Tampilkan postingan dengan label Edwards. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Edwards. Tampilkan semua postingan

Sabtu, 02 Juni 2012

Jurors: Edwards evidence elusive

NEW: "We actually wished there would be more evidence," one juror says NEW: "I definitely thought he was a good liar," another juror says of EdwardsEdwards was cleared on one count and a mistrial was declared on the other five chargesOne juror says the trial shined light on the importance of campaign finance law reforms

(CNN) -- Several jurors in the John Edwards corruption case said Friday that they thought the two-time Democratic presidential hopeful was a liar, but there wasn't enough evidence to convict him of breaking campaign finance laws.

"We actually wished there would be more evidence, and that we would ... be able to follow the evidence to John Edwards," Ladonna Foster told CNN on Friday night. "But that wasn't the case."

Foster, Cindy Aquaro and jury foreman David Recchion all said they believed Edwards was guilty on some of the six charges he faced during his trial. Yet their 12-person jury on Thursday only reached a unanimous verdict on one count, in which they cleared Edwards, while deadlocking on the rest after more than 50 hours of deliberation.

The U.S. Justice Department is determining how to proceed with the case, including possibly calling for a retrial.


Edwards ran for president in 2004 -- when he ended up as the Democrats' nominee for vice president -- and again in 2008.

Prosecutors said Edwards "knowingly and willingly" took nearly $1 million in illegal campaign contributions from Fred Baron and Rachel "Bunny" Mellon to keep Hunter out of the public eye, then concealed the donations by filing false and misleading campaign disclosure reports, to keep his pregnant mistress under wraps in his last presidential run.

He was charged with four counts of accepting illegal campaign contributions, one count of falsifying documents and one of conspiring to receive and conceal the contributions, which could have led to 30 years in prison and a $1.5 million fine if convicted on all counts.

His attorneys argued he was guilty of being a bad husband to his wife, Elizabeth, who died in 2010, but had committed no crime. They also argued that former Edwards aide Andrew Young, the government's star witness, used the contributions for his own gain and to pay for the medical expenses of the mistress, Rielle Hunter, to hide the affair from Edwards' wife.

Opinion: Edwards jury got it exactly right

Neither Edwards, Hunter, nor either of the two donors whose funds were in question testified during the trial. Baron died in 2008, while Mellon -- who gave Edwards the bulk of the money -- is now 101.

"I wished we could have heard from ... Bunny Mellon," said Aquaro. "I think we would have been able to follow the money more if we had."

Aquaro added that she believed Edwards intended the money from those two donors would go to pay Hunter and her expenses, but "the evidence was not there to prove it."

Foster said earlier on NBC's "Today" show that she thinks Edwards was particularly knowledgeable about the Mellon money.

Other jurors interviewed on ABC's "Good Morning America" on Friday said they weren't convinced that the money was given for political reasons.

Jonathan Nunn said it wasn't even a close call.

"In my eyes, it was all personal," he said. "It was pretty weighed one way."

Theresa Fuller said the "evidence just wasn't there."

Why politicians lie

Sheila Lockwood said she wanted to hear Edwards talk about the money that he received "on his behalf." Edwards chose not to testify.

Asked what weakened the prosecution's case, Recchion pointed to Young and his credibility.

"The government had a tough job to do with a witness that wasn't credible as was needed to be, in order to prove (Edwards') guilt," he said Friday.

As to Edwards himself, several jurors said they'd wished he took the stand. Yet they did hear his voice in the form of a 2008 interview with ABC's Bob Woodruff in which he admitted having an affair with Hunter but didn't father her child.

"I definitely thought he was a good liar," said Aquaro.

Asked whether the case should be retried, several jurors instead said they hoped campaign finance laws be changed first -- so that there is more clarity for politicians and potential jurors alike.

"I would like to see some changes made so that future candidates understand that these activities are unacceptable," Recchion said.

Overheard on CNN.com: 'Being a slimy dirtbag doesn't equal being a criminal'

Leaving the court Thursday, Edwards said that while he never believed he committed a crime, "I did an awful, awful lot that was wrong, and there is no one else responsible for my sins."

