Skip to comments.Judge orders John Edwards to answer questions about affair (under oath in a deposition)
Posted on 05/01/2011 10:48:46 AM PDT by Zakeet
Former Senator and presidential candidate John Edwards must testify before a judge about his relationship with his former mistress, Rielle Hunter, a North Carolina judge ruled on Friday.
The private testimony will come during a deposition set for June 20 as part of a civil suit brought by Hunter against Edwards' former aide, Andrew Young.
Hunter has sued Young and his wife Cheri to force the return of a videotape that allegedly shows Hunter and Edwards having sex. Young says he found the tape while packing boxes in a home near Chapel Hill, North Carolina where Hunter lived with the Youngs for a time.
A February 8 deposition of Edwards was halted when his lawyers told him not to answer numerous questions posed by Young's attorneys. Young's attorneys filed a motion March 2 asking Superior Court Judge Carl Fox to compel Edwards to answer.
On Friday, Fox said he will preside at Edwards' next deposition and settle objections as they arise. The judge also agreed that portions of the transcript not deemed confidential would be made public.
Fox, responding to a motion filed by lawyers representing media organizations, also eased a blanket protective order to allow motions in the case to be made public.
Testimony by Edwards, the 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee who sought his party's presidential nomination in 2008, could cast light on possible criminal charges regarding payments to Hunter. The U.S. Attorney in Raleigh is investigating whether Edwards violated federal law by using campaign funds to pay Hunter.
(Excerpt) Read more at ca.news.yahoo.com ...
No happy medium: One minute, the hairball was a loud mouth trial shark who conjured up the spirits of dead babies for juries, a Rat candidate for President, and headed for a job as Attorney General in the Wee Wee's cabinet ... the next, he was film star, father of the year, on suicide watch, and headed for the can!
I didn’t know Camilla Parker Bowles had a sister.
What gets me is that after all of those successful tort shakedowns the second oldest profession on earth falls to the oldest. All that money being stripped should at least have netted something more . . . presentable? Pleasant?
Some former civil defendants somewhere are chuckling with bitter but heartfelt laughter.
REALLY! Once I had seen what was on that tape, I would have set fire to the tape, the VCR, the TV, the room, the house... there would have been nothing to return. Then I would have sued them for leaving that damn tape where I could find it.
She’s no prize either.
“I didnt know Camilla Parker Bowles had a sister.” ROFLMAO
He was heavily invested emotionally and career wise in Edwards. Young was a true believer in Edwards personally and the presidential campaign politically.
Before Young was able to admit to himself that he was completely wrong about Edwards, he was already complicit in the cover-up.
This suit by Young is vengeance for what Edwards made Young and his family go through to cover for this fraud. And it is fun to watch this phony get everything he deserves.
They are really going after this guy. I mean like Bill Clinton wasn’t worse.
You’ll enjoyed kissing Bill Clinton’s axx for these many years, how come you don’t enjoy kissing Edwards axx for 10-20 years? Hmmm?
Liberals lie under oath and do so with impunity.
Forcing Edwards to tell the truth is like forcing a fish to breathe air. Somehow I doubt it will work.
Interesting that this is from Yahoo Canada. I finally found it on Yahoo U.S., but it is buried deep-it only has 18 comments. Of course, why would I expect anything different if it makes a dem look bad?
It's hard to be impressed after Clinton's performance.
As if the word “oath” means a tinker’s damn to a democrat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.