E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe jury in the criminal trial of former presidential candidate John Edwards reconvenes for a second day of deliberations. NBC's Lisa Myers reports from Greensboro, N.C.
ANALYSIS: As the jurors in the federal criminal trial of John Edwards begin their second day of deliberations on Monday, we don't know whether the outcome of their work will be a conviction, an acquittal or a mistrial. But based on trial observation and the attorneys' closing arguments, the keys that might motivate any of the three most likely outcomes are surprising:
If Edwards is convicted
If John Edwards goes to prison, credit could go to two unexpected sources: Cheri Young (the wife of former Edwards' political aide Andrew Young) and the quintessentially "old school" evidence of handwritten notes.
As I wrote at the end of week one, there can be little doubt that Andrew Young's credibility as a witness was in tatters by the end of defense questioning. Yet for all the success Edwards attorney Abbe Lowell had turning Young into the apparent culprit, Young's wife, Cheri, masterfully turned the tables — and the trial's attention — back on the defendant. By the end of her testimony it seemed that the hundreds of thousands of dollars the Youngs kept rather than pass along to Edwards' mistress, Rielle Hunter, was a pittance, and that no amount of money could make up for what the former Democratic senator put Cheri Young and her family through. Without her star turn, it is hard to imagine the government's case getting back on track after Andrew Young's evisceration on cross-examination.
The other key for the government if prosecutors prevail could be two handwritten notes, one each from the two funders of the Edwards-Hunter sex affair cover-up.
- Full trial coverage on msnbc.com
- Full transcripts of closing arguments (.pdf)
- Analysis by Hampton Dellinger
In April 2007, heiress Rachel "Bunny" Mellon wrote to Andrew Young on the occasion of news reports on John Edwards infamous $400 haircut: "(F)rom now on, all haircuts, etc., that are necessary and important for his campaign — please send the bills to me," she wrote. "….It is a way to help our friend (John Edwards) without government restrictions."
 Hampton Dellinger, a litigation partner with Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson of Charlotte and Chapel Hill, N.C., is former deputy attorney general of North Carolina and has taught election law at Duke University Law School. In 2008, he sought the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor of North Carolina. |
A few months later, wealthy trial lawyer Fred Baron included a barely legible cover note in an envelope with $1,000 in cash intended for the Youngs and Hunter: "Old Chinese saying: use cash, not credit cards!" it read.
Prosecutors highlighted the notes in the indictment, their case and closing arguments. And based on their requests for evidence during the initial day of deliberations, it appears jurors are focusing on the notes as well. If the jury convicts, these notes — rather than more modern communication modes such as email, texting or even video or phone recordings — may be the basis for the conclusion that Mellon, Baron and, above all, Edwards had the requisite criminal intent to sustain a conviction.
If Edwards is acquitted
If John Edwards walks out of the L. Richardson Preyer Federal Courthouse in Greensboro, N.C., a free man, the two witnesses he should thank most may be a surprise: his protégé-turned-nemesis Andrew Young and the 2008 financial officer for his campaign, Laura Haggard.
While Young identified Edwards as the orchestrator of the cover-up, he also testified that Edwards repeatedly assured him the arrangement (money from Mellon and Baron to the Youngs and Hunter) was perfectly legal. While many observers expected Young to claim that Edwards told him the cover-up was likely (or certainly) legally improper but an absolute political necessity, he said Edwards said the opposite.
Full trial coverage from NBC News and msnbc.com
Chris Keane / Reuters, file
Cheri Young, a witness in the case against former U.S. Senator John Edwards, arrives at the federal courthouse in Greensboro, North Carolina on May 1, 2012.
More than anything else, it was Young's testimony about Edwards's exculpatory statements that may have persuaded Edwards not to testify. And Young's words made it more difficult for the government to prove Edwards possessed the requisite criminal intent to "knowingly and willfully" violate the Federal Election Campaign Act. Lead prosecutor David Harbach confirmed how helpful Young's testimony about Edwards was to the defense in an aside in his closing argument:
"By the way," he said, "if all Mr. Young was doing was sticking to the government's story, as Mr. Lowell suggested that he was, … don't you think he could have done a lot better job of that? He said that Mr. Edwards told him that he had checked with lawyers and the checks were legal. That's what Mr. Young's sworn testimony was. That is a fascinating thing to say by someone who had just tricked the government to immunizing him by being willing to say anything that the government wants in order to sink the defendant. That doesn't fit."
