I would assume everyone reading this posting knows who Idaho Senator Larry Craig is and the attention his plea agreement regarding a bathroom encounter with a airport police officer and Senator Craig’s behavior that apparently ensued.
I’m not going to focus so much on the Senator’s actions as I am the generic issue of when is a case completed. Later this week, I’ll discuss what I have observed as an unusual trend of negativism in public perception of police actions when they apply proactive policing techniques that are successful.
In Senator Craig’s situation. He struck a plea agreement with Hennipen County prosecutors that essentially said he was guilty. In exchange they negotiated a lower charge.
Plea bargaining has been a hot topic of discussion for the last 30 years. Many feel the process takes away the right of the accused to stand before a judge or a jury of his/her peers. Ironically, most people don’t realize that in many situations state laws do not provide for a jury trial, only to be heard by a judge. Without plea bargaining, our court system as is currently is staffed, would not be able to handle the overwhelming caseload of hearing every single case; but that is another posting opportunity.
If you listen to the interview of Senator Craig, he is provided his rights. One would assume a U.S. Senator would understand those rights better than most. He had an opportunity to consult with an attorney. He had time to work out the plea agreement. So why now is he trying to get it reversed? I suppose Senator Craig has to answer that one.
Suffice to say, it’s probably because something he thought would stay buried in an unremarkable court record in a Midwestern community would have little bearing on his standing in the Senate or to his constituents back home in Idaho. Ironically, it might have worked had Senator Craig not been so quick to inform the police officer of his “official” title as a senator.
So now, the discussion relegated to the local section of today’s Strib, becomes that of why does Senator Craig think he gets a “time out” to reverse the hands of time to renege on his plea agreement?
Perhaps what Senator Craig should have considered is to petition a court to have the matter expunged from his record or have the files sealed. Both practices have been around for quite some time. The process allows a person to try to convince a judge that a person’s actions were not representative of their normal behavior, a lapse in judgement if you will, and is a bar to their ability to obtain a job or hold office.
Senator Craig could always petition the governor to see if he could be pardoned: another long-standing process to expunge a court decision.
I’ll be interested in watching how the process Senator Craig uses to get his plea agreement reversed. Ironically, if he is successful, he will still have to stand trial and the reason plea agreements are usually accepted is the person involved is making the assumption that his odds with a plea agreement are better than what he will receive as the outcome of a trial.