Media Roundup: Who was Whom?

After the end of week 2, day 1 of the Conrad Black trial, the reports on it have this to say:

1. From Rudolph Bush of the Chicago Tribune, a wrap-up of yesterday's testimony, with this excerpt from Michael Reed's cross examination: "Genson suggested that if Black had viewed the final contract between Hollinger and CNHI [Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc.], he would have no reason to believe CNHI had not requested the non-competition agreement from Hollinger Inc."

2. An abbreviated report from Romina Maurino,webbed by the Free Press of London, Ontario. Another one, with more background facts, is here.

3. The most recent report from Mike Robinson of the Associated Press, which recounts that CNHI, in 1999, went along with the allocation of $12.5 million from the non-compete fee of $50 million for the first sale of newspaper properties from Hollinger International, as completed in 1999, because doing so would expedite the deal going through, on Hollinger Int'l's end. Webbed by the State, of South Carolina.

4. The trial of Conrad Black gets a mention in the Boston Globe's "Business Notebook," as "Trial #2."

5. The Guardian has another report by Andrew Clark, which contains this significant bit of testimony from Mike Reed: "extra names [had] appeared unexpectedly on the documents, including Hollinger Inc, the Canadian entity that held Lord Black's 15% share and voting control of Hollinger International. Mr Reed was surprised, believing such stringent anti-competing contracts were unnecessary: 'They're typically one daily newspaper towns. There aren't [competing] daily newspapers for them to acquire, and the financial metrics of starting new newspapers aren't attractive.'" It also contains an update on the status of the Tribune's motion to release the names of the jurors.

6. A brief write-up from 680 News about the continuation of Thomas Henson's testimony today.

7. Chris Lackner of CanWest News Service has found a Website where direct bets can be placed on the outcome of the trial: BetUS.com. His report quotes the then-current odds. (Webbed by the Financial Post. BetUS.com has the Conrad Black trial in its "Entertainment/Corporate Scandals" section.) There's further info from this write-up: "More Than 3000 Place Bets on Fate of Conrad Black," posted by Gambling911.com.


[UPDATE on #7: BetUS.com seems to have closed the book on the entire "Corporate Scandals" subcategory in its "Entertainment" category. That's where the Conrad Black bet lines were found.]


8. A subscribers-only account of yesterday's trial events is available at the Ottawa Citizen.

9. This report in Canada.com News notes that Mr. Reed testified that the split of the non-compete payment between Hollinger Int'l and Hollinger Inc. was an 11th-hour amendment that "his company didn't care about...although it was not typical of about 100 newspaper deals with other sellers during his tenure as both the company's chief financial officer and CEO." It also notes that Mark Kipnis explained to Mr. Henson that the change "'was a way for [the recipients] to legally avoid certain tax in Canada.'" Also from it, a snippet on Mr. Henson's testimony: "Thomas Henson, CNHI's lawyer, mirrored that testimony later in the day, saying it was 'immaterial' if more parties were added to the non-compete payment, but sellers like Hollinger usually try to limit, not increase, the scope of those restrictions."

10. Paul Waldie's latest write-up, in the Globe and Mail, adds some perspective to yesterday's events. His report ends with: "Mr. Genson tried to make the point that Mr. Reed actually did want a non-compete with Lord Black and the others because they were still actively involved in the newspaper business through another company called Horizon. He also alluded to the fact that Mr. Radler negotiated the deal and he said that based on the final documents for the deal, 'as far as Lord Black knows, you did want a non-compete with him,' Mr. Genson said." In addition. it mentions that the initial agreement to sell the first block of newspaper properties was reached in 1998. Also, Mr. Waldie has a what-to-expect-today guide, which ends with a forecast of what the defense will challenge in their cross-examination of Mr. Henson. From it: "They will likely point out that the documents make it clear the non-competition payments were a condition of closing..."

11. The Chicago Sun-Times report by Mary Wisniewski starts off by noting that the claim that CNHI "requested" the split of its non-compete payment was refuted by Mr. Reed's testimony. Sun-Times columnist Michael Sneed mentions Donald Trump's advice to Mr. Black in his latest column.

12. The Age of Melbourne, Australia has a summary of Mr. Reed's testimony from yesterday, which notes, "[i]t was not clear from testimony whether Black and the others ever got the money from that deal, though he and his three co-defendants are accused of absconding with $US60 million through similar transactions."

13. Also from Australasia, the New Zealand Herald itself has a summary of Mr. Reed's testimony.


In addition: this entry from the blog "Finlay ON Governance" contains a thoughtful and quite well-informed recounting of the demise of Conrad Black. The author of it, J. Richard Finlay, claims credibly to be an old near-neighbour of Mr. Black. In his heart, he's pro-comeuppance, although he's scrupulous with respect to the legal status of the case itself.


And finally, TheTyee.ca has a lengthy review of "The Book That Black Hates."