Elizabeth Edwards' Suit is Foolish

It was reported, on Good Morning America, this morning that Elizabeth Edwards is threatening Andrew Young with a Alienation of Affection lawsuit unless he agrees to certain demands. The demands make Edwards' suit threat look more like a shakedown. Edwards is demanding that Young donate $250,000 to the Wade Edwards Foundation and that he hand over certain email and voice messages. Those demands make Elizabeth Edwards look like a woman who is just trying to force someone to donate to her charity.

Also, the lawsuit seems to not have any real foundation. Edwards is claiming that Young's help in the hiding of the affair between her husband and his mistress caused the end of her marriage. It seems that the marriage would have only ended earlier if Young had not helped hide the affair.

There is no question that Young and Hunter engaged in a conspiracy to defraud Elizabeth Edwards' interest in her marital estate, and that they may be guilty of alienation of affections, as that cause of action exists under North Carolina law.

I predict she delivers a royal ass kicking to Young, and forces him to spill his guts.

She is suing Andrew Young and not Reille Hunter. That is why I said the case has not foundation. If she were suing Hunter I would say there is real foundation. In addition, she is not suing based on being defrauded out of her marital estate, she is suing based on Young not telling her about the relationship. I highly doubt anyone will allow someone to be sued under this statute when they were not the person who engaged in the affair.

It's not my understanding that North Carolina law regarding the civil cause of action of alienation of affections is confined to adulterers. There appear to be three elements:

*there was love in the marriage between the husband and wife
*that love was alienated and destroyed
*defendant's malicious conduct was a contributing factor to the loss of affection

If there's North Carolina case law that says only the adulterer may be a defendant in such a claim, I'd be happy to read it.

The video tape that he somehow got and kept show that.

What a trio they make - John, Anthony and Rielle.

treat them as though they're respectable people, as they hawk their kiss and tell book. Young and his wife are creepy.

what and how Edwards handled this whole thing, but for Young to stick a knife in and turn it a couple of times, really is low! After all, he DID benefit monetarily by his association with Edwards!

And while Edwards certainly has acted like a cad, there have been so, so many more that belong in this LONG list of "betrayers!"

Thinking back over time, so many others have acted in a like-minded way, but I don't recall anyone getting as much flack as Edwards has. And that's not to say I condone ANYTHING he's done, and I DO understand what it could have caused had he been elected.

But we DID have a recent POTUS who had known affairs BEFORE he was elected, and despite this, he ended up having yet ANOTHER scandal while in office! One would have thought he could have curtailed his desires while in office, AT LEAST! I will also say that I think that even HE may have been set up, although I could never prove it.

And I need to add, that I did work and vote for him for BOTH of his terms and still think he can almost sell ICE to many in Alaska! I feel very sorry for ALL involved, but I also think Reille may have had an ulterior motive and I seem to recall reading an article way back when about this too. But I'm sorry, I can't recall where!

And yes, it DOES seem like I'm defending John Edwards, but still I can NEVER get over the fact that much of what he said was spot on. Especially his statement about sitting down with Big Pharma, Insurance Companies and Corporation for dinner and how THEY would eat all the food! He was so correct about this, even if ANYONE thinks he never believed it. There were so many of us here who did, and while his affair caused him to pay a hefty price... one must understand that he is most certainly paying THAT price! In Spades!

JMHO!

And I just posted what you did on another thread. What about Jackie Kennedy, Hilary?

Are they supposed to go out and announce to the public that their husbands are cheaters?

The actions of the cheating husbands put them in a no-win situation, and the cheaters are the ones at fault.

We've found out about a lot of cheaters in office recently, and I'm sure there are MANY we don't know about and never will.

