CHAPEL HILL John Edwards, the former Democratic senator and presidential candidate, got a bit of support Wednesday in his criminal case when a government watchdog group filed a proposed brief in federal court criticizing prosecutors and asking for charges to be dropped.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, an organization bent on holding politicians and government officials responsible, submitted a 28-page document that questions the prosecution's case and supports the defense.

Edwards, 58, was accused in June of violating campaign finance laws by secretly obtaining and using contributions from two wealthy supporters to hide his pregnant mistress from the public during his 2008 presidential run.

The payments covered living, medical and other expenses for Rielle Hunter, a videographer with whom he had an extramarital affair and a child. Prosecutors argue the donations exceeded legal limits and were campaign contributions because they were meant to hide the affair so Edwards could keep his presidential bid alive.

CREW argues that, under federal elections law, the payments made by Texas lawyer Fred Baron and benefactor Bunny Mellon to others to cover Hunter's expenses are not campaign contributions.

In support of CREW's argument, lawyers Anne Weismann and Melanie Sloan state that Baron and Mellon were friends with Edwards before and after his campaign.

They argue the payments were used for expenses not related to the campaign.

Prosecutors contend that Edwards sought to hide his affair and Hunter's pregnancy from the public to preserve his image as a "family man," a concept central to his campaign.

To protect the family

But the CREW lawyers argue "his most likely motivation was preventing his cancer-stricken and dying wife and his family from learning of his affair. Mr. Edwards certainly would not be the first individual to spend significant amounts of money to keep his affair hidden from his wife and children."

The payments, CREW lawyers point out, continued after Edwards abandoned his presidential campaign.

"At bottom, the indictment proceeds on a theory that ignores the most logical explanation for Mr. Edwards' behavior," the CREW brief states.

CREW argues that prosecutors' interpretation of a campaign contribution in the Edwards case would lead to "absurd results."

"[H]ad Mr. Edwards been a known philanderer, like presidential candidates before him, any payments by his friends to support his mistress would not have been characterized as 'contributions,' " the brief states.

Unlike a 'family man'

Prosecutors, CREW lawyers contend, are pursuing a case against Edwards that comes, in part, because of his status.

"Because he did not comport himself in a manner consistent with that of a 'family man' - or stated differently, consistent with public perceptions of how a presidential candidate should act - Mr. Edwards now faces criminal prosecution," the CREW brief states. "But however odious or flawed Mr. Edwards' character may be, it cannot form the foundation for criminal liability."

CREW's interest in entering the case comes several weeks after defense attorneys filed a barrage of documents asking a federal judge to dismiss charges against Edwards.

A trial is scheduled for January, but a judge has yet to take up many of the legal questions and issues associated with the case.