Local Politics

Edwards seeks delay in sex tape testimony

Posted June 9, 2011

— Former presidential candidate John Edwards wants a judge to delay a planned deposition in the privacy lawsuit filed by his mistress over a purported sex tape.

Edwards, who was indicted last week on four counts of violating federal campaign finance laws and one count each of criminal conspiracy and making a false statement, said answering questions under oath in the civil suit would violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Rielle Hunter filed suit last year against former Edwards campaign aide Andrew Young, alleging that he took from her sensitive materials, including a reputed sex tape showing her with Edwards. She wants the items returned to her.

Young said Hunter left them behind after leaving a hideout they shared while covering up Edwards' affair during the 2008 presidential campaign.

Edwards provided testimony in February but refused to answer some questions that he says weren't related to the lawsuit.

Superior Court Judge Carl Fox ordered a June 20 deposition of Edwards that the judge would attend to rule on the relevancy of the questions posed by Young's attorneys.

In a motion filed Wednesday, Edwards asked Fox to stay his order until the criminal case against him is resolved, noting Young is a key prosecution witness.

"Given the subject matter of the indictment and the questions sought to be posed, there is no serious question that Fifth Amendment rights are implicated if the deposition occurs," the motion states.


This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • michaelclay Jun 10, 2011

    Tax Man, he didn't request not to testify he requested to testify after his criminal trial. That is a fair request.

  • pebbles262004 Jun 10, 2011

    You know Edwards is a grown man..It looks like he would have had sence enough not to get that woman pregant. A Lawyer with no common sence I guess.

  • dorindarindy Jun 10, 2011

    I think as adults and after what we see on tv, movies and the paper on a daily basis, that the moderators could be used more wisely elsewhere. We are adults, good grief. Some of my comments have not made it on here, and Im thinking if people can't handle that dont read the horrific stories in the papers. We are big boys and girls.

  • superman Jun 10, 2011

    I guess he has nothing to hide. He made the sex tapes. Everything was pretty much exposed.

  • dorindarindy Jun 10, 2011

    I hope they put it off for you John. You have paid for what you have done. Half of the men and women, or probably more than half, have done the same thing. Maybe it didn't end in pregnancy, but probably every judgemental, holier than thou person on here has had an affair that no one knows about. It is tht oldest story in the book, and David did it with Bathsheba, Republicans and Democrats do it, and it will never end. Hoping and praying you don't have to leave your children who have already lost their Mother.

  • Alexia.1 Jun 10, 2011

    "If he did nothing wrong then why put it off." --Sherlock

    Because the prosecution will use it to twist his words, find flaws in his statements, etc. In a criminal trial, he is not required to utter a word.

    Look at Brad Cooper's court case as an example. He did a deposition in an effort to keep his children. Years later, the prosecution used that against him. While I didn't watch all of the deposition, the parts I saw seemed like an honest attempt to answer questions. However, some of the questions -- many, in fact -- had little bearing on the children's welfare and I believe they were actually a deliberate attempt by the police and DA's office to trap him in some way.

    After seeing the Cooper trial, I don't think I'd voluntarily make any statements under oath. I might be "shown" to be liar because I reported using a different brand of detergent than what was found in the house, for example.

  • chevybelair57sd Jun 10, 2011

    Thank goodness we didn't get to vote for this man last election, he would have blended in perfectly with the DC bunch.

  • Tax Man Jun 10, 2011

    Fox needs to order Edwards to testify in full, honestly and truthfully - something I don't think Edwards is capable of. But the civil case should not be delayed by the criminal case. Perhaps Judge Fox could legally limit Edwards testimony to this case only and not to be available for the criminal matters. But Edwards needs to testify, even if in private with the judge and parties only. I guess once he is convicted in the criminal case it won't matter anyway. Go to jail, do not pass GO, do not collect $200!

  • DontLikeTheSocialistObama Jun 10, 2011

    Edwards will soon be asking what the definition of "is" is.

  • Sherlock Jun 10, 2011

    What has he got to hide, this is a totally different matter. If nhe did nothing wrong then why put it off.