Edwards' statements — presented by Young — professing a belief that support for a mistress could not constitute a campaign violation were buttressed by Haggard. The earnest staffer, who oversaw the filing of the campaign's finance reports, was given a small opening by presiding Judge Catherine Eagles to testify that she did not believe the Baron-Bunny monies were contributions.
In closing arguments, Lowell returned repeatedly to Haggard's opinion, as well as former FEC Chair Scott Thomas' testimony. Thomas addressed the topic of whether a third party payment to another third party for personal expenses associated with an affair could be covered by FECA, noting that it had never arisen in his decades of dealing with the statute. The upshot: How could John Edwards have thought money for his mistress could be illegal when not even experts such as Haggard and Thomas thought it was covered by federal campaign law?
If Edwards is convicted, but the verdict reversed
Finally, there is the possibility that the jury finds Edwards guilty, but a reviewing court (either the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court) throws out his conviction.
Gerry Broome / AP, file
Andrew Young, former aide to former U.S. Sen. and presidential candidate John Edwards, leaves federal court in Greensboro, N.C., on Monday, April 23, 2012.
While prosecutors and the presiding trial judge appear untroubled by the novelty of the government's case, it may provoke greater interest on appeal. Lowell has made much of a Fourth Circuit decision, North Carolina Right to Life v. Leake, which he believes strongly favors his client's claim that if Baron and Mellon sought to aid Edwards as a friend as well as a candidate, their "mistress money" cannot be considered a campaign donation.
Judge Eagles' jury instructions define this pivotal issue differently: "The government does not have to prove that the sole or only purpose of the money was to influence the election. … The government does not have to prove that Ms. Mellon (or Mr. Baron) had any intent or knowledge as to exactly how the money would be spent, or that the money was in fact spent on the campaign." Eagles also limited testimony from Haggard and Thomas, and denied defense efforts to introduce evidence that the FEC concluded that the failure to report the Mellon-Baron money as campaign contributions did not violate commission rules.
If a conviction is reversed, an unexpected but pivotal factor may be the defense's decision not to call Hunter, Edwards or Edwards's daughter, Cate, to the stand.
Here's why: The less evidence there is at his trial, the more the trial judge's rulings will stand out on appeal. By calling so few witnesses, and by not testifying himself, Edwards limited the trial record in a very deliberate way — one that emphasizes the impact of Eagles' rulings and makes it less likely a higher court can conclude any error was "harmless" if it finds mistakes. Still, if Edwards is found guilty and the conviction is upheld on appeal, the regret he will likely take to his grave is not taking the stand.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Analysis: Possible outcomes for John Edwards
- Great-grandma: Ready to 'lose' my life protesting
- US war veterans return medals at NATO protest
- Father of 30, by 11 women, wants state child support
- Marijuana grows openly in California towns, not just for medicinal purposes
- Video: Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg gets married
Leave a Comment:
Edwards is a piece of trash.
I agree with you, but that does not make him guilty. Those involved with making the donations knew full well where the money was going and that it was not for the campaign. Mellon even declared the money on her tax return as a gift to Edwards. The government did not even come close to proving that Edwards knowingly violated campaign finance laws - they did not even prove that any campaign finance laws were even broken to start with. The fact that the payments continued even after Edwards dropped out of the race clearly demonstrates that the money was meant to help Edwards personally to keep the affair/child from his wife and not primarily to help his political campaign. If the government starts trying to say that any money or anything of value given to a candidate that in any way helps his campaign is to be considered a campaign contribution we are in for a nightmare. The key should be whether the primary purpose of the contribution is to help the campaign. There are just far too many things that are not really about the campaign that do, however, peripherally help the candidate and his image that could be called campaign contributions otherwise. If anyone on this whole mess committed a crime it was Andrew Young and the government gave him immunity to try and get Edwards. Young skimming money off the Mellon payments and pocketing it for himself and his wife was criminal and he has been let off the hook for it.
