Analysis John Edwards
Analysis John Edwards, Itâ€™s official: Jurors in the John Edwards trial do not think they are deciding a simple case.
If all 12 of the North Carolinians judging the former U.S. senator thought it was clear Edwards broke the law when billionaire buddies Fred Baron and Rachel â€śBunnyâ€ť Mellon supported his mistress and his former political-aide-turned-faux-father of the Edwards-Rielle Hunter baby, they would not be starting a seventh day of deliberations. And it is not just the duration of deliberations that suggests uncertainty; during nearly every courtroom entrance for the past week, jurors have worn furrowed brows and grim visages. They have made specific requests for dozen of exhibits and readily accepted the presiding judgeâ€™s offer to have every exhibit â€“ hundreds in all — brought into the jury room.
Even if the final answer is â€śguilty,â€ť the time and trouble the jurors are taking to render a verdict suggests that one or more of them will describe the decision of whether to find Edwards guilty of violating the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) as a close call. Which raises the question: Should a jury be making such a call at all, given that the two arms of the federal government that are expert in campaign finance violations â€“ the Federal Election Commission and the Justice Departmentâ€™s Public Integrity Section â€“ appear to disagree on whether Edwardsâ€™ conduct was unlawful? (MSNBC)
Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on