It's too much dumping on of Elizabeth for me, and with Young and his wife parading around proudly, making money off of trashing Elizabeth, bragging that they have a sex tape, I say go get 'em Elizabeth.

really flamed, I suppose I should leave it at that!
:shrug:

He was spot on. I also liked his health care reform plan the best and the fact that he came righ tout and SAID that the private insurance companies would not be able to compete against the public option and eventually would go out of business! I think where I was so misguided was in wanting so badly to believe the John and Elizabeth narrative, their closeness after the tragedy of Wade's death, her extraordinary efforts to have two more children later in life and her cancer. I guess I must have idealized them because when I first heard of the Enquirer article I kept on defending him. I couldn't believe that he would do something so foolish and reckless.

I should have known. But I didn't.

I can't be the one to pass that kind of judgment. Hundreds of thousands of people have done much worse!

You need only to think WAR! But that's completely beside the point to be sure! I've tried to file it under "shit happens" and try to recover! Not the first time, nor the last that we will be DUPED!

Some would say that things going on right now, while not of such a personal nature (one on one) are actually quite "personal" to us all!

Just stating what's obvious to me!

who hold sway over many others. There is a real temptation to just go out and do what you want because you have so much power. I think the Greeks called it "hubris."

I also remember reading the articles you're writing about.

BOTH were set up..I remember reading this also..there's no doubt both of those so-called "women" were out to ruin BOTH marriages.

Also, you probably remember reading the article about where the "lady # 1" & what she had access to & who she knew.

# 2--help with "getting pregnant'?

There's no doubt in my mind, both of these were blind. # 2 comes from a very "interesting" family.

check it out! And yes, now I recall more... there are some interesting "factoids" in her background. I think I heard either yesterday or the day before that the "lawyers" between Edwards and the "other" woman were working on some sort of agreement.

This was a comment made by someone on MSNBC when asked about the possibility that Edwards might be engage. Andrea Mitchell may have asked the question and the person replying said they didn't KNOW that he planned to marry her, BUT that only the lawyers were talking to each other. Went on to say that given that information it didn't "seem" like they would be engaged, however he couldn't confirm anything!

But, if one were to GOOGLE, there is some interesting information on Rielle! It also gave information on how to say her name because it was said "different" than most thought! Just thought I would add that!

Having said that, I DON'T think that's where if first read about her, it was somewhere else.

And regarding lady #1, to me there has always been something very untoward and about that whole situation!!!

Also, Rielle goes by 4 different names. I find that quite interesting. Her family has an interesting background also, including her ex-husband. You can check that out. Plus, read that she was an actress, she certainly IS! She was having an affair with another guy, Jeff Goldblum from "Law & Order", at the time she was "seducing" Edwards. She led Goldblum on into believing he was the father of the baby. When he asked her if he was the father, she'd tell him "maybe". How sick is this chic, big time! How many other men had she been dating? Interesting that she supposedly never got pregnant before, ya right. All that she sees is $$ signs, & she liked the $18,000.00/month. Many families don't even make that in a year!!!

the MAJOR character in THE FLY!! Appropriate? I wonder? It's been said before that he was a heart breaker too! Haven't checked out his BIO on GOOGLE yet!

Veeeeerrry Interesting!

He's been doing anything to get attention for quite a while now.

There was a time he was up and coming, but that time has past. But a lot of people don't get over that --and money won't cure that feeling.

:shrug:

has passed, the $$$ is looking might appealing... :shrug:

YIKES -- Edit to add I didn't for a second mean to imply that he and JE were lovers if that's how it reads. I think he thought so highly of Edwards, gave his all, and was hurt when he realized Edwards didn't think as highly of him. So revenge initially -- to hurt back -- then when the feelings subsided a bit, the vision of dollar signs lured him to act further.

:mad: :puke:

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Elizabeth was willing to make a scapegoat out of Young.

Moreover she admitted that she continued with the campaign of her husband long after she new that this scandal was going to blow up.

EE was a willing participant in perpetuating a fraud to the donors of her husband's campaign by continuing to receive donations even though her husband had confessed that he had an affair and his mistress was pregnant. Only a fool would believe that her husband's mistress was carrying Young's child, knowing that Young was Edwards 'errand boy'.


I wish I could get my $ 200 back.

I'm so sick of all this "E.E is a saint" myth.

She had to have known more then she lead on. EE is not dumb, she's a very educated smart individual. It is possible she was in denial of wanting to believe her husband was having an affair. Given her husband's campaign, I also understand it put her in a bad situation, either play along or sit on the sidelines. If she sat on the sidelines, it would quickly become a story that would hurt his campaign. The only alternative was for him to bow out, which he did after performing poorly in the first few primaries.

Just a disclosure, I too donated to Edwards early on (it was only $10). At the very beginning of the campaign (April 2007) I couldn't decide on Edwards or Obama and decided to make my first donation to both (both $10). The next month, I made up my mind and ended up making up my mind in weeks later.

It's nice that she is standing up to that sick fuck Young. More power to her.

so she will do some things that don't seem nice. It's how she is trying to cope emotionally. I've been there, done that, have the t-shirt: my husband got the nanny pregnant. She, unfortunately, has the whole world scutinizing her reactions; I simply had my small town watching. Years later, I'm fine, even amused by my own story. She probably won't have that years-later when she can look back and laugh.

For a woman who's been through waht she has, to have a vile matter become so very public, I say--KICK 'EM ALL IN THE TEETH IF THEY HELPED.

Good for Ms. Edwards.

:shrug:

There is no doubt that Young conspired with John and Rielle to defraud Elizabeth's interest in the Edwards' marital estate. There is no question that North Carolina law has the cause of action for alienation of affections, and that it appears applicable.

She will likely use this litigation to force Young to spill his guts about everything John said and did, and then use that to make John surrender in the divorce.

My money is on Elizabeth to skin these weasels.

I had a NOT in there that had to come out. I completely missed it because it was in the subject line and only noticed it a moment ago. I was like "WTF is that?" As if someone else had gotten in my post and typed it.

:hi:

if your logic were sound...

Your motion to dismiss is denied, and you're sanctioned for filing a frivolous pleading.

Not good logic, and you can't file motions to dismiss (or sanction anybody) on DU.

And she was right.

She never said the existence of the suit meant it has merit. She said it has merit (which is true) and if it didn't have merit, no responsible attorney would take. Perhaps you think a responsible attorney would file an unmeritorious suit.

This case is well founded in North Carolina law, and it certainly appears she can make a prima facie case for alienation of affection against Andrew Young.

And how, prey tell, have you decided just who is and who is not a "responsible" attorney, when you should know full well that knowing that one has a meritorious suit that one intends to see through to a jury verdict represents only one of a multitude of strategic reasons for filing same?

It's a silly point, and your arguments about the merits of this antiquated "moral crime" tort are silly. Lay out the elements of the tort, and then match the facts to them, if you want to make that argument. Of course you don't have to do so, but your argument about the merit of the suit can't move forward without this next (seemingly obvious) step.

But all of this misses the bigger point: I haven't made an argument about the merits of this case, since my state (like most north of the Mason-Dixon) have abolished these sorts of "moral crime" torts as incompatible with modern society. :silly: :hi:

Unlike you, I knew I should consult the law of North Carolina rather than assume they don't have Alienation of Affections as a cause of action. Turns out they do have it, and alienated spouses win money on such claims all the time. Turns out the law doesn't limit the class of defendants to adulterers or paramours.

That means I concluded before I ever posted on this topic that Elizabeth Edwards had a valid cause of action under North Carolina law, that she could make the elements of the cause of action by facts known in the public sector, and that she could therefore make it past any motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action.

You can dismiss it as a "moral crime," but it's cause of action, the same as a cause of action as "tortious interference with a business relationship." Your failure to recognize causes of actions is consistent with your approach to legal problems, which is sloppy.

When did I argue that this COA doesn't exist in NC? Can you provide any language to that effect?


"I concluded before I ever posted on this topic that Elizabeth Edwards had a valid cause of action under North Carolina law, that she could make the elements of the cause of action by facts known in the public sector, and that she could therefore make it past any motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action."

So you come here to give a lecture, rather than to discuss? :rofl:

"Your failure to recognize causes of actions is consistent with your approach to legal problems, which is sloppy."

What are you talking about? When have I "fail(ed) to recognize causes of actions" (and apparently more than once: "failures"!)? You're demolishing a point no one but you has made (and doing so with gusto!) It's a sad way of "debating".

But I don't think Ms. Edwards has stupid attorneys. If this case actually exists, they have reason to believe Ms. Edwards can win or they wouldn't take the case. I know how torts and family court work; I get paid to know.

Yes, only the judge can decide merit. Bit there is case law and a foundation.

And to my knowledge, the whole thing is still a rumor spread by a sleazeball cashing in on Ms. Edwards at the WORST possible time for her.

In fact, such filings represent a tiny minority of suits filed--most civil suits are filed in full knowledge that they will never be argued in front of jury.

a client agreement if they think NOTHING will come of the action sought.

And I'm pretty sure that Ms. Edwards has competent attorneys. In fact, I'd say they are likely more than competent. Call it a hunch if you will.

None of this turns on "competence".

"Also, the lawsuit seems to have any real foundation." "Seems not ..." would agree with the rest of your post, I think.

She should be doing other things during her cancer battle than filing frivolous lawsuits.

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the cause of action of alienation of affections under North Carolina law.

Elizabeth is above this kind of thing.

Why don't you just say that you don't like it? Because that's all that's going on. It offends you. But there are likely many kinds of lawsuits that you wouldn't like. This is a good lawsuit, and if your ox was being gored, you'd be crying to your lawyer to go get some justice for you.

John Edwards, Anthony Young, and Rielle Hunter all deserve a litigation ass kicking from Elizabeth, and I'm going to enjoy watching it happen. This gives Elizabeth a chance to get some payback against these people, who all conspired against her at a critical time in her life.

The wailing and gnashing of teeth is just getting started.

as they are in most states...

What's your point?

That's the point.

It's not a shakedown, except in your head.

actually they are all just horrible. But I can see why she would want to get her pound of flesh, so to speak.

This story just gets more and more like something from the TV show "Dallas".

If this makes her feel better, good for her. Young is an opportunistic creep.

I thought that only applied to people who actually screwed your spouse.

i am not sure

i feel bad for her and i am sure she feels helpless, sick with cancer and sick with knowing she may leave her kids behind to this mess.

:thumbsdown:

She obviously has too much money to spend on her wounded ego and her revenge fantasies. The only winners at the end of all this will be the lawyers. Ironic, given the family background.

ruthless to her. He deserves all of it.

I hope she rips JE, this guy and John's little moonbeam mistress a new one.

her charity, which seems like a worthy one to me. She is doing what she can to put Young (and Rielle, by extension) on trial before the American people and to make him pay for it (to charity) out of his "ill gotten" gains. I can see that. He's made lots of money by selling his book. Now she wants him to make some restitution to her for what he has done and wants to diminish the profit-from-misery that his little book is. Simple, really.

An admittedly sedate affair by comparison. One point of commonality was a young child was involved, so my ex and I would be communicating on a lot of things, and we would both be in the picture for the duration of childhood and adolescence. I wanted as little acrimony as possible so that my daughter could be free to have as normal an environment as possible. At the same time, the lawyers on both sides were happy to see us fight it out, and there's always something to fight about, if you want.

These are high-powered people with tons more money than average folk, and their situation is admittedly complex, but I think it's pretty safe to say their resources aren't helping matters. The marriage is over, John's probably going to wind up with Rielle, and the more this gets dragged out, the worse it is for the little bystanders. By all means, go deep into Johnny's pockets, but lawsuits like this just keep the whole saga alive, which can't be healthy.

If I were Elizabeth I'd be thinking "what right does he have, coming in here and colluding with John in the destruction of our marriage? What kind of person does this?"

Your divorce (and mine, too) probably didn't involve that set of circumstances. In fact, she has been betrayed by THREE people. Bad enough that the other woman and her husband both betrayed her, but his closest aide and also her friend (she thought) did the same, outrageously so.

In my case, my three grown children are aware of the misery their father caused. My grandchildren are too young and I am not happy that they innocently believe that grandpa is an OK guy. But he is now old and won't live much longer so I am circumspect. If I were in Elizabeth's shoes, tho, I don't know if I wouldn't do what she is doing, to tell you the honest truth. Her kids may eventually feel that their mother did an heroic thing...

I settled out of court with insurance company for CASH. Was I doing a shakedown.
If they didn't agree to our (me & attorney) demands then we would have gone to court.

Instead of cash she is just asking for charitable donation. Same cost to the defendant but she can't be accussed of doing it for the money. Oh wait she is and on DU. Guess no good deed goes unpunished.

Also last I checked it is up to the courts to determine if a case has merit.
If her claim has no merit then Young shouldn't take the deal, go to court, and the case will be dismissed.
On the other hand if it does have merit it is entirely possible Young could lose lot more than $250K in court.
See legal system does work.

for his family.

John Edwards continues to disappoint ~something tells me that he and his bride to be will not be happy together.
On edit--- they deserve each other.

20 years from now when he looks back on the decline from being a Presidential hopeful to divorcing his wife dying with cancer and marrying a woman willing to cheat with a married man I think he will be sad.

When the heat of the moment is over and you only had the cold reflect of history things look much different.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/10/edwards-spokeswoman-denies-story-on-marriage-proposal/?fbid=QtcrbPOBWI7

He has told so many lies.

That is the problem with a person that has a long long nose ~ they can't stop it!

I really don't know if he will or will not marry that lady,I do know that I have lost respect for him.

"That is not my baby!"
Yep it is!

I guess. Thanks again for the avatar, but decided the "flaming" would be too intense. I get enough as it is for not supporting Obama in ALL of his decisions!

But thanks again! And I should get over to that "other place" that so many worked on! You're one of the good ones to me! I did hear that the "lawyers" between the two are hashing things out which would indicate (as some reporters say) that they aren't engaged. But nothing is set in stone I'm sure. And I really need to STOP posting about this, it just keeps the thing going!

Outta here!~

I'd trust the Enquirer before I'd trust him.

Your insurance company actually owed you some form of money. In the case of Elizabeth Edwards Andrew Young does not owe her any money. It is different when someone is trying to get what they actually deserve as opposed to when someone just trys to get money from someone just because someone either wants to hurt the other person or just wants money.

I don't know how I'd deal with the crap that's been dumped on her. Most people in her situation thankfully get a little privacy, but both her cancer and her husband's gross infidelities have been splashed all over the tabloids. She probably needs a target for her frustration and grief. Her husband is not really what you'd call a hard target - he's beyond pathetic. I'm giving her a pass (not that it matters one whit).

it would be like to have these two creeps, (Young and wife) parading around on talk shows, making money off of intimate details.

Like her or not, Elizabeth is one heck of a strong woman, and is fighting back, despite her health.

She's taking control of the situation good for her.

He doesn't seem to care a bit about his kids or his seriously ill wife.

Absolutely.....and I hope she gets every penny, whether to charity or otherwise.

and reeks of blaming everyone but her husband for the end of her marriage.

entitled to their opinion! I doubt any of us here will ever know the "full extent" of it all, but that's just how the cookie crumbles!

And crumble it did!

Young and his wife becoming public.

make it more likely to come public?

It's like waving a red flag in front of a bull.

I can't believe we actually elected a family that seems to understand the theory behind a "wholesome family".. and avoided this train wreck. Clinton Part Deux...

If the media stops talking about her for a few days, Ms. Edwards will find a way to start them up again, it seems. For a woman who is mortified, she surely loves the press! :wow:

playpen for himself and potential wife to be...coupled with the constant barrage of trash in the media, Elizabeth is entitled to whatever satisfaction she can get out of any legal move.

She has legal advice from her battery of attorneys and they are doing what needs to be done to protect her and her children's interests over those interests of the potential new bride(once a divorce is filed).

Good for Elizabeth.

Now, if only wife #1 will find a way to go after Neutered Gingrich. Perhaps a cooperative venture between #1 and #2...lol.

her fair share! But it took about 3 years in her case, but she finally won! Don't know about how things will actually turn out for Elizabeth, but I think she is due her fair share!

And do forgive me, I didn't know Edwards was going to marry his mistress. I obviously missed it, but then I've tried not to get involved in the Edwards posts because of how I supported and felt about him.

I've heard it more than one time, 50% of married couples experience an affair and that's not saying much about marriage! And yes, Edwards betrayed more than just a wife, I GET THAT!

I have a saying I use... "once you get up on that pedestal, you have FURTHER to fall!" Just sayin'.

some kind of justice out of this whole thing. I think she has transcended the tabloid tackiness of what befell her. I think she is on to justice playing out as Greek tragedy. When you think about the themes of Greek tragedy, they deal with matters such as this, one of monumental betrayal.

I am not sure what did Young have to do with "alienation of affection."

Plus, I think she feels he is smearing her.

Of course, if this were Greek tragedy she would have the mistress killed...

Elizabeth and her need for attention.
Also heard that she and John are very very cheap, if so she's probably doing some of the legal work herself.
Who the hell knows what these sickos are up to.

Do the Democrats get to sue you and your husband for running for the nomination knowing full well this story could explode all over the news? Can we sue you for fraud?

Especially since she was considered the "brains" behind the whole operation.

that's why she's doing this.

She wants to protect her image. The money would go to a good cause, but that portion of the demand seems to be a smokescreen.

I'm sure the release of those messages would be deeply humiliating and do in her already damaged image.

Welcome to DU.

:hi:

What a disappointment they became. Both of them.

pro-labor. John Edwards was one of the most pro-labor Democrats to ever come along. I was drawn to his candidacy. It disappoints me that he couldn't keep his wiener in his britches. Each of the tabloid revelations over recent months makes the entire ordeal even more sour. If Elizabeth Edwards really is threatening a law suit against Young, she would be making an already untenable set of circumstances even worse.

There are some young children in the Edwards family who will have to navigate through public memory of this mess in very short order.

See my earlier post in this thread on "rough justice." It is rough on everyone, tho, I agree. She wants to win and she wants closure to come after, not before, that, IMO. I'm sure she feels that the wicked should not prosper. I think we have to remember that she was the wronged party and she did not want to have John's affair become public knowledge. That desire misguided her into a decision to go forward with the campaign, denying the reality of what happened in her own mind and not thinking through how disastrously this thing could play out. I see this as the "capstone" of this whole mess...

becoming, or then again, it might just mean one more car or two off the track in an already-smoking train wreck.

I'd like to see both of them make fewer public stands on their own navigations and more pledges to their kids.

A likely unconstitutional monstrosity, even.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alienation_of_affection

I think it needs to be overruled. I do not believe anyone can take someone's affection away from another person. If someone has an affair it is most likely they already have lost affection for the person on which they cheated.

It will provide even more 'entertainment' for the media and the little-old-ladies-under-the-hairdryer crowd. That is, if Elizabeth doesn't die before this whole thing can get to court.

Edwards "Young alienated John's affection"

Youngs Lawyer: Didn't Reille Hunter do that? Didn't John do that? Just how strong of a marriage was it anyway?

Case over.

So she had three people working against her. People she trusted.

Think about how you would feel with that kind of massive betrayal...

But she still has no case.

whether Mrs. Edwards is doing a shakedown, is acting letigiously, or whether what she is doing is right or wrong. Why should we stand in judgment of her actions, Mrs. Edwards of all people. Fucking A people. So what now, DR Court reform? Leave that to the pugs.

All her issues with alienation of affection started because one man decided to put his dick in another woman. Her issues should be resolved in divorce, not this alienation of affection bullshit against other people.

all about preventing the shit she sent from becoming public. I'm betting she talked to her lawyer about the best way to get those emails and phone messages back and he/she told her that this is the route to take.

That's why you don't leave nasty messages that you wouldn't mind everyone hearing later. :)

I know I would.

on someone's phone. And yes, I've been in a position where I itched to.

No proof that I know of yet.

though I think this action speaks louder than his words.

for not wanting them to be published. The point is we don't know what is on the tape, do we? She might have said something totally different and had reasons for him not to publish them.

She also might have wanted this thing bottled up from now on. Maybe her health is not as great as we think it is and she feels she has only a limited amount of time left to her to "put things right."

...belong in the Entertainment forum.

Thank you for your concern.

The thing is, I do find it mildly interesting in an Entertainment Tonight kind of way. Same as Tiger Woods's troubles. That's what I meant. Sorry I was rude about it. That was lame.

If we throw out the Edwards threads, the Cheney, Reagan, Gingrich - every disgraced Republican threads all have to be classified as entertainment too.

They're not, because even though none of those people hold office or likely will anytime soon - they are still political figures, as is Edwards and the whole sorry circus that surrounds him.

- If she wants revenge, she needs to address it to her husband. He alone is responsible for this mess. Had he kept it in his pants there would have been no Hunter or Young. Edwards is 100% at fault.

Too bad Elizabeth is throwing away what remains of her energy and her life by blaming the wrong person and allowing her misplaced anger to control her.

it is justice. She has to make sure that things are airtight before departing for the sake of her kids.

Again...good for Elizabeth.

- The 100% guilty person here is Edwards and Edwards only. Everyone else is just window dressing. Elizabeth has let her anger take over what is left of her life and has lapsed into a bitter and somewhat confused figure. I can't help but to feel sorry for her.

she left that were way over the top. she doesn't want them to go public. I don't blame her but this has nothing to do with justice. she doesn't want the humiliation of having those messages in the public sphere.

First off, I assume much of the content is irrevocably already in his book. It may be too late.

Second, it seems part of his motivation is that he now hates the Edwardses with the same passion he once loved JRE. It seems that he first disliked Elizabeth several years ago. I can't believe that such an intelligent woman, who is a lawyer, would have not realized that messages could be saved - where they are phone, email or letters. I think once a message is sent, it belongs to person it was sent to.

If, she would have thought over the next year of how they seem, she should have apologized to the Youngs for the out of control messages and accepted the fact that the real person she should be angry with was her husband.

That includes the voice mails ABC already has and aired, the published book, etc. Can't censor the story itself that's already public. Using her greater resources (i.e. her wealth to pursue litigation) to crush this guy who was her husband's flunky isn't much of a legacy to leave one's kids.

If anything it would go to confirm the less than flattering image of Elizabeth portrayed in not only Young's book but also "Game Change," where on the record named sources sympathetic to Elizabeth subsequently confirmed incidents described in the book but made the case that the incidents should be considered in context.

Another Edwards hating, bashing thread.

This thread is not about hating or bashing Elizabeth Edwards. It is about pointing out that threatening a guy with a lawsuit unless he gives you money may seem like a shakedown to some people. I never said she was a criminal. I pointed out that it was a foolish move in that it made her look bad.

But even if the case is thrown out, at least Elizabeth has let the world know what a disgusting sleezy asshole Young is.

engenders?

John Edwards around and did pracetically everything but digest his food for him.

They deserve each other.

think calling Elizabeth a shyster & a hustler is rather rough. Sure, politics is a tough game, but c'mon, is this type of name calling needed?

I know, sticks & stones, but perhaps you might want to reconsider, then perhaps not. I suppose since I don't see her that way, it IS offensive to me and I think to others also regardless of the whole mess.

