|
Print this page |
| |
|
Close this window |
"It was the Family Theater, in the 1300 block of Market, where the police used to ensnare people, homosexuals, on morals charges, and they then were shaken down by the magistrates," Specter said yesterday.
What happened in the theater case was not clear-cut, Specter said, and it might not be in Craig's case either. Craig pleaded guilty last month to disorderly conduct after an undercover police officer had said he was acting suspiciously in a restroom at the Minneapolis airport in June.
Specter said there was an important issue at stake. "The rule of law ought to apply to him like anyone else, no better, no worse. I have a very strong sense of fairness."
Going out on a limb for Craig is the latest example of Specter's career-long habit of assuming what others might call a contrarian role, especially when legal principles are involved.
"He dances to his own tunes," said pollster G. Terry Madonna of Franklin & Marshall College. "It's very hard to put pressure on him; he has this maverick streak that is part of his psyche and his politics."
When news surfaced late last month about Craig's arrest, Republican leaders saw him as a political pariah and wanted him gone - fast. But on Sept. 1, the night before the Idaho conservative was to announce his intent to resign, Specter called Craig and urged him to withdraw the guilty plea and fight.
He said a reading of Minnesota's rules of criminal procedure convinced him that Craig had grounds to take back the plea because it was not "intelligently given."
Specter did not accuse Minnesota authorities of misconduct, but he said that, based on an audiotape released by police - he believed the case against Craig was weak.
Craig apparently listened to Specter's legal advice.
On Monday, lawyers filed a motion in Minneapolis to withdraw Craig's guilty plea on grounds he made it under "intense anxiety." A hearing was set for Sept. 26 - four days before Craig had said he planned to resign from the Senate.
The advice and Specter's subsequent defense of Craig on national television were both vintage Specter.
"I believe Larry Craig's rights are more important than avoiding an embarrassing political issue," Specter said yesterday, adding that no one in the Republican cloakroom has chastised him for his stand. "People know me well enough to know I'm going to express an independent view."
Indeed, Specter played a key role in defeating the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Robert Bork in 1987, outraging conservatives. Four years later, liberals didn't like Specter's cross-examination of Anita Hill, who had accused Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment.
Anger over that episode nearly cost Specter reelection in 1992, when he faced Lynn Yeakel.
Then in 1999, there was Specter's much-mocked invocation of Scottish common law when he cast a "not proven" verdict in the Senate impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton. The other senators said "guilty" or "not guilty."
Five years ago, Specter came to the defense of Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi, who was forced to give up his post as Republican leader after making remarks at a birthday party for Sen. Strom Thurmond (R., S.C.) that seemed to approve of Thurmond's 1948 segregationist campaign for president.
Lott's comment "was an inadvertent slip, and his apology should end the discussion," Specter said at the time.
Two days after surviving a conservative challenger in the 2004 Republican primary, Specter warned President Bush not to try to appoint judges who wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade. Angry conservative activists unsuccessfully tried to block Specter's impending appointment as chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
One of his allies in that battle: Larry Craig.
Specter first publicly defended Craig on Sept. 2 on Fox News Sunday. Later, Craig said he would not resign if he were vindicated in court. His term expires in January 2009.
Specter's role in Craig's turnabout came to light when the Idaho senator left a voice mail - apparently intended for his lawyer - at a wrong number. The recording was leaked to the Roll Call newspaper.
"Arlen Specter is now willing to come out in my defense, arguing that it appears by all that he knows that I've been railroaded," Craig said on the tape. "Having all of that, we've reshaped my statement a little bit to say it is my 'intent' to resign on Sept. 30."
Minnesota law allows a guilty plea to be withdrawn on grounds of "manifest injustice," saying that a plea must be voluntary and "intelligently given."
"What Sen. Craig did was by no means intelligent," Specter said on CNN. "He was very badly confused when he responded."
Fred L. Morrison, interim dean of the University of Minnesota Law School, said a motion to withdraw a guilty plea is "rarely granted." If done, it's mostly in cases where a judge's sentence exceeds the punishment specified in a plea agreement - or when there was clear coercion.
"The fact that there were six weeks between the incident and the time he signed the plea agreement makes that quite unlikely," Morrison said. "He may have been agitated, but he clearly thought about it a long time" before signing.