Edwards jury got it exactly right
updated 9:57 PM EDT, Thu May 31, 2012
John Edwards makes a statement outside the courthouse.
- Alan Dershowitz: Jury made the right calls on a weak government case
- He says John Edwards should have been left alone to deal with his misdeeds
- Prosecutors placed impossible burden on jury of divining Edwards' real intentions
- Dershowitz: This was part of trend toward criminalizing policy differences and personal sins
Editor's note: Alan Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter professor of law at Harvard Law School.
Cambridge, Massachusetts (CNN) -- The jury in the John Edwards case rendered exactly the right verdict. Of course they couldn't make up their mind on most of the charges. No rational person could. The judge essentially instructed them to get into John Edwards' mind (as well as into the minds of several other actors in this political soap opera) and to determine precisely what his intention was in receiving money from friends.
If his intention was primarily personal (to try to save his marriage and not humiliate his wife any further), then there was no crime. But if his intent was primarily political (to help him get elected president), then there may have been a crime. Precisely how many angels were dancing on the head of that pin?
No one, not even Edwards himself, could calculate the precise quantification of his complex and multiple intentions. This kind of decision should never be the subject of a criminal case, and the jury was right to find a reasonable doubt as to one of the charges and to throw its hands up as to the others.
Edwards after mistrial: I did a lot that was wrong
All reasonable people should now hope that the Justice Department sees the light of day and does not seek a retrial. The jury has spoken, though ambiguously, and there is no reason to believe that another fairly picked jury will be able to discern the precise intentions of the actors with any greater certainty or precision.
This entire farce of a trial is part of a larger problem that infects not only America but other Western countries as well: the criminalization of policy differences and of personal sin.
No one can justify what John Edwards did to his family, to American politics and to himself. He will forever pay a steep price for his selfishness and arrogance. But it is not a price that all Americans should have to pay by the distortion of the criminal justice system into a Rorschach test, in which the jury is asked to interpret vague action and attribute precise intentions to actions done with mixed motives.
Edwards: "I did a lot that was wrong'
Edwards trial ends in hung jury
2008: John Edwards admits affair
The criminal law should be limited to what I call "Hamlet decisions." Before a person is charged with a serious crime, the government should have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant actually engaged in a "to be or not to be" decision -- to be a felon or not to be a felon, to step over a clear line that separates criminality from sin. There is no reason to believe that John Edwards ever made that decision, because the law governing his conduct is vague, subjective and unclear in the extreme.
John Edwards: Once a cheater, always a cheater?
At the time of the founding of our republic, there was a common expression that said that a criminal law must be so clear that a potential defendant "can read it while running and still understand it." The law under which Edwards was tried was so unclear that a bevy of lawyers could not understand it while sitting and studying it for hours.
So let the remaining charges be dropped against John Edwards. Let him be relegated to his deserved place in history, and let us reserve the criminal law for real felons who knowingly violate clear criminal statutes. If Congress wants to criminalize what Edwards was accused of doing, let it enact a clear law that gives fair warning to all politicians that they may not accept any gifts, regardless of intent. I doubt Congress will pass such a law.
iReport: What is your reaction to the jury's decision?
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Alan Dershowitz.
Part of complete coverage on
updated 7:35 AM EDT, Wed June 19, 2013
Yury Fedotov says progress has been made but not fast enough to help millions of trafficking victims
updated 10:58 AM EDT, Wed June 19, 2013
Mark Quarterman says the slaughter of elephants for their tusks is at its worst in decades. As the price for ivory soars, Africa's militant groups are killing elephants to pay for arms and ammunition.
updated 7:29 AM EDT, Wed June 19, 2013
Wendy Weiser says the Supreme Court's ruling on Arizona voting restrictions was a win for voters, but why stop there? It's time to modernize the U.S. election system.
updated 7:37 AM EDT, Wed June 19, 2013
George Gascon, a former police chief, says immigrants are less likely to report crimes if they fear police. It's in law enforcement's interest to bring them out of shadows
updated 8:49 AM EDT, Wed June 19, 2013
Peter Bergen says it's up to the public to decide if the terror attacks on U.S. soil prevented by NSA spying are worth giving up privacy.
updated 11:39 AM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013
James Millward says if Chen Guangcheng's departure from NYU owes anything to Chinese pressure, his is but one, high-profile case.
updated 10:46 AM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013
Bruce Schneier says the United States is conducting offensive cyberwar actions around the world.
updated 7:42 AM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013
President Obama will speak in Berlin one week before the 50th anniversary of the famous speech by President Kennedy.
updated 8:36 AM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013
CNN let readers choose the topics for the new Change the List project. The votes are in.
updated 9:49 AM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013
Gloria Borger says the president should be leading the debate on balancing security vs. privacy.
updated 8:55 AM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013
Alex Footman says he and a former co-worker successfully sued a movie studio over their experience as unpaid interns.
updated 6:44 AM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013
Peter Bergen says the public record tends to cast doubt on the NSA's claim that its electronic surveillance has helped stop numerous plot.
updated 7:53 AM EDT, Mon June 17, 2013
Fifty years ago, President Kennedy defined civil rights and equality as a moral issue. Patrick Kennedy says today's moral issue is that people with brain injuries and mental illness face stigma and inadequate treatment.
updated 3:47 PM EDT, Mon June 17, 2013
The story of the boy bashed on social media after singing the National Anthem in mariachi costume is instructive.
updated 10:57 AM EDT, Sun June 16, 2013
Bob Greene says the Lone Ranger rode into town, fought injustice and got out. He didn't stop to tweet that he just saved the day.
updated 12:25 PM EDT, Sun June 16, 2013
Ruben Navarrette says that what many of us really want for Father's Day is an attitude adjustment for our kids.
updated 9:00 AM EDT, Mon June 17, 2013
At the outset of his term, the new president of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, will confront a thicket of national and international challenges.
updated 4:58 PM EDT, Fri June 14, 2013
Clifford Nass says talking to your car, even when you've got your hands on the wheel and eyes on the road, impairs your driving because it really confuses your brain.
updated 2:43 PM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013
Nadia Bilchik writes how she grew up in a cocoon of white privilege in South Africa. But she grew to understand the horror of apartheid and the greatness of Nelson Mandela.
updated 2:54 PM EDT, Wed June 12, 2013
Ronald Deibert says unintended consequences of the NSA scandal will undermine U.S. foreign policy interests.