Interesting....Just what are the specifics of the charges that Senator Craig faces???

Question

I just had an interesting conversation with my woman and she argued a very good case of abuse of powers by law enforcement. As much as I loathe such behavior, at the point of his arrest, what law was actually broken. If a guy signaled to a woman that he was enterested, with no intent to exchange any currency...could he too have been arrested?!?!...and on what charge??? Only if the now former Senator, actually engaged in sexual activity in the stall, which didn't happen..what is he going to be charged for???....Hitting on a guy!?
This is something that needs to be looked at....
What do you think....and lets keep the emotions out...ok!?

Answer 1

Craig pled guilty to disorderly conduct. This is the Minnesota statute:

609.72 DISORDERLY CONDUCT Subdivision 1. Crime.
Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place, including on a school bus, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor:

(1) Engages in brawling or fighting; or
(2) Disturbs an assembly or meeting, not unlawful in its character; or
(3) Engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive, obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.

A person does not violate this section if the person's disorderly conduct was caused by an epileptic seizure.

Apparently it is subsection (3) above that he violated. The officer stated that based on his experience with this type of behavior, Craig's actions were consistent with solicitations for sex.

Personally, I think it's a stretch to apply this statute. The point is, Craig was stupid enough not to hire an attorney who probably could have successfully defended him against the charges without too much difficulty. By pleading guilty, he left himself no out.

Answer 2

Indeed it is an arm of the total enslavement of our society. This is just a deception on the part of government and the media, it is desperately trying to shift focus on real issues that should be brought to light. Even though I feel this charge was bogus I do think this maggot needs out of politics, he was charged about 15 years ago for the same behavior. Being married and going out trolling for men in a lewd way is disgusting way to fill the gaps in your life. A statesmen he is not.

Answer 3

There may be some anti-homosexual attitudes built in, but the fact is the homosexual community has a real problem with this sort of thing. At rest stops, at bus stops, at airports - all are places where gay men meet and have sex, and you or your small kids can walk in on them. Nobody cares anymore what they do at home or in their own club, but at least try to have some class in public places!!!

Answer 4

He pleaded guilty and then recanted. That was his first mistake. Now his credibility is at stake. Any man that goes into a bathroom and acts strange and then is questioned by the police in a taped interview...

It's hopeless. Even the best spin doctors in the world couldn't help this guy.

Answer 5

Morality aside, (separation of church and state), what law did he break? I think, and I am 100 % liberal, that this whole thing is just stupid. Go after some real crooks and let the politicians have their little sexual quirks.

Answer 6

The thing is that his case is resolved; he pled guilty to something. (not disturbing the peace, but something as mild) He tried to keep it quiet but somehow that backfired and it is his currect predicament.

Answer 7

Solicitation of sex in a public place is a crime in most states.

Answer 8

Ummmmm.what he did was illegal. Sex was solicited. End of story.