The Verdict: Slicing and Splicing

There was one segment on The Verdict dealing with the Conrad Black trial tonight, on a discussion of the cross-examination of David Radler. Ms. Todd, the host, started off by noting that Mr. Radler was tight-lipped as he left the court today. Eddie Greenspan, though, was light-hearted. Conrad Black himself offered no comment, after apologizing for the unoriginality of the phrase, but got somewhat miffed when pressed by a reporter for one.

The guests on the segment were two lawyers, Hugh Totten and Steve Skurka. Both were in the courtroom today. Csr. Skurka started off by noting that there had been an anticipation for the cross-examination since 7 AM, when the lineup started. Csr. Greenspan had gotten off to a strong start.

Csr. Totten noted, though, that Csr. Greenspan had started off in an “odd fashion.” He referred to the Bible business. Using the Bible to swear on isn’t used that much anymore. He interpreted the repeated references to the Bible as Csr. Greenspan making a turf statement. Ms. Todd asked him what effect it would have on on the jury – would they be confused by the Bible stuff – and Csr. Totten answered that it may be explained by cultural differences between Canadians and Americans. Then, he said that the cross-examination proceeded in “slices and dices.”

After Ms. Todd read out an excerpt of the transcript about the “script,” and asked Csr. Skurka what Mr. Radler had looked like, he answered that Mr. Radler looked “silly.” It seems that Csr. Greenspan was trying to tease the real Radler out of his persona.

Csr. Totten observed that Mr. Radler has not been eviscerated, as of yet. Csr. Greenspan did establish that there was a kind of script, but Mr. Radler did testify earlier that he met with the prosecution only a few times, which did show in Eric Sussman's direct examination of him. He may not have been coached enough - or was coached by the wrong team. Csr. Skurka noted that David Radler had spent a lot of time with his own lawyers.

Ms. Todd later brought up the golden-goose E-mail, and asked about its effect on the jury. Csr. Totten ventured that the sentence she quoted was too rococo to have much of a direct impact. He added that there was little evidentiary value except for an attempted “prejudical effect.” Csr. Skurka commented that the mistrial motion relating to it, which Ms. Todd had mentioned before quoting from the E-mail, was a serious mistrial motion; he agreed with Csr. Totten regarding the E-mail's prejudicial effect. Ms. Todd brought up the possibility that the E-mail could substantiate the theory that that Mr. Black doesn’t care that much about the shareholders, but Csr. Skurka scoffed at her theory. Hugh Totten had the last word of the segment, when he noted that, in the end, the E-mails “won’t matter a hill of beans.”

(The possibility that Judge St. Eve is going out of her way to be fair to the prosecution wasn’t brought up.)

In her “closing argument,” Ms. Todd said that Greenspan has a lot on the line – not only Conrad Black’s future, but also his reputation as a “witness slayer.” She opined that Csr. Greenspan will have to hit harder to impugn Mr. Radler’s testimony. The Bible bit probably confused the jurors. It may have had a desired timing effect, but it also made Csr. Greenspan look “ogrish.” The jurors already know that Radler is a liar; she ended by noting that, as of yet, “his pants weren’t on fire.”

[This episode of The Verdict will be broadbanded as of 10:30 pm tonight, and will stay up until about 10:30 PM or so tomorrow.]