Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
On Friday the jury was called into the courtroom by the judge in -- John Edwards trial and reporters were told to get out.
The judge talking to the jury about some matter we still don't have specifics on it.
But some bizarre things happened on Friday we're gonna talk about today as the jury now is reconvenes.
Today on Tuesday after the long holiday weekend when they got to go home.
-- Hackett is joining us now she's a criminal defense attorney it's great to have you here joining us from Atlanta thank you for having me here in Atlanta correct.
That's track -- -- when you've been monitoring the events I know what's been going on in the North Carolina courtroom.
Two things that we do know about one is the alternate jurors who weren't hearing -- case they haven't been in the deliberation room.
Have been dressing in the same color every day one day it's red one day it's orange.
Doesn't mean anything as a defense attorney.
What Jamie we don't know -- spend close deliberations between the judge and John edwards' attorneys and also the prosecution.
About what this could mean and what the judge is going to do with these jurors on Thursday the alternate jurors showed up wearing bright yellow.
And then on Friday they showed up wearing red and a couple of the other jurors that have actually been selected and are deliberating also showed up wearing red.
We don't know what this means at this time but I know that the -- -- carefully considering what it needs and whether to possibly even.
Release some of those alternate jurors well it happens at as far as we know that they did begin deliberating today that jurors that are in the jury room and then nobody was excused if as news breaks we'll certainly bring the very latest to our viewers.
But on top of that there was some speculation by one media outlet that one of the jurors was a -- in trouble.
For flirting in the courtroom -- John Edwards.
I'm an attorney and when I have been in courtrooms and watch juries come back you look for eye contact he happens to DNA attorney.
And may -- he was trying to read this particular juror swing a -- his way I don't know what do you think it is.
Well my understanding is that the juror that was seen in making eye contact with mr.
AdWords and -- with mr.
Was in fact an alternate juror.
Yes from my experience certainly there is some interaction between the defense team.
Their client the defendant and the insurers.
Certainly the defense attorneys are trying to read those jurors and feel out where they are on making a decision.
You know whether they feel any affinity for their client.
I think in this case since it's an alternate -- it's not such a big issue because.
That alternate juror probably will not be deciding John -- state.
Were you surprised -- because when there aren't long holiday weekends jurors can sometimes pick up the pace.
Were you surprised that they.
Wanted to continue to deliberate or needed to.
After the holiday weekend.
I was surprised and to me that indicates that there's a possibility that this will either be -- hung jury that will result in a mistrial.
Or it could be a jury.
Where there's a split verdict where the jurors who may feel that mr.
Edwards is guilty on some counts.
And they acquit him on some counts.
In either case if this is a split verdict or if this is a hung jury there's a possibility that prosecutors could come back.
And bring another case against mr.
Edwards on those charges so.
I think that the fact that the jurors did not reach a verdict on Friday shows that there may be some issue in reaching that verdict what questions could they possibly have at this point after so many days and deliberation and after review again.
Of whatever the documents they requested that the judge did allow them to look at.
You know campaign finance law is very complicated and in this case the prosecutors are trying to show both.
Edwards knew that he was -- intended recipient of all of this money.
From bunny Mellon and also that he knew that he was violating -- finance laws.
So they really have a lot to prove here beyond a reasonable doubt.
If there were seven days of testimony seventeen days excuse me a testimony in this case and 500 exhibits so the jurors really have a lot to review.
And have to also work that end to the complicated campaign finance law.
To make their decision about whether John Edwards knew.
That he was receiving this money and he was violating the law.
He did not testify.
At John Edwards someone so skilled at trials and trial law.
It would have been fascinating to have seen him on the stand.
Do you think that the reason he didn't and maybe he wanted to and it was advised by his attorney not to.
That he didn't feel the prosecutor prove the case and does a jury understand that that sometimes you don't put your client on because.
And what we're joined by -- well who's a former prosecutor and ask for the same question.
When the jury interpret that as he felt he didn't have to -- because they just didn't meet their Burton.
-- think so Jamie I think that in this case mr.
Edwards may have come off says slightly cocky.
By not testifying his daughter Kate did not testify she's also -- -- -- we didn't hear from real hunter.
The basically the defense made their argument by cross examining the prosecution's witnesses particularly Andrew Young.
Right so that you know can the jurors interpret this as the prosecution having a very weak case.
Have they interpreted it that way well they haven't reached a verdict yet they haven't come back when the -- so I don't know that that's how they're interpreting at.
Least seven days.
If that first of all my question it part a two juries understand that concept I don't think.
I don't think they understand it I think it always even though they're told -- -- -- cannot take anything away from the fact the defendant and take the stand.
-- want to hear.
They want to hear from the thing I didn't do it I did nothing wrong.
But I know having little quite -- the defense lawyer worked with him on impeachment of president Clinton's very good like he's very Smart.
And I think he realized -- he thought anyone that the prosecution didn't quite meet its burden on the law.
All morality and all of that I think we'll all agree with no there's no dialogue really there.
But on the line they didn't have -- an annual -- took -- chance -- the not to put John Edwards on.
-- might be Smart also not to put his daughter came home.
They were talking about the heat on humanize John Edwards.
I just kept thinking that's gonna backfire that seems to -- like -- sentencing witnessed exactly an indication exactly and sentencing.
But to put your daughter if I mention I'm sitting around watching that thing.
You are putting your daughter's gone she's lost her mother.
-- you have an affair with someone -- and fathered a child with this woman and you're putting your daughter through that I would despite he's using.
Her wounded exactly -- he chose not to more than lawyer a lawyer to what about real -- person believes what would she had to say.
-- do you think the jury is disappointed in some way that they didn't have the chance to see her question.
-- all the -- what could she say yes I took this and have the money but it's not that the critical thing here it's not.
Her intent what she knew she got the money she spent the money.
But it's not -- content from about what's in her mind.
It wasn't what was in John Edwards on the time what does he know what does he know them in the same sport and with -- good news for -- hunter.
Aside from the campaign that became critical issue to me so she had nothing really to add to that just -- value.
We -- yeah and definitely tabloid value right though not enough -- -- which you brought the baby -- core I wonder.
-- as a prosecutor do you feel the prosecution has proven their case.
I think they've done.
Everything John I think they have been very difficult mountain to climb here because -- -- case the first impression it has never been tried like this before.
Where the money doesn't go to the candidate goes to a third party.
And again inside someone's brain and say that he knew that's that the money was going for a campaign contribution when the two daughters have paid gift taxes on.
That's -- How many more days carry it well this -- be behind closed doors -- thing.
You know Jamie I don't know the answer that question.
That I I would agree though that there is.
A very very strong burden for the prosecution.
To prove in this.
-- and big hurdle to jump.
And I don't think that they've done it I think that in this case.
And the defense team has shown that there is no.
Testimony and -- circumstantial evidence showing John edwards' knowledge so I think the jury could be out.
For quite some except the one thing I just want to mention real quick is that it did jury instructions the judge gave last week or when they went out.
Which is that only -- the sole motivation does not have to be.
To cover it up for campaign finances they could be just one of the motivation -- that was critical to me that gave a real -- the real jump.
This of the prosecution's case it's great insight I agree absolutely are in -- -- nice to meet you thanks for joining us from Atlanta today.
At least you're doing a brownie you're probably doing triple duty -- -- -- and I think.
How good out played out over.
Filter by section