If the media would at least make an attempt to vet Democrat candidates for president there would be a lot less crap like this.
You have the testimony by Baron and Mellon that the money was a gift. That's the hard part to get past. Plus, as JS noted that the money continued after Edwards had dropped out of the race. That makes the conviction questionable. However, if he's not guilty of breaking campaign finance law, Edwards might instead be guilty of tax law violations.
I wonder when some of you are going to get off the issue of Obama's citizenship? The fact remains is he is the President, he will go down in history as the President, and nothing anyone can do or say will ever change that. So, why not be concerned about the issues at hand. As for vetting candidates, both parties are just as guilty. Seriously, a candidate that is guilty of tax evasion and then claiming he has nothing to do with it? It's still "HIS" money and he is liable for anything that is done with it, bottom line! As for this debacle, this is just another case of the rich, famous, and anyone else who can buy a sleezy attorney(s) trying to get away with something that is obviously wrong. Sure, testimony is provided that no one knows if a third party giving to a third party for an affair is illegal, because that just goes to show how wrong it is and how much of a piece of $hit we almost had as a President. This is exactly the garbage that 99.999% of the politicians are doing to destroy our nation. Between illegal campaign contributions, super PACs, and the BS that spews from politicians mouths and their looking out for their own and their buddies interests instead of our nation, it's no wonder that we are in the shape we are in. How nice it would be to have politicians that are truly "By the People and for the People". Perhaps then we wouldn't have the economic, employment, and military problems that we have. As for me and my vote, they are going to anyone but an incumbent with exception of the President. All we need is another rich, greedy, power hungry politician in office. If Romney gets elected, it WILL BE the end of the middle class and our nation will exist as just another nation of haves and have nots!
The reason why this is all happening right now is because what he did to his wife. Cheating with another woman and using the money he shouldn't have used. Period!
I already know how this is going to go. Dharun Ravi gets a slap on the wrist for a crime that actually hurt someone else and Joh Edwards will get thrown to the wolves for something that was between him and his wife.
I wonder if the jury can legally consider the case against Andrew Young? Are the facts that Young set up the payments, took most of the money for himself and his wife, got an immunity guarantee for himself and his wife, and then threw John Edwards to the wolves mitigating in this case? I wonder what the instructions to the jury included about this. Anybody know?
ATTORNEY ADS!
The Edwards articles are nothing more than advertisements for attorneys that favor him.
No one in the United States gives a care about this immoral and disgusting UNC attached criminal.
He should never have been permitted to run for president in the first place.
The ads shown attached to this article are for the lowest, slimiest, seediest people I have ever seen in my entire life - they are lower than the Vegas scum. They lie, cheat, steal their way around in this life and prey on the innocent.
The United States has a choice to make - it can honor decent people and help to stop extreme hate crimes like the genocide in New Hampshire that no one wants to expose - or it can continue to support jerks like this as a national symbol.
I am disgusted with all of you.
The cousins of the Queen of England are being denigrated and forced out of their homes and real estate in New England and you don't care about them Forced out by Democrats and liberals that are force-populating this tiny area of the nation whose ancestors settled the towns and cities that dot the coastline in the east.
They are forced out - this is a surge of foreign immigrants or illegal immigrants or others that really have no interest at all in preserving the rich history of this land and are occupying it to take it over.
And you think we are concerned with the likes of a man that cheated on his wife before she died of cancer.
What the hell is wrong with this nation?
Well so EDWARDS cheated own his wife i will say this there are many men and women who cheat own there spouse . I don't like Edwards but i think that he has ruined his own political life and that is enough punishment i wound think for the rest of his life. He must have been a great lawyer at one time and can go back to that i hope in another STATE.
