Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

alp227

(32,268 posts)
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 02:50 PM Jun 2012

John Edwards trial jurors: Panel majority wanted to acquit

Source: Washington Post

They thought he was guilty. But they couldn’t convict him.

Such was the conundrum for three jurors in the John Edwards corruption trial who recounted their deliberations Friday morning in an interview on NBC’s “Today” show. Those jurors and five others who spoke to ABC’s “Good Morning America” painted a picture of a deeply divided jury riven by a stubborn minority that wanted to convict Edwards of campaign finance violations and an equally headstrong majority that did not think the prosecution proved its case.

A key question was whether Edwards knew about $1 million in payments from Virginia heiress Rachel “Bunny” Mellon and Edwards’s campaign finance chairman, Fred Baron, to cover up his affair with Rielle Hunter. Juror Ladonna Foster told “Today” show host Matt Lauer that she thinks “Edwards had some knowledge. I think he definitely had some knowledge of the money, where the money was going, especially the money from Mrs. Mellon.” But juror Cindy Aquaro said Edwards was “just smart enough to hide it, and we could not find the evidence.”

A key flaw in the prosecution case was its reliance on the testimony of Andrew Young, the Edwards aide who built a luxury home with money from Baron and wrote a bestselling book about his experiences with Edwards.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/john-edwards-trial-jurors-panel-majority-wanted-to-acquit/2012/06/01/gJQA13Xq6U_story.html

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

lark

(23,495 posts)
1. He never should have been prosecuted
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 02:55 PM
Jun 2012

It's a double std. by Obama admin. and Holder. The Repug admits to paying his mistress and her husband 100,00's of thousands of dollars to keep them quiet and hired the husband to his campaign committee for this purpose. The money was delivered by another senator. Holder does nothing to this creep, yet goes after John Edwards.

WTF - so glad for the fail, they deserved it!!!!

 

teddy51

(3,491 posts)
2. Agree! They have lots of real criminals out there that need to be prosecuted, go get some those.
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 03:05 PM
Jun 2012
 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
5. WTF - so glad for the fail, they deserved it!!!!
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 04:24 PM
Jun 2012

It was a politically motivated trial brought by a prosecutor who goes after liberals. Glad it failed. It's Conservatives wasting time and money again to destroy an already destroyed person. They go for the lowest hanging fruit, and still can't do it right.

NoodleyAppendage

(4,620 posts)
4. 3 dumba$$ jurors employing "faith based" thinking
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 04:13 PM
Jun 2012

I always cringe at the thought of people like this making life/death decisions over others. Any juror who subsequently claims "I felt" or "I believe" about the guilt or innocence of a defendant should be forever barred from serving on any other juries. It's supposed to be about the FACTS, not how you feel about the person.

J

amuse bouche

(3,659 posts)
7. I truly hope
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 05:38 PM
Jun 2012

I never need a jury of my peers. I'm frightened to death of the stupid

On the other hand, I'm happy for dopey Edwards. He never should have been tried. I do feel for the kids

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
15. You will not get a jury of peers
Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:12 AM
Jun 2012

...you will get a jury of people purposely selected to lose your case for you.

Jury selection should be a thing of the past. When I was called for jury duty, every person who was a professional or academic of any kind (and there are many in my area) was removed from the jury. Not to say that any body else isn't smart, but the idea of selecting for the young and naive, or people with no job or training of any kind--it's just wrong.

It's rigged against intelligence--for SURE. A lot of people do not realize this.

mother earth

(6,002 posts)
8. I concur with fellow DU'ers who feel there are far greater criminals that need prosecution.
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 06:15 PM
Jun 2012

I am sick & tired for a few dems that get thrown under the bus, so that our country has some appearance or semblance of justice.
I don't defend the actions of those few dems, but their crimes are far less than the bastards that relentlessly screw this country over and are free to do so over and over again. I think of that bastard, Newt Gingrich, that called for impeachment of Clinton while he was doing the same or worst, flippin' hypocrite!

I hope that Edwards can mend his family.

Personally, I grieve for the man that might have been, the man that should have been, the man that I thought John Edwards was, because he knew the real issues that plague us to this day, and he could have been the best. To reach incredible heights you must have incredible values and insight, it's incredibly hard to be a leader in any calling, and many a great man can succumb to a weakness, in this case it was a woman, which is forgiveable, minus the money issue. To quote Kennedy, to whom much is given, much is expected. Oh, John, you held our hearts and our hopes.

I hope that John finds his true heart, mends his family and from this day forward realizes he can still redeem himself. I know the man that Elizabeth believed in, the man his family believes in, the man I believed in, is still there...we are all human, and inclined to sometimes make incredibly stupid mistakes.

Find your way, John, redeem yourself, for your self.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
9. agreed.
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 06:58 PM
Jun 2012

and from what he said after the acquittal, it sounds like he's heading that way. He admitted he has done terrible wrongs. Not criminal, but terribly wrong. No equivocation or non-apologies for anyone he may have wronged.

1monster

(11,012 posts)
16. I think John Edwards probably is the man he could have been, should have been and would have been --
Sat Jun 2, 2012, 12:17 PM
Jun 2012

but he is also human.

I do not doubt that John and Elizabeth had a loving and committed relationship. Afterall, they were married for many years and shared common goals which they worked for together through the good time, the bad times, and times of tragic loss. They supported each other.

My personal belief is that the Edwards should have pulled out of the Presidential race as soon as the cancer came back and tended themselves first. But remember, Elizabeth wanted that presidencey as much as John did. When one member of a family is ill or has a major problem, the whole family sufferes from symptoms, espcially the spouse. And no one is necessarily thinking clearly.

It is sad that in the final chapter, the stresses of the presidential run and the return of Elizabeth's cancer allowed the vulnerabilities of their bond to be exploited by predator Rielle Hunter. Once Edwards succumbed to temptation, a whole new bag of crises opened up -- "Oh what a tangled web..." In attempting to hide his failure, Edwards opened the door to many more problems.

But I doubt that it changed who he was in the past, or what he believed or the good he tried to do or what he believed or his basic character. We all have weaknesses. (Or let he who is without sin cast the first stone.)

GoddessOfGuinness

(46,436 posts)
10. It bugs the hell out of me that he was being held criminally accountable
Fri Jun 1, 2012, 07:19 PM
Jun 2012

for what was essentially a breach of ethics that did no harm to anyone, when Bushco, responsible for the deaths of thousands, doesn't even get a slap on the wrist.

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
14. A breach of ethics (with the wrong timing) could have destroyed a Democratic
Sat Jun 2, 2012, 08:04 AM
Jun 2012

presidential race.

NEVER BUY the idea that "a breach of ethics harms no one." It is the root of corruption and often does immeasurable damage.

Get the picture, this country is criminally corrupt in so many ways that people don't even see it anymore.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»John Edwards trial jurors...