John Edwards Was a 'Bad Husband,' But Not a Criminal, Lawyer Argues

GREENSBORO, N.C. May 17, 2012— -- John Edwards was a bad husband who cheated on his wife while she died of cancer, but he never broke the law, his lawyer said in closing arguments today.

The prosecution said Edwards was more than a bad husband. The former presidential candidate was the chief architect of a criminal scheme to illegally use campaign contributions to cover up the love affair.

Edwards, 58, is on trial for allegedly using nearly $1 million in donations from wealthy donors Fred Baron and Rachel "Bunny" Mellon to keep secret his affair with mistress Rielle Hunter in order to protect his 2008 presidential ambitions and later his hopes of winning a spot as vice president or attorney general.

The jury is being asked to decide whether the money was political donations used to dupe the government or gifts from friends who helped Edwards fool his wife, Elizabeth, who was dying of cancer. If convicted, Edwards could be sentenced to as much as 30 years in prison.

"This is a case which should define the difference between someone committing a wrong and someone committing a crime," said Edwards' attorney Abbe Lowell.

"John was a bad husband, but there is not the remotest chance that John did or intended to violate the law," Lowell said.

"If what John did was a crime, we'd better build a lot more court rooms, hire a lot more prosecutors and build a lot more jails," he said.

Lowell put much of the blame for soliciting and spending the money on former aide Andrew Young and his wife Cheri Young, a couple that he said "could shame Bonnie and Clyde." The Youngs, he said, used Edwards' scandal to enrich themselves.

"John's conduct was shameful, but it was human… Andrew Young's lies on the stand and the government sponsoring those lies is worse," Lowell said.

"Andrew Young will make up anything he wants… and the government will build its case on it," he said.

Lowell said the money was going to support a campaign, just not John Edwards' political campaign.

"There was a camapign purpose -- there was -- it was a campaign to make the Youngs rich beyond their means... To make the Youngs rich with money they didn't earn," he said.

John Edwards remained unemotional during closing arguments, much the way he has throughout the trial, keeping his chin pressed against his crossed hands, and only occasionally looking at the jury.

Prosecutor Robert Higdon tried to convince the jury that Edwards was an archly ambitious politician fixated on obtaining a higher office.

"He would deny, deceive and manipulate," Higdon told the jury. "The whole scheme was cooked up to support John Edwards' political ambitions."

The prosecutor recalled the testimony of Andrew Young who was uneasy about the "'truck load of money" that was "way way way over the limit" in donations that is allowed by the Federal Election Commission, but said it was to "help John Edwards maintain his candidacy."

Higdon recalled that Cheri Young testified she insisted she be told by Edwards personally that the complicated plan to funnel Mellon's money through her personal account was legal and that Edwards curtly told her, "Get the money in."

"Ladies and gentlemen, that's what this case is all about," he told the jury.

Edwards so wanted to be a "player on the national scene" that he ignored the campaign finance rules established to give both the rich and the poor an equal say in politics.

"John Edwards forgot his own rhetoric," Higdon said, alluding to Edwards' "two Americas" campaign speeches. "He had no problem dividing the two Americas when it served his own purpose."

Higdon started his closing argument by recalling that December 2006 day when Edwards declared his candidacy.

"He wanted to be our leader. He asked for our vote," Higdon said. In the audience that day was Rielle Hunter, and on "that day, the seeds of his destruction were sown."