Edwards walks

The precedent so it seems has been set. So now when you send a politican money thinking you're helping with his campaign and he spends it on his mistress or Pampers for his love child that is perfectly legal. It's not a campaign contribution it "evolves" into a gift.

The real reason for a mistrial. Stupidity or political affiliation?

Maybe both.

Combined IQ 110




The jurors who sensationally found disgraced politician John Edwards not guilty of illegally accepting campaign funds yesterday have said they do not think the case should have even gone to trial.

Speaking out for the first time since the verdict, the jurors said there was not enough evidence to find the former North Carolina senator guilty. The judge also ruled a mistrial on his five other counts.

One juror, Theresa Fuller, told Good Morning America: 'I felt like the evidence just wasn't there. It could have been more - a lot more - than what it was.'

When asked if the case should have even come to court, she responded: 'Honestly, no, I don't think they should have bought it.'

But another juror told the early-morning show that she would have liked to see the former senator take the stand, as some questions had remained unanswered.

'I would've liked to her more about the money,' she said. 'More about his intentions. That would have done it for me.'

But of the acquittal, she added: 'He didn't get the money, so I just didn't think he was guilty.'

Another juror, Denise Speight, spoke out for the first time about earlier reports she had flirted with John Edwards while in the court room.

'I just thought it was the most funny think I had ever heard,' she said, insisting she had been smiling about the media's reaction to the jurors' colour-coordinated outfits.

'[I had] no intention of flirting with John Edwards and I don't think he had any intention of blushing or flirting with me.'





The interview, in which the jurors described themselves as 'one big happy family', came after Edwards's tearful acknowledgment of his acquittal outside the courtroom on Thursday.

It also emerged he is unlikely to be tried again on the charges that were ruled a mistrial.

The Justice Department refused to comment on the outcome after spending millions of dollars of taxpayers money on the prosecution of the former U.S Senator, but an anonymous source familiar with the case said that a retrial was not expected.

Legal experts lined up to back up that opinion, with Jerry H. Goldfeder, a New York campaign finance lawyer saying in the LA Times, 'It would be very surprising if the government went back to the well to try him again. I think this prosecution is over. It failed and it is over.'

Edwards walks