Edwards is less than a man. He is not high enough on the evolutionary ladder to be caleld trash.
wow, i cant understand what is so terrible about edwards. this is such a backward, puritanical country full of clay footed hypocrites. this wouldnt have even made the papers in civilized countries. having an affair is so common, but he stayed by his cancer stricken wife and tried to shield her- gingrich walked out on his wife and young children and didnt even pay the rent. who would have thought his wife would last so long- if she had died when she was expected to, she probably never would have heard of it. and he didnt push hunter for an abortion, instead he supported her and the love child. you people who condemn him probably are anti abortion too, but your judgemental attitude is what puts pressure on people to get abortions. oh, i know, perfect people like you would never have sex like that - bullsh*t, maybe thats what you need, to get layed. and elizabeth wasnt a class act, she was a shrew. part of the reason we cant get any talented people in government is that its rare to find someone really talented who also behaves exactly like you want- puritan, sexless, timid, unimaginative. by all accounts, steve jobs was a massive pr*ck, but he was a first class salesman/conman. most stellar people dont fit the republican mold, or they lead a double life. grow up and quit judging people, and maybe we can find a leader- like eisenhower, who cheated on his wife in england, but didnt ditch her like mccain did when he got back- for a younger chick with more money. did i mention gingrichs wifes family put him through school while he was dodging the draft?
RIP Elizabeth.
You were a class act married to a selfish little man...
...who believed in two Americas.
Ms. Edwards doesn't get off so easily. She knew he was hiding all of this, and she supported his run for the presidency anyhow.
She also stated that she had forgiven him his 'error', and then she went on to write a book about their relationship and how her husband had destroyed so much that they as a couple and as a family had built together. She then proceeded to sit on the stage of every talk show that would book her and rant even more about how poorly she had been treated.
He's no prize, but she didn't remain very clean in this entire mess, either.
@Mackie-4741671
Ummmm.... okay?... I guess....
Holder should be next...
I just can't stop thinking about how low a man can be for cheating on his dying devoted wife.
That bothers me more than anything else in all this. He will walk for the most incredulous moral crime of all because there was no legal laws broken...
True very true but you only have to go back as far a Newt to see it happens everywhere is politics power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely
"most incredulous moral crime of all because there was no legal laws broken"
That is extremely desperate!
Just get over it people cheat and you might find out that she cheated too. Just
because he is not saying anything does not mean she never cheated.
Somehow we believe in our society that men always cheat and women does not it is a two
way street and they are both likely to cheat. Women are just as likely as men.
After all it takes another woman for a man to cheat and it takes another man for
a woman to cheat.
The moral crime, if such a thing exist, is that this is in court. When the real crime, the theft of over 1 milion dollars goes unpunished.
I hope the contributors take the thiefs and the covernment on in court for not prosecuting the real crime that for which there are laws and which were broken.
I would want my money back if I were them. If not from young certainly from the covernment.
Edwards and his spouse went through the cancer issues for years - a lot of stress on any family, still not an excuse for a huge character flaw. However, this is the kind of thing that is addressed with a hefty fine, restitution and not having an opportunity for public office again - not a full criminal prosecution.
Our legal system has become one of prosecutors and judges looking for the spotlight in these kinds of cases to mask their apparent fear of addressing the drug cartels who are tearing our country down from the inside out. Someone needs to put their priorities straight.
Your exactly right Don.....I think everyone no matter what side of the fence your on can agree that this guy is a POS of the highest order but does he deserve 30 years in prison? Does anyone except for the crooked prosecutors and Judges really care about this case? ...........The Man let his other brain do his thinking for him and Lord knows there's a lot of people guilty of that, Men and Women.
Lets get busy in this country going after crimmnels that are resposible for hurting people not wasting time on meaningless crap like John Edwards. He really only hurt himself and the people that he loved.
He deserves 30 years in prison just for getting $500.00 haircuts on the taxpayer dime.
Michael-- it's not like taxpayers paid extra for the haircuts. Whatever tax money he got was his salary as a senator.
So all people who get $500 haircuts deserve 30 years in prison. This will definitely overcrowd prisons.
The taxpayers didn't pay for his haircuts. They were paid for by his campaign donors or by himself.
The mere fact that there is a CHANCE that Edwards could have a NOT guilty verdict is a simple indication that our injustice system is a joke.
