Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
bjbj"9"9 JUDY WOODRUFF: We turn to the courtroom drama involving the 2004 Democratic vice presidential
nominee, John Edwards. Edwards faces charges he violated campaign finance laws by securing
funds for his mistress, Rielle Hunter. After nearly a three-week run by the prosecution,
the defense has rested after just two days without calling Edwards or Hunter to testify.
Closing arguments are tomorrow. Michael Biesecker of the Associated Press has been inside the
courtroom, and he joins us now from Greensboro, N.C. Thank you for being with us. And before
I ask you about what happened today, Michael Biesecker, give us a sense of what the prosecution
laid out over the time that it was in charge. MICHAEL BIESECKER, Associated Press: Well,
the prosecution presented 14 days of testimony from very close friends of Edwards and former
aides that presented him largely as a liar, a liar who lied about his affair, who lied
about fathering a baby with his mistress, and who lied about his knowledge of the money
and covering it up. They rested their case with an ABC interview from 2008 where he repeated
all those lies, and they played it for the jury. So, the defense had to try to mitigate
that damage in presenting its case. JUDY WOODRUFF: And how did the defense do that? And, again,
what -- just over two days, what did the defense say? MICHAEL BIESECKER: Well, since they didn't
put Edwards on the stand, they had to attack the credibility of those who had questioned
his. They attacked the aide Andrew Young, the person who initially claimed paternity
of the baby and who took $725,000 from a wealthy heiress, Bunny Mellon, that some of which
was spent to cover up the affair. But the defense used the Youngs' own financial statements
to show much of the money they received, almost $1 million in total between two donors, was
funneled to build their $1.6 million dream home in Chapel Hill. It didn't go to the cover-up
of the affair, at least the majority of it. JUDY WOODRUFF: Is there a sense, an understanding
of why the defense decided not to call John Edwards, a celebrated trial lawyer throughout
most of his career, or Rielle Hunter, the mistress? MICHAEL BIESECKER: Well, on Edwards,
obviously, he made his living before he entered politics swaying jurors, and after he entered
politics swaying voters. But he took a -- he would have stood a withering cross-examination
about his past lives, about his sex life, about the baby he fathered and denied for
two years. And I think they -- when they did the risk analysis, they felt that the prosecution's
case was weak enough that they didn't have to expose Edwards to the risk of what he might
be forced to say on cross-examination. For Hunter, if they put -- if the defense put
her on the stand, that just would potentially remind jurors of the affair and the sordid
tabloid nature of this whole scandal. JUDY WOODRUFF: What about the core of this, Michael
Biesecker, the notion that a campaign finance law may have been violated here? The core
of that argument, either side -- is there some sort of consensus that either side has
the -- made the better case on that? MICHAEL BIESECKER: Well, certainly, the defense contends
that Edwards had very little knowledge of the cover-up and the money used in it. But
the defense has hammered that this was money that flowed from a third party, the wealthy
donors, to another third party, the aide Young and the mistress, Rielle Hunter. Edwards never
touched the money. It never went through his campaign account. And, therefore, they argued
that these were personal expenditures between two individuals that didn't have anything
to do with the candidate or his campaign, essentially a gift. The prosecution counters
that it was clearly a campaign finance violation because the money was intended to influence
the outcome of an election, i.e., hiding the mistress from the public and keeping Edwards'
campaign viable as he went through the early primaries in 2008. JUDY WOODRUFF: Tell us,
Michael Biesecker, what has it been like covering this trial? It has gotten so much attention
because of the sensational details. Watching -- we have seen pictures of John Edwards coming
and going with his parents, with his daughter. Tell us about that side of this trial. MICHAEL
BIESECKER: Well, for those of us from North Carolina, we watched John Edwards' meteoric
rise from a local trial attorney to senator to vice presidential nominee for the Democratic
Party. And as rapid as that rise was, his life fell apart even faster. And all the sordid
details, some of which were previously unknown, about that fall have tumbled out into the
courtroom. You know, it's -- it's Shakespearian in its dramatic nature. And certainly there
have been moments in the testimony, especially the testimony about his deceased wife, Elizabeth
Edwards, and an argument they had at an airport in Raleigh where she ripped over her blouse
when she challenged him about the affair, some of the testimony was so emotional, it
sent his daughter, Cate Edwards, who has been sitting in the front row of the courtroom
for most of the trial, fleeing in tears. The defense has tried to refocus from all that
emotion, all that sex, all that scandal back to the central technical legal issue of were
these campaign finance violations and take the emotion out of it. And they had some success
in trying to do that in the last two days. JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, closing arguments tomorrow.
Michael Biesecker, we will be watching. Thank you. MICHAEL BIESECKER: Thank you, Judy. urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags
City urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags State urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags
place JUDY WOODRUFF: We turn to the courtroom drama involving the 2004 Democratic vice presidential
nominee, John Edwards Normal Microsoft Office Word JUDY WOODRUFF: We turn to the courtroom
drama involving the 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee, John Edwards Title Microsoft Office
Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8