- Associated Press - Thursday, May 17, 2012

GREENSBORO, N.C. (AP) — Attorneys hammered at the credibility of John Edwards and his once-trusted aide as arguments in his campaign corruption trial ended Thursday, leaving jurors to decide whether the presidential candidate’s sex scandal cover-up amounted to a crime or a litany of lies.

Jurors begin deliberations Friday on six counts of campaign finance fraud that could send Edwards to prison for up to 30 years.

They will weigh whether to believe Edwards‘ arguments that he didn’t knowingly break the law when he sought to cover up an affair with his pregnant mistress, or his aide, Andrew Young, who said Edwards recruited him to use secret donations from wealthy donor to hide the affair.

In closing arguments Thursday, prosecutor Bobby Higdon recounted Edwards‘ affair with Rielle Hunter, a videographer working on his campaign, and said the candidate would “deny, deceive and manipulate” at every turn to keep the revelation from destroying his political career.

Edwards knew of the money going to Young and Hunter from heiress Rachel “Bunny” Mellon and campaign finance chairman Fred Baron, Higdon said. He also was well aware of the $2,300 legal limit on campaign donations, Higdon said.

“It is a simple rule and applies to every candidate and every donor,” Higdon said.

Defense attorney Abbe Lowell said prosecutors didn’t prove that Edwards knew that taking the money violated the law and said the 2008 candidate shouldn’t be convicted for being a liar.

“This is a case that should define the difference between a wrong and a crime … between a sin and a felony,” Lowell told the jury. “John Edwards has confessed his sins. He will serve a life sentence for those. But he has pleaded not guilty to violating the law.”

Lowell also pointed to inconsistent testimony of both Andrew Young and his wife, Cheri, about assurances they said Edwards gave them that accepting the money from Mellon was legal.

“Even those two, who could shame Bonnie and Clyde, couldn’t get their story straight,” Lowell said.

In rebuttal arguments, prosecutor David Harbach acknowledged Young’s inconsistencies on the stand, but questioned why he would have orchestrated a scheme that had him harboring Edwards‘ mistress while he still lived with his wife.

“This guy is a criminal mastermind? Andrew Young?” Harbach asked sarcastically. “That’s nonsense. Andrew Young kept a lot of the money for himself. Of course he did. Has he lied in the past? Of course he has. … But if Andrew Young could say anything to help the government’s case, don’t you think he could have done a better job?”

Jurors appeared to be nodding frequently in response to Lowell, who stared squarely at the jurors for two hours as he made his case; Lowell appeared choked up at the end of his argument and put his face in his hands. Higdon, in contrast, often read from a binder and delivered his argument in a monotone.

Edwards is charged with six criminal counts including conspiracy to violate the Federal Election Campaign Act, accepting contributions that exceeded campaign finance limits, and causing his campaign to file a false financial disclosure report.

At the trial, prosecutors have shown two members of Edwards‘ inner circle, Baron and Young, engaged in a yearlong cover-up to hide the married presidential candidate’s mistress from the media.

Story Continues →