Posted by The Crux | Yesterday, a Minnesota judge denied Sen. Larry Craig's motion to withdraw his guilty
plea (to a misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct), stemming from Craig's June arrest in a sex-sting at an airport bathroom (CNN). In August, Craig said that he planned to resign from the Senate at the end of September if he couldn't clear up his legal troubles.
Yesterday, Craig said: "I am extremely disappointed with the ruling issued today.... I will continue to serve Idaho in the United States Senate." Craig is up for re-election in 2008, not that he would actually get re-elected (or even try).
Other legal issues may be heading Craig's way....
According to The Hill, the defense attorney of government contractor Brent Wilkes (who's about to face trial for allegedly bribing congressman-turned-inmate Duke Cunningham) said that he might issue a subpoena to Craig and 14 other federal lawmakers. Craig is linked to both Wilkes and Cunningham, so it's anyone's guess what would come out in Craig's testimony if he were subpoenaed. (BN-Politics) Some have speculated that it would be easier for Craig to avoid a subpoena if he's a sitting senator.
Craig claimed that his guilty plea in August was a mistake: that he hadn't engaged in bad conduct and that he pleaded guilty without legal advice our of fear that the allegations would become public if he consulted a lawyer. The judge found that the "pressure was entirely perceived by the defendant and was not a result of any action by the police...."
Criminal law is not my area of expertise, but I did hear the post-arrest tape of Craig's conversation with the arresting officer, and I too perceived "pressure." It did sound as though the officer was sending this basic message: This'll stay out of the papers as long as you plead guilty -- and quickly. Why such a rush, I couldn't figure out when I first heard the tape.
Perhaps my memory fails me, though. You can check out the audio here (about 9 minutes).
seriously... did he really think it wouldn't make the news? he had to know better than that! he's a frickin' senator! they are always in the spotlight!
Posted by: Kendra | October 05, 2007 at 09:04 AM
seriously... did he really think it wouldn't make the news? he had to know better than that! he's a frickin' senator! they are always in the spotlight!
Posted by: Kendra | October 05, 2007 at 09:04 AM
He mailed in the guilty plea two months after the arrest. This was long enough to come to the realization that no promise, express or implied, by the officer could prevent public records from becoming, well... public.
Posted by: Charles | October 06, 2007 at 03:58 PM
Charles,
You make a good point. I hadn't thought about that.
Posted by: The Crux | October 07, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Charles,
You make a good point. I hadn't thought about that.
Posted by: The Crux | October 07, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Charles,
You make a good point. I hadn't thought about that.
Posted by: The Crux | October 07, 2007 at 12:50 AM