He thanked his family for supporting him, adding that "I'm grateful for all my children" -- including Cate, who sat through the trial with him, 12-year-old Jack, 14-year-old Emma and the 4-year-old girl from his affair, whom he called "my precious Quinn, who I love more than any of you can ever imagine."

John Edwards: Once a cheater, always a cheater?

Edwards had denied that he was the girl's father for more than a year -- including in the ABC interview -- saying the affair was over before Hunter became pregnant.

Hunter has been largely silent publicly, though she'll present her account of what happened with the release of her memoir -- entitled "What Really Happened: John Edwards, Our Daughter and Me" -- on June 26 through publisher BenBella Books, her representative RoseMarie Terenzio said Friday in a statement.

"A lot has been said, but no one has heard the truth of what really happened until now," BenBella publisher Glenn Yeffeth said.


Peliculas Online

Jumat, 01 Juni 2012

Opinion: Edwards trial a waste

John Edwards was prosecuted by former U.S. attorney George Holding to enhance Holding's political prospects, said Jeff Smith. John Edwards was prosecuted by former U.S. attorney George Holding to enhance Holding's political prospects, said Jeff Smith. Jeff Smith: John Edwards trial was a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money on a non-crimeSmith: Prosecution of Edwards was really about George Holding, who will be in Congress He says Holding indicted Edwards for political gains and attentionSmith: The person in this sordid mess who ought to be prosecuted is Andrew YoungEditor's note: Jeff Smith, who represented Missouri's 4th Senate District from 2006-09, is a professor in the Urban Policy graduate program at The New School in New York City. He spent 2010 in federal prison for lying about a campaign finance violation. He is on Twitter: @jeffsmithMO


(CNN) -- Does John Edwards deserve to go to prison? The jury has decided, and he's walking.

Whatever we may think of the Edwards trial, one thing is certain: the prosecution was a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money on a non-crime. Who cares if a billionaire wants to give a multimillionaire some money to hide his mistress (who pays taxes on the gift)?

The prosecution of Edwards was never so much about Edwards as it was about George Holding.

Jeff Smith Wait -- who is George Holding? And why should we care?

After winning a recent primary, Holding is likely the next congressman in the 13th District of North Carolina. He initiated the prosecution against Edwards while he was a U.S. Attorney. But he didn't argue the case in court. Instead, after receiving a year's worth of headlines (and Republican praise) for charging Edwards, Holding resigned from the case to run for Congress.

Maybe Holding understood the weakness of the case, which rested upon Edwards' failure to report the money billionaire heiress Bunny Mellon and another wealthy donor gave to him to help hide his mistress. The problem is that if Edwards had reported contributions and then used them for personal expenses, he would have been guilty of a crime, since the Federal Election Commission bars spending official campaign funds on personal expenses. Therefore, according to Holding, Edwards was damned if he did, and damned if he didn't.

To prove his case, Holding had to show that Edwards knowingly broke the law. But if neglecting to report the gifts as campaign contributions constituted a crime, yet reporting such gifts as contributions would violate existing law (by implying that Edwards converted contributions to personal use), then it is impossible to prove Edwards knew he was breaking the law, which would be necessary for a conviction.

That's not very good legal reasoning on which to rest a case -- especially a case unlike any other that had been successfully tried. And since Holding had access to all the available evidence and knew that no witness and no recordings would suggest that Edwards knew he was breaking the law, it is difficult to see how Holding thought he might win, other than hoping that jurors disliked Edwards so much they would convict him.

Or maybe Holding wasn't all that concerned with the legal reasoning. Perhaps he realized that, win or lose, he'd already gotten enough mileage from the case to realize his political ambitions. By the time he indicted Edwards, the well-connected Holding knew that the newly Republican state legislature had drawn a safe district he could win, if only he could get out of the primary. And what better way to appeal to Republican diehards than prosecuting the smarmy, liberal trial lawyer John Edwards? Holding certainly received his reward last month when he won his congressional primary.

The public generally associates politicians with the pursuit of ambition and power. Too often, investigators act from similar motives. Law enforcement officials seek to justify long, expensive investigations into high-profile targets by stretching the law to win convictions and mount the biggest scalps on their walls.

