Posted on 05/14/2012 8:12:52 AM PDT by Zakeet
Not since Bill Clinton challenged the definition of "is" has so much hinged on a very short word.
John Edwards appears to basing much of his defense, which begins today in a North Carolina courtroom, on the legal interpretation of the word "the."
Edwards has listened to three weeks of testimony meant to prove that he violated federal campaign finance laws by using nearly $1million in donations to hide his mistress Rielle Hunter and her pregnancy during his bid for the 2008 presidential election and in the months after he dropped out -- but was still angling to be vice president or attorney general.
If convicted Edwards could be sentenced to 30 years in prison.
The statute governing illegal receipt of campaign contributions "means any gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit of money... for the purpose of influencing any election for federal office."
The words "the purpose" suggests that in order for a conviction, the sole reason for the money would have to be to finance a presidential campaign.
Edwards' legal team has argued he did not know it might be illegal, did not intend to break the law and that his main reason for hiding Hunter was to keep her secret from his wife, Elizabeth, who was dying of breast cancer.
Prosecutors, however, are arguing the law should be interpreted to mean "a purpose," meaning use of the donations does not have to be solely for a political campaign.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Yep, the Enquirer merely forced their hands.
He obviously doesn’t know the definition of the word “marriage” either. But his friends are working on that.
This came mostly with the advent of of statutory strict liability crimes. For example, if somebody stuck a handgun in your bag and they caught you on an jetliner with it. You are guilty, whether you knew you had it on you or not.
The Edwards case shows that when you have a contentious legislative session, you often get an ambiguous law. That makes a horse race in a prosecution.
I can't say I have a handle on the issues in this case, but if Edwards has the prosecution backed into an argument that "the purpose" means "a purpose," the prosecution is on the run. Just my SWAG.
Well well well............here we go again. I’m amazed that these weasels keep trying to pull this “stuff” on juries. The conceit is an affront to decent people!
Next will come the “Chewbacca Defense.”
‘The’ is the proper general article; ‘a’ or ‘an’ would not be grammatically correct in the context quoted.
That means Edwards is wrong, because ‘the’ is not modified by S’sole’. “sole’ is used when the intent is to limit the referent of ‘the’ to ‘one, and only one’ specific item, case, or circumstance.
GUILTY! We know that; let’s hope the jury does.
The guys a suzzball, but I have to agree, I think this trial is a joke, I haven’t seen anything reported that gave any impression the donors gave the money thinking it was directly for his campain and then misdirected to cover up his affair.
Government certainly hasn’t proven its case to me, at least not with what I have read.
I recently read that even though his popularity rating was 3%, just after all of his child’s true paternity was revealed as well as his mistress, along with his cheating on his dying cancer stricken wife, he confided in a good friend that he still thought he could be appointed to be an AG or SCOTUS.
He just needs to be treated like a defective animal and put down so he can’t breed anymmore.
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.