Problems for prosecution in John Edwards case?
Star witness calls other witnesses
- Duration 5:50
- Date Apr 24, 2012
Star witness calls other witnesses
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Kelly's court is back in session on the docket today possible problems for prosecutors in the corruption case against former presidential candidate John Edwards.
The star witness in the government's case is Andrew Young.
He's the campaign -- for Edwards who turned his former boss in an exchange for immunity.
Apparently young decided in advance of his testimony to call few other witnesses.
To talk about their testimony and that is a big no no -- we call witness tampering.
The judge in the case has now told the defense attorneys for Edwards.
They can't call it that but they can discuss a little bit -- habits have been this guy just sink the prosecution's case he's their star witness.
Joining me now defense attorney David -- and former prosecutor and defense attorney Joey Jackson.
The judge has allowed he has said that they -- tell the jury.
He called these other witness -- witnesses they can't use the term witness tampering how badly did this guy hurt the prosecution's case is not.
At all much ado about nothing like his wife say this make -- -- three real things and I'd look at here the one thing is is that he's not on trial John Edwards is and it's important at the prosecution keep the focus on that.
The second real issue is that he -- written a book already and which he's detailed a number of accounts from his point of view as to what was unacceptable and illegal activity here.
And that was done in advance of him calling other witnesses are doing anything of the -- The third thing is is that jurors will understand that in any case right it's very rare that you have choir boys and priest on the stand.
There are people who have their own dynamics their own issues the critical question is there's an additional way you actually.
Remember that a jury you've got Laura -- We apologize we can't we can't -- but -- David.
Here's the question so even if they think this guy tried to call the other witnesses it really in -- young is critical to this case he is critical -- the prosecution's case.
And what he testified to yesterday was all sorts of business from this.
Elderly woman 101 years old now bunny Mellon who want it to see John Edwards as president.
All boy did she want that and she was passing all sorts of checks all sorts of money hidden in little packages and so on to Andrew young and his wife.
-- -- -- three L hunter ultimately I guess is what he is suggesting to cover up the affair is that essentially where he's going.
Well that's where he's going Megan but -- You know John Edwards gonna say that what Andrew Young -- was actually take some of that money and funnel it into building his dream moment if that comes out they can actually prove that.
As an affirmative defense that will go toward further destroying Andrew young's credibility to Megan.
I mean that they're government better help but had better hope it has twelve Joey Jackson's on the jury because this idea of contacting the witnesses.
And trying to synchronize his testimony with them if it weren't for immunity he would be prosecuted.
For tampering with witnesses he also -- the book deal make it does say something when you write a book you cash in on the case before it ever starts.
That is biased and that's going to further to hark back torpedo his credibility -- And that's why don't need to talk -- -- witnesses if your only plants -- us there and tell us sites when you hear what the other what I -- to expand that but let's understand what this case is about -- debate this case is about whether or not he know that -- John Edwards knew that this money was going to support his mistress and his child and allow them to be hidden from public view.
And I think trials are always about Megan they're always about common sense at a jury is going to relate to the fact that someone's running for president.
He's gong to do with the level best to conceal this issue from public view so that he could get elected -- now say I had no idea here is a bit of history.
Let me ask you David on the other substantive front end of the case against Edwards apparently in -- young.
Testified that or is is prepared to test -- he did testified that.
Edwards pulled aside Andrew young and said go to bunny Mellon.
-- -- bunny -- my number one fan.
And ask for a quote non campaign expense something that will benefit me because -- keep -- -- viewers.
If it's a non campaign expense of it if it's a gift from bunny.
To John it's legal show.
If it was a campaign contribution that he did not declare it's not legal so if he really did -- -- Andrew young and -- go to bunny Mellon.
And get a non campaign expense.
He -- trouble.
Well it depends -- I'm -- the defense is gonna have forensic accountants that are gonna testify.
It to exactly what that is Megan.
Because there were other expenses as well under gonna have to document those and prove that -- Mallon was actually donating to things other than campaign expenses.
You know she wanted him to win there's no question about that and and if it the other issue is this is a specific intent crime.
If the defense can show that this was handled by.
By Edwards aides and the money was switched here and there by the aids and it was in the heat entrusted the the money in the and where -- -- was supposed to go to them.
And he didn't have knowledge of it now is measures yelling at.
Is did not know in your resubmitted he's -- like I can -- -- does that get mom.
Now because it's willful blindness the -- and I don't know the point is is that he's the captain of the ship he wants to be president he has every qualification to be president but he doesn't know what his campaign doing about something so credit a political -- -- -- that's a -- -- -- legally if he can convince this jury that they were doing this without his actual knowledge.
Even if he intentionally did not gain that knowledge.
But mega despite the snip pets you know right in the second on -- -- because it becomes a putt I know he's at the political issue but it's also a legal issue because that's the essence of what this is about.
The reason he brought the -- -- -- conceal this from public -- days he had no right related -- over the jet I have no idea.
Not -- under.