There are a number of problems with Senator Larry Craig’s story even if you believe what he admitted to in the police interview and other Larry Craig statements.
- Craig admitted to touching the foot of the cop in the next stall with his foot. I’m my years of going to the men’s room I’ve never come close to touching the foot of the guy in the next stall. That just doesn’t happen accidentally.
- Craig says he has a wide stance. But if his pants were down around his ankles then his wide stance is limited to the width of his pants.
- If Craigs legs were spread so wide that he was touching the foot of the cop in the next stall then he wouldn’t have been able to lower his pants.
- If I were in a stall I wouldn’t want the guy in the next stall reaching under the divider to pick up a piece of toilet paper on my side.
- Craig admitted he wears his wedding ring on his left hand. The cop was in the stall to his right. So if he were picking up toilet paper off the floor in the cop’s stall with his left hand, he would have had to get down on his hands and knees to reach it. The idea of getting down on your hands and knees to reach under the stall divider to get a piece of toilet paper off the floor in another stall is creepy.
- Craig raised the issue of entrapment indicating that he might have been doing the act he was being entrapped by.
- When Craig pleaded guilty he swore under oath that he was guilty. If he is not guilty then he lied under oath in front of a judge. That’s the same thing that he accused Clinton of when he voted to impeach him.
- When Craig said that “it is my intent to resign” he knew at the time he said that that he was lying to the public.
Then according to the police report Craig was peering at the cop through the crack in the door trying to make eye contact. Craig didn’t reach for toilet paper on the floor but had his palm up and touching the bottom of the divider. The cop indicated that he established foot tapping communication with Craig and that they exchanged pickup signals that gay men use to signal they want sex.
Even though the standard of criminal conviction is “beyond a reasonable doubt”, if Craig’s story is impossible and it’s clear he’s lying then that undermines reasonable doubt. So a jury conclued Craig is lying and the officer is truthful the Craig goes to jail.