a lot more than the hand thing (like peeping through the stall door while he was "waiting" for the next stall to free up). If the officer is being the least bit truthful it is a slam dunk and Craig on tape is just trying to negotiate down to the least charge, and no publicity.
Possibility 2 is that the officer is entrapping people and happened to hook a big one (a related possibility is that this was an elaborate conspiracy to bring down Craig). If it were that possibility, and Craig was truly innocent, there's no way he would have protested the minutia of whether his hand was down picking up paper or not.
An innocent man would have no idea what the officer was talking about and would not be negotiating to save his public hide by copping to a private plea.
Occam's razor points to this particular bathroom being a gay sex spot, most likely due to the public complaining about it (or the police could have simply read about it online). Occam's razor does not tell us whether Craig stumbled into a trap or went there willingly, but his reaction, basically prevaricating and negotiating, tells us either he was guilty or the elaborate sting had him tongue tied and up against the wall.