The former head of the St. Louis FBI who investigated me for a campaign finance violation years ago said of his job: "I love the chase. [It] was fantastic. It was me against them. And the smarter they were, the richer they were, the more I enjoyed catching them."

But justice isn't about investigators' adrenaline rushes or personal advancement. It's about the common good. If the central goal of prosecuting "corrupt" public figures is to remove them from public life, then the Edwards prosecution is a clear case of overkill. He is a walking punch line, unfit to run for dog catcher. Why should prosecutors spend millions of dollars and years of time targeting him with novel legal theories?

I am familiar with Edwards' predicament. During my 2004 congressional campaign in Missouri, I approved a meeting between two aides and a man who wanted to send out a postcard highlighting my opponent's dismal attendance record in the state House. In the immediate aftermath, our campaign denied any involvement in the mailing, and then when faced with a Federal Election Commission complaint which gave us a chance to come clean, we maintained our denial. Five years later, through an unlikely set of circumstances culminating in my best friend's wiretap, I ended up in prison for a year.

As a current taxpayer who spent a year loading trucks at a prison warehouse, eating food for which you, dear reader, paid, I can tell you two things. First, I did not want to pay to house, feed and clothe multimillionaire lawyer John Edwards. Second, the only person in this sordid mess whom prosecutors should have considered indicting is someone who was already granted immunity. That's right, Andrew Young, who defrauded the 99-year-old Bunny Mellon by siphoning (or, more precisely, stealing) hundreds of thousands of dollars to build his dream house.

Of course, prosecuting Young wouldn't have gotten George Holding all the publicity that prosecuting John Edwards did, and it definitely wouldn't have gotten him to Congress.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Jeff Smith.

ADVERTISEMENTJune 2, 2012 -- Updated 0215 GMT (1015 HKT) romney app A Romney app went viral for its "Amercia" spelling gaffe. Merrill Perlman says as copy editors get fired, embarrassing mistakes multiply.June 1, 2012 -- Updated 1537 GMT (2337 HKT) Romney's successor as governor says the candidate failed to grow the state's economy and reform governmentJune 1, 2012 -- Updated 1524 GMT (2324 HKT) Christine Owens says with unemployment rate remaining so high, we must not cut off help to the least fortunate Get the latest opinion and analysis from CNN's columnists and contributors.June 1, 2012 -- Updated 1546 GMT (2346 HKT) Jeff Smith says the prosecution of John Edwards was never so much about Edwards as it was about George Holding. June 1, 2012 -- Updated 2316 GMT (0716 HKT) Edward Morrissey says Mayor Bloomberg's proposed citywide ban on soda servings over 16 ounces makes no sense and eliminates free choiceJune 1, 2012 -- Updated 1755 GMT (0155 HKT) Aaron David Miller says the need to stop the killing is urgent, but the options are either imperfect half measures or a costly intervention that nobody wantsJune 1, 2012 -- Updated 1216 GMT (2016 HKT) Ruben Navarrette says candidates should realize that among Latino voters, immigration policy is a key testJune 1, 2012 -- Updated 0157 GMT (0957 HKT) Alan Dershowitz says of course the jury members couldn't make up their mind on most of the charges. No rational person could June 1, 2012 -- Updated 1857 GMT (0257 HKT) Timothy Stanley says the unveiling of Bush's portrait offers a moment to reevaluate a tenure that ended with low approval, but may have been an important presidencyMay 31, 2012 -- Updated 1414 GMT (2214 HKT) Jeff Cruz says President Obama will likely win the votes of Latinos, who care greatly about issues like Social Security and MedicareMay 31, 2012 -- Updated 1554 GMT (2354 HKT) Josh Levs says the brief life of Marina Keegan, a new Yale grad killed in a car crash, offers a shining example of the importance of reaching for dreamsMay 31, 2012 -- Updated 2157 GMT (0557 HKT) Frida Ghitis says the Assad regime is maintaining power by enforcing a reign of terror.May 31, 2012 -- Updated 1309 GMT (2109 HKT) Sen. Frank Lautenberg says that Congress must reform the outdated toxic chemicals law to protect our children's health.Today's five most popular storiesMoreADVERTISEMENT

Peliculas Online

Free Phone Sex