The Verdict: Assessing The Prosecution

The first segment of tonight's episode of The Verdict dealt with the Conrad Black trial - specifically, how the prosecution has fared now that they're about to rest. The three guests were jury expert Paul Lisnek, former prosecutor Ted Chung, and trial-watching regular Steve Skurka.

Csr. Skurka assigned a “C- to D+” grade to the prosecution, because: no victims were presented; the weakness of the audit committee testimony; the general lack of credibility of their witnesses. The only credible one was Richard Burt.

Csr. Chung went easier on the prosecutors. He said that the prosecution made their case “intelligible” but the witnesses were disappointing, especially David Radler. His assessment was that they did an “adequate” or “decent” job. When asked by Ms. Todd about the assumption that the non-compete payments would have ended up in Hollinger International’s treasury being not proven, he conceded that they may have made a mistake by not providing any victims.

Csr. Lisnek stepped in by noting that a victim is not needed. All the prosecution has to establish is that the defendants violated the law. Ms. Todd asked, though, how will it be determined what specific interpretation of the law did they violate, if any? Csr. Skurka noted, at that point, that the prosecution pulled back in the middle of the trial, and conceded that the CanWest non-compete payments were legitimate. Her question got the answer that the judge will determine what the relevant law is, and reveal it in her instructions to the jury.

When further asked by Ms. Todd about Conrad Black going on the stand, Csr. Lisnek replied that there wasn't a chance of it. Csr. Skurka added that Mr. Black is an “undisciplined witness.” He's too loose a cannon to give reliable testimony in his own defense.

Csr. Chung ventured that the jurors would like to see Mr. Black on the stand, but it’s not necessary for the defense's case. Csr. Skurka observed that they have already heard Mr. Black under a kind of “cross-examination” by the Hollinger Int'l shareholders at the 2001 and '02 annual meetings. Csr. Lisnek noted that jurors will forgive mistakes, but they're not likely to forgive arrogance.

After quoting from Leo J. Strine's 2004 decision, Ms. Todd asked Csr. Chung what the prosecution would cross-examine Mr. Black about. He replied that they can ask about almost anything, and can batter away as much as they like. They can ask questions based on any document that’s been introduced in the trial. Csr. Skurka added that the prosecution can also ask about any of Mr. Black’s comments to the media.

Ms. Todd then mentioned that Joan Maida's testimony is coming up. Csr. Skurka said that she’ll provide an “innocent explanation” of the removal of the boxes. Donald Trump may be the next witness.

Csr. Lisnek himself said that celebrities have an initial aura, but they tend to relax into regular witnessing and are seen by the jury as only that. There is a problem, though, with a celebrity being brought in as a character witness. Parading celebrities is “dangerous.” Look at what happened to Jim Thompson….