|
Stings and Plea Bargains
Idaho Sen. Larry Craig resigned Saturday over a men’s room sex sting, bowing to pressure from fellow Republicans worried about a scandal dimming their election prospects.
[…]
Craig’s resignation completed a stunning downfall that began Monday with the disclosure that he pleaded guilty to a reduced charge following his arrest during a sex sting in a Minneapolis airport men’s room.
Sen. Craig resigns over sex sting
That’s ok. He is a hypocrite who several times voted against gay people’s interest. There are too many such hypocrites around. The Republicans only pushed him out to lessen the damage to themselves and only because they are sure that the Republican governeur of Idaho will send them an adequate partisan replacement.
But aside from the politics, the case let me think about the differences between the U.S. and old Europe, i.e. Germany. Again they are bigger than I first thought. This in the social sphere as well as in the legal realm.
The mayor of Hamburg (rightwing) is openly gay as is the mayor of Berlin (leftwing). At political-social gatherings the leader of the German liberal democrats is usually accompanied by his same sex partner. Exept for a few hillbillies and some catholic bishops (hypocrites themselves), nobody cares about it.
More generally, talk about sexcapades of politicians is frowned upon. Over some beer journalists will tell you all the juicy stories, but they don’t print them. Using one’s political opponent private sexual doings to smear him/her, usually ends with a backlash. (People here were disgusted by the Clinton affair. Not about the sucking or the cigar – who cares, but how such private stuff could be pulled into open court.)
U.S. conservatives often proclaim their ‘christian nation’. Luke 6:41 says: "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye? …"
What is Craig supposed to be guilty of? Looking for contact with a consenting adult? An attempt to abet someone for sex?
On the legal side the sting operation is strange to me. Such tricks are forbidden here because they are so easy to abuse. What can be abused, will be abused. Legally they are seen as "seducement to a punishable act" and are crimal acts themselves.
A plea bargaining is, if I understand this correct, a deal in which a defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge and the prosecutor in return drops more serious charges. This is not possible in the German system. A charge is a charge and can not simply be dropped or exchanged for another one.
Deals can be done over a voluntary confession in exchange for a lesser penalty or probation. But they don’t change the accusation. Any deal needs to be done in front of a judge and the defendant must have a (public) lawyer. The reason is again possible abuse.
In the U.S. 90 percent of all cases are settled by plea bargaining.
How many who struck such deals were not guilty? How many prosecutors routinely charge higher crimes just to induce pleas for lower ones thereby juicing up the statistics that show them being ‘tough on crime’?
How many plead guilty to a lesser charge to avoid the chance of being judged guilty for a bigger crime they might not have committed at all? (Plea bargaining can be a real ‘prisoner’s dilemma’ for the defendant.)
The Craig case was a he said/he said situation that any good lawyer would have slashed down in front of a court. Craig was dumb not to use that chance. But it was also unfair to offer a plea to him without demanding him to consult a lawyer first.
Per capita the U.S. has the highest rate of prisoners in the world. Maybe people in the U.S. are simply more criminal than elsewhere. Then again, the public pressure for ‘successful’ policemen and prosecutors, ‘successful’ measured by numbers of ‘guilty’ pleas, may give them the wrong incentive. Sting operations and plea bargains may give them the wrong instruments.
Only a few countries use stings and only few have, much more restricted, plea bargains at all. Some argue pleas are needed as it would be too costly to give everybody a trial. But good and fair prosecution and trials may even be cheaper than to build more and more prisons.
Senator Craig leaves for the wrong reason. He is a hypocrite and should leave in shame because he hurt gay people. He should not leave for being gay and because of abusive tools in the hand of the police and prosecutors.
I strongly suspect that the secret permanent government has the goods on EVERYBODY at the level of congressman or governor (and up) — and business Poo-Bahs, too. After all, one needs a responsive government, doesn’t one? (I suppose Gannon’s nightly visits to the White House were only meant to plumb Bush’s level of responsiveness, which, when found slightly wanting, were “piqued” by letting the cat out of the uncredentialed journalistic bag.)
Besides, control on this “private” level allows the rest of our society to function more efficiently, with greater visible openness — a lesson the Communists never completely grasped. (Just more evidence that the Washington Consensus/Davos gang really do understand the meaning of progress.)
Why this particular incident on this particular person, this Senator, at this time, I don’t know; many interpretations are possible.
At one point, many moons ago, when I lived in New York City, I became friends with a neighbor across the hall in one apartment building I lived in — a very cute young transsexual who was paying her way through sexual reassignment surgery by taking part in the high-end sex trade (ply-to-pay, not pay-to-ply ;-). I remember going to a party one evening at her flat, filled with all her friends in a similar place in life. Late at night, when everyone else had gone, the discussion turned to who had slept with who lately — literally the names of many of the most powerful people in the world (including one or two one would still recognize from the Middle East) were dropping right and left — and what they were into, whether they were “icky” or not, and how much they tipped. I will not name names here, but I must admit it was very eye-opening, and jaw-dropping.
None of this is so surprising considering that, in our capitalistic society, even in the relatively well-to-do USA of thirty years ago, a very significant percentage of our attractive young population engages in the sex trade to either pay for an education, or otherwise pay for what they want, or need. And here I am only referring to those who engage in the trade voluntarily. Many more are forced involuntarily. (There were many neighborhoods of Manhattan where it was hard to sleep on a summer evening because of the continual sounds of the street girls fighting with their pimps.) And we are all well aware of the unctious Nicholas Krystoff spending NYTimes account money to buy a few Nepalese girls out of sex slavery, caused by a society torn asunder from structural adjustment — the really important relationship he neglected to report about.
Of course the sex trade, like most of our society, is completely segregated by class. That is what is most surprising about Craig’s entrapment: Senator “Wide-stance” was simply in the wrong “class” of stalls altogether.
But then, capitalism always claims its victims from all walks of life — it is, to a greater extent than most of us realize, an equal opportunity corrupter and destroyer.
It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that in our repressed Calvinistic society, for the ruling class, sex is just another commodity, another “need” to be satisfied through shopping. That such “needs” would involve long-term comparison shopping should not be surprising either — it can be hard to make a decision on a “big-ticket” item, if you know what I mean; the bigger the “ticket,” the more one must try things out before cumming to a decision. That fear is often an inducement to out-of-control risk-taking shopping sprees can only be underscored and validated by Bush’s timely appearance reminding us all to shop and engage in fantasy (Disney World) in the aftermath of 9/11. And one doesn’t need a psychologist like Justin Frank, author of “Bush on the Couch,” to realize that the more one projects power and violence in one’s professional life the more one seeks a reciprocal balance in one’s private life. Just the laws of nature; and we all know that nature can be quite kinky when it wants to.
Now, I don’t care what anyone does in their private life, either. I think it is healthy at a certain age to try things out and explore your sexuality, and I am certainly glad that I came of age before AIDS. But I am currently reading a book by Brazilian theologian Leonardo Boff about St. Francis, where he decries the lack of TRUE Eros in this world (no wonder he was disciplined with a year of silence!)– and I certainly agree with him on that. (In this sense, Eros can also be defined as the longing for wholeness or completeness, and is used to describe fulfillment between man/woman and man/Gods.)
I do agree with b that entrapment of any sort is a facist tactic, not “law enforcement.” And I do agree with our esteemed comrade, r’giap, that the Law is just a very particular form of Cultural Hegemony. When a rich person falls from grace, we are encouraged by our media (emotional mediator is perhaps a better term) to empathize with that person’s plight, as in a Greek tragedy. In the case of the poor, we are plied with programs like Fox’s “COPS” — a complete sexual orgy of Calvinistic denigration of our “defective” underclass, barely human creatures who are best wiped of the face of the earth for our safety.
Well, be that as it may, that’s the “Law,” but where’s the justice?
Posted by: Malooga | Sep 2 2007 2:32 utc | 8
|
