The Verdict: Inflection Point Or Turning Point?

Tonight's episode of The Verdict had one segment on David Radler’s second day of direct testimony. The two guests were both journalists; both have been watching the trial regularly, at least one of them since day 1 (if you’re a regular, you’ll recognize both names): Andrew Clark of the Guardian and Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail. [Mr. Waldie's latest report on Mr. Radler's testimony is here.]

Ms. Todd started off with Mr. Waldie. He was surprised at Mr. Radler putting the blame squarely upon Conrad Black for the transference of some of the non-compete funds to Hollinger Inc. Mr. Radler sounded as if he had merely “went along with it.” Mr. Clark, on the other hand, assigned Mr. Radler a grade of seven out of ten. His testimony was straightforward, not florid like Mr. Black's would be; his weakness was being “short on detail.” Mr. Clark added later in the segment that Black is too “Shakespearian” in language to relate to ordinary people, as the E-mails in those 13 boxes that have finally reached the trial will show.

When asked by Ms. Todd about the defense team’s likely strategy, Mr. Waldie replied that they’re a long way from deciding what's appropriate. The prosecution isn’t finished yet, and whatever strategy the defense team decides on will be based on the prosecution’s entire case. So, it’s not certain as of yet.

With regard to the contents of those boxes, Mr. Waldie said that it looks like they contained only Mr. Black’s personal effects. Mr. Clark added that the public has seen no evidence regarding the obstruction charge, unlike details pertaining to the other charges. He also observed that it’s ironic that the defense's first chance to see the contents of boxes that belong to the chief defendant has been today.

Near the end of the segment, Mr. Waldie was asked by Ms. Todd about how the defense – particularly Conrad Black’s legal team – would impugn Mr. Radler's testimony this past day, after she expressed surprise that he would have been “so black and white” while on the stand today. He replied that Mr. Radler was not that detailed, and was sufficiently full of surmise that the prosecutor (Eric Sussman) had to rein him in. He also testified in a manner that was inconsistent with previous testimony from earlier prosecution witnesses, with respect to at least one payment. Those witnesses had testified that Mr. Radler himself had pushed the payment through.

Ms. Todd’s “closing argument” also dealt with Mr. Radler’s second day of testimony and last day of questioning under direct examination. “The gloves have finally come off.” She pegged the testimony that Mr. Radler supplied as the most damaging so far to the defense, and as presenting quite the challenge to Eddie Greenspan’s skill as a cross-examiner. What Mr. Black’s lawyers need right now is time, to prepare a “stingray attack” against his testimony. She’s sure that examining the contents of the boxes are not the highest priority of Mr. Black’s lawyers tonight.