Posted on 08/31/2007 12:02:25 AM PDT by davidosborne
Craig obviously knew what he was doing from how he interacted with the officer during the recording.
If he wasn’t there trolling for gay toilet sex then he would have said “what the hell are you talking about? Why are you harassing me?”
Instead he tried to give alternate explanations for what most people would consider arbitrary actions like only someone who knew their significance could.
However, given the arbitrary nature of the actions in question, I cannot see how they could by themselves constitute a crime. The officer jumped the gun on the bust. He needed to take it far enough to get a verbal solicitation. He didn’t, and that is what leaves open some reasonable doubt.
I think if he was really NOT guilty.. I would think that he would have cooperated with the officer.... Thanked him for his service PROFUSELY...... and politely tell him that he had made a mistake.... HOWEVER his argumentative attitude has guilt written all over it....IMHO I have arrested folks that... after further analysis/questioning... I truley did not believe were GUILTY... but the “probable cause” was there at the time and most are VERY coopertive with the process, and understand that I am just doing my job.... An interview with an INNOCENT person does not usually “go down” Iexcuse the pun...) like this, form my personal experience....... a CHARGE, or being QUESTIONED about a POSSIBLE CHARGE... is a far cry from conviction.. a plea of GUILTY IS A CONVICTION.. HANDS DOWN... or should I say.. HANDS “under the stall” !!..
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.
CRAIG = PERVERT
Scares the crap out of me that this sort of evidence could be used to arrest a person and ruin their lives.
Just think what you could do with some sort of scenario where police said how you looked right and left walking down the street constituted solicitation or something.. and arrested you. Its insane.
C’mon....do you honestly think a politician would agree to take a misdeameanor charge that would require 100’s of days of community service if he hadn’t done anything?
That’s insane.
Craig new they had him.
That is the level of things these days. It will get worse, as we get more and more “tabloid” and move away from the big ticket issues.
Craig blew this one.
BTTT
I’m listening to it now as we type
Hillary breathing our air is a big deal.
Absolutely! Any time there is something potentially terror related; related to democrap shenanigans; any damn thing that might be important, some crap like this comes up. The Republicans, as usual, will fumble the ball, the MSM 'craps will run with it, and the important stuff will disappear.
As a law enforcement officer I can tell you that MOST innocent people are NOT scared of the police...... attitude is a HUGE key indicator when questioning folks about their actions/intended actions...
Larry...if you’ve touched another man’s genitals and the phrase “turn your head and cough” isn’t part of the conversation...you’re gay
I listened to this one, and watched the interrogation a couple times yesterday on the news. I don’t find anything really incriminating. It appears the case comes down to the cop’s word against the accused. The officer even changed his story once during the interrogation (left hand, right hand).
This officer’s sole job is busting homosexuals in public restrooms. If he wants to be promoted he must prove he’s on the job and that means keeping his arrest and conviction numbers up. Would that be an incentive to fabricate? Most LEOS are honest on the job. Others become caught up in the us vs them mentality.
As an aside - now that I know that having the toe of your shoe slide under the stall partition is a signal for homosexual sex I will have to watch it. It has happened occasionally when my right knee locks up.
I think I understand what you are saying but I don’t think you have anything to fear. Specific instructions are usually written on bathroom walls by homosexuals. For example, “put hand in back pocket”, “tap foot” and the officer would be looking for these signs. You can usually tell if someone is just doing the signs incidentally and the ones who are doing it for an explicit purpose.
A regional manager where I used to work had his hand in his back pocket outside the bathrooms and this perv we called, “redbeard” was all checking him out. I wasn’t going to tell him that was the current homosexual bathroom signal. I had to get somewhere quickly where I could bust a gut laughing and not get fired.
As a law enforcement officer I can tell you that MOST innocent people are NOT scared of the police......
I’m glad you qualified the statement with “most”.
I was interrogated one time in my life as a suspect - by Army CID back in 1968. A soldier had a radio stolen, and as I was in the area at the time I was a suspect. Yes, I was there -walking to the shower wearing nothing but a towel. I would be a bit difficult to hide the old style boom box under it.
I was ordered to report for interrogation at their office. The officers’ demeanor was extremely hostile, I believe it’s called “taking control of the interview”. I was ordered to remove my prescription sunglasses so they could watch my eyes. Unable to focus clearly without them I was asked why I didn’t look them in the eye when I talked! As carefully and as inoffensively as possibly I explained they were prescription and I needed them to see clearly. They continued to repeatedly inform me of the penalty for both larceny and lying to an officer.
Was I scared of them before I left? Darn right!
I think the "I plead guilty Your Honor" is the conclusive "incriminating" part.
If he reached his hand under the next stall,(which he seems to admit) I think he was cruising.
I can assure you that MOST interrogations do not happen like that... I guess your experience with a couple of over zealous CID agents in 1968 has given you the wrong impression about how MOST cops do their job..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.