A copy of Senator Craig's police interview is available here
. After reading this, I am not exactly sure what to make of this case. Could I see someone dropping a piece of paper and having their foot briefly move up to the side of the stall divider? Sure. I guess that I would want to have something a lot more definitive about someone than that. This seems like awfully weak evidence. The thing that worries me the most is that I had no clue that this type of action could get you arrested. I could just imagine myself wiggling around in a stall sometime and accidentally creating this "signal." Is it possible that Craig knew what he was doing and it happened exactly as the officer describes with the intent that the officer attributes to the events? Sure. But while I am inclined to believe the police officer, I would like something more here as evidence. Apparently the officer knew Craig was a Senator before this interview took place and that could introduce all sorts of biases.
The biggest problem that I have is that sexual relations in a restroom should be punished. I don't think that simple foot tapping or even having one's shoe briefly touch another person's shoe should be a criminal offense.
UPDATE: After reading the transcript again, especially the beginning, I have become more convinced that Craig did something wrong. What convinces me of that is Craig's claim that the officer had tried to entrap him. At the very least that implies that Craig positively responded to some advance by the officer. Possibly Craig simply mispoke, but it would have been better if he had simply said that the police offiicer was inaccurate, which is what he says later on in the discussion.