Nope. It's an indication that people are put on trial for breaking laws, not for doing bad things. He's on trial for breaking campaign finance law-- but all the signs are that the money was never intended to be campaign money. It was money given to him. As bad as his actions were, he broke no laws.
If we locked up everyone for cheating, then more than half the USA would be in jail.
I would say to anyone who is upset with the direction their life has taken to just look at John Edwards. No one else can possibly eff up their life as much as he has.
John Edwards elevates a word (douchebag) to a term of art. All the ink wasted in reports trying to describe the attributes and their magnitudes from his actions and character could be saved with its accurate use.
I don't understand why there is no reference to IRS gift tax laws and regulations. If it is a gift, there should be IRS tax forms. If not, it should be a political contribution.
I followed the trial in the N&O, and testimony was given that Fred Barron DID communicate that he had "paid the gift taxes". My understanding is that the "giver" would be responsible for the gift taxes not the recipient. Don't know if any of the reports were entered as evidence. In any event, Edwards is pretty much a ruined man because of his own personal choices. I also had issues with Mrs. Edwards when this story first broke. I understand that she was fighting a brave battle with cancer (many of us have had terminal situations in our own family members); however, according to the timelines in the trial, she knew long before he dropped out of the race that the affair had not ended. Did she, too, participate in this lie and somehow hope that it would all come out in the wash? Mrs. Edwards is the one who asked her husband NOT to drop out of the race.
Well, we all know he is guilty BUT can the courts prove it. Regardless of the outcome of the trial, his life is in shambles. I feel sorriest for his children who have a bastard half sibling that they have to deal with.
And his children now know that he is just another man who can't keeps his pants zipped.
Uh, no... many people (including me) think he's not guilty. He's not on trial for being a d-bag, he's on trial for breaking campaign finance law, which it would appear he did not.
Edwards is a cheating piece of trash,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,BUT, By all accounts this money was never intended for or given to his campaign so,,,,,,He would be innocent of the charges against him. If the Youngs recieved the money (and kept it) they alone would be responsible for taxes
I hope he is found not guilty. Yes, he messed up. He made terrible judgements but he is human. I feel sorry for the man. I think he has been punished enough.
Jeez. This guy could have been president. Contrary to what others may say, Character does matter.
Pity John Edwards, a victim of luv, a fool who rushed in, in a town without pity.
I can hear nyt now, 'since when is being in love a crime?'
Edwards is a WOOF WOOF pos!! And that skank home wrecker is even worse! How DARE he have he and Elizabeth's daughter stand beside him? Hes the lowest of the low - and if that skank will do it with you, she will surely do it TO YOU! Karma is a MOTHER ........and you'll find out just how bad it is
My prediction is that Edwards will get no more than a slap in the wrist. He's rich and rich people don't go to jail. Not even for murder, usually. He'll get off. His daughter must have something wrong upstairs.
He'll get off not because he's rich, but because he didn't break the law.
I had Edwards pegged for a smarmy creep from the moment I first set eyes on him.
Never trust a man with a dimple in a weak chin: He's likely to think he's a lot more than he really is.
There really are two Americas. One which believes that John Edwards sucks. The other America thinks that John Edwards really sucks.
The whole country is divided on everything. What more can we expect.
Justice at it's best!!....I'm so confused?? Why?? Is it you can try Edwards for crimes of being a cheating SOB.....but no one had the guts to bring Bush/Cheney up on charges of 'WAR CRIMES/and LIES???".....
The laws in our country are there to put some kind of framework for those who choose alternative ways of "taking" what they want; be it hatred after a broken love affair where one is murdered OR literally stealing property or goods from another. Legislating "moral" justice is impossible and is the main reason so many Americans are fed up with politics and the leaders of our country. It's the classic "do as I say, not as I do" routine and, frankly, I wouldn't let someone like John Edwards clean my toilets. It's too good for the likes of him. We've wasted thousands of tax-payers dollars to see someone who is actually above the law try to be brought down. He is a stain on the good leaders of NC, and I hope he has a very slow tragic decline both physically and mentally for his heartless and calculating sex romps with Hunter. He and Tiger Woods should rent an apartment together and trade stories. Remember Eve Carson.