Elizabeth a shyster & hustler? She's far from that. Perhaps you're jealous of her being that she's a brilliant female attorney? Your post clearly shows your mentality. Her and John are millionaires who fought for people who were wronged, & a judge wouldn't rule in their favor for their clients cases they did just because they were Atty Edwards'.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I hope she nails the bastard to the wall along with Hunter and Edwards.

She's been through hell and knows way more details about what's going on than anyone on this forum.

is cheating on them.

Young actively engaged in deception that contributed to the destruction of her marriage. That is actionable in NC.

Can they come back with an unclean hands defense, as Elizabeth knew about the affair and still pushed John to get the Democratic nomination?

Just asking.

Would a defense want to fault a dying woman with young children for attempting to keep her marriage? I doubt it.

He did it because John Edwards asked him to. The affections appeared to be already alienated.

Elizabeth believed she was part of an intact marriage when Young acted to hide the affair from her. That's what she's addressing with the suit under North Carolina law.

helping hide the affiar help her marriage continue. If the affair were known about sooner wouldn't the marriage have ended sooner? This is a stupid law.

x(

i agree that suing someone for alienation of affection makes you look small, petty, and a throwback to 1800, and that this suit makes it look like edwards is extorting young, which puts her in the wrong where she would have been in the right -- makes the whole thing look like an ugly money grab

HOWEVER, i wonder if you are considering the effects of cancer treatment/chemotherapy on the brain -- chemo fog is a well-known side effect of treatment for breast cancer, to the point where some survivors seem to change their entire system of values and beliefs

i know a woman who was formerly high achieving, after treatment for breast cancer, is a completely a different person, not just in looks (her very HAIR grew in a different texture and color) but in personality, values and beliefs -- she became entangled w. a drug addict and from being on the partner track, first got on the mommy track (with a drug addict!) and now is on the unemployed screw-up track

chemotherapy is strong drugs, yes, needed to save your life when there is no alternative, but what they do to your brain is no joke

this lawsuit is ugly and unattractive but we are biological creatures, subject to weakness caused by our biology and frailty, both john and elizabeth have my sympathy even if i don't agree with some of their choices

we all screw up somewhere

that way, but I too feel as you. And this whole thing is nothing but SAD! I'm trying not to be overly judgmental because I'm not walking in their shoes. But my gut feeling is that Young is after the money, and he's doing as much betraying as he stated that the Edwards' are! Two wrongs don't make a right. Enough with the cliches, eh??

:shrug:

is what's going on here..The Young's are after money, cut & dried. They were living a life of luxury while being w/ the Edwards. The Young family also left their young family & traveled, had a grand time, at NO cost to them. They knew what was going on the entire time, then when it hit the fan, they did a 360. They find out they can't get a JOB, then decided to write a book, media, & appear on tv shows bragging about sex tapes, emails, text messages, and whatever else, and made COPIES of everything that they stole. There's a name for people like them, and I'm certain you know what it is.

about Rielle Hunter, who's past is quite checkered. She's gone by several different names and this IS NOT her first foray into a SCANDAL! Some pretty interesting stuff about a horse racing scandal, drugging etc. I'm an animal lover and I've known about what happens with horses and how those "big whigs" were only concerned about the money and NOT about what damage and death that happened to the horses. This is a subject that has made me furious more times than not!

Checked out wikipedia and found her real name was Lisa Jo Druck, and there's a SLEW of info there. Also am doing more recent research about some articles written by one of his previous staffers, I think her name is Wendy Button. She sounds heart broken like so many who supported Edwards for so long.

I doubt we've heard the last of this, and it will continue. While some say Edwards will marry Rielle, I didn't get that feeling from what I've been reading. Also, some staffers are REALLY upset by what Andrew Young has done, and think he's "cashing in" on something that he was just as duplicitous as Edwards was. Some even feel he's seeking more of his 15 minutes of fame by what is going on.

I know this isn't something many want to hash out over and over again here, but I sincerely think this is going to rear it's ugly head again and we'll be talking about it all over at a later time.

Just sayin'