The overnight media reports on the Conrad Black trial not only include write-ups on yesterday's testimony, but also a report on a special session today:
1. The Hamilton Spectator has webbed a brief sumary of Paul Saunders' testimony, written by Romina Maurino.
2. From CANOE CNews, a CP report, which discloses that there will be testimony today from Hollinger Int'l's independent auditor, KPMG acountant Marilyn Stitt, after the rest of Beth DeMerchant's testimony is heard from. [There wasn't; Ms. Stitt was pushed back to Monday.]
3. Peter Brieger's latest write-up, posted in the Ottawa Citizen, focuses on Beth DeMerchant's testimony yesterday, as well as on Ms. DeMerchant herself. He mentions both her admission of mistakes and her salary for the year 2000, for which she provided a rough estimate after checking with her own counsel to see if it was "a fair question" for them to ask. She answered that it was somewhere between 600,000 and 900,000 Canadian dollars. "One U.S. journalist joked that the figure wasn't so large given that it was in Canadian funds." His report ends with similar vagueness in Csr. Saunders' testimony on his own. "Paul Saunders, a partner at the blue chip New York City-based Cravath, Swaine & Moore, when asked for his salary, explained there are 'clients' and there are 'matters,' and billing isn't as clear cut as the lay person thinks."
4. The Belleville News-Democrat has posted the AP summary of Csr. Saunders' testimony.
5. The first overnight report by Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail recounts the testimony of both witnesses, and includes Ms. DeMerchant's acknowledgement of her mistakes when working on the CanWest deal. He also mentions the salary issue, and ends with a comment made by Michael Schachter after Csr. Saunders strugged to name his own rate: "'I guess if you have to ask, you can't afford it.'"
6. Rick Westhead's latest, webbed by the Toronto Star, centers on Csr. Saunders' testimony.
7. Mary Wisniewski of the Chicago Sun-Times also focuses upon Saunders' testimony in her own report. She mentions that Peter "Atkinson didn't tell Saunders about $15.6 million that he, Black, former CFO Jack Boultbee, and former Sun-Times publisher David Radler had received in individual 'non-compete' payments from the sale of U.S. newspapers in 2000 and 2001.
"'It would have been relevant,' said Saunders, a corporate litigation specialist..."
8. Another report by Mr. Waldie discusses a pre-testimony controversy, to be ruled on by Judge St. Eve later this morning, about how much Ms. Stitt can testify about the "auditing process, including how auditors go about detecting possible fraud." (She may use the word "hypothetical" in her ruling on this defense motion.)
Also, the Conrad Black trial is mentioned in passing by Michael Miner in his "Hot Type" column for the Chicago Reader; its main topic is the closure of the last American newspaper's bureau in Canada by the Washington Post. He uses the interest differential between Canadian and American media as a symbol for American news outlets' relative lack of interest in Canada. (For those not in the know, or not in the care, this topic is an old and reliable one for the Canadian media.)
The trial is also mentioned in the New York Times' "Deal Book" blog, through it relaying a comparison of Cantor Fitzgerald CEO Howard Lutnick to Conrad Black, made by hedge fund manager Robert Chapman. Mr. Chapman also compared Mr. Lutnick to Bernie Ebbers and Dennis Kozlowski.
----------
Douglas Ball, in yesterday's entry in the Toronto Life trial blog, works in both "Godwin's Law" and cognitive dissonance.
Mark Steyn has indulged in a little cognitive dissonance of his own as he tried to integrate what lawyer said what when and how each lawyers's 'what' meshes with the 'what' of the other whatters. Failing to do so, he turns to the amount of the feeing, which drives him to the verge of going native.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment