Media Roundup: Differings

The media reports, webbed today, on the Conrad Black trial are composed of two analysis pieces, an opinion piece and two prep sheets, one dealing almost exclusively with Donald Trump:

1. From Reuters, Andrew Stern has written an analysis of the prosecution's case, entitled "No smoking gun yet in Conrad Black fraud trial." It has a different take on the prosecution's case than Ms. Vallis' earlier piece, entitled "There's no 'smoking gun'," had. From the second paragraph of Mr. Stern's piece: "[Despite there being no telling piece of evidence,] the prosecution, which wrapped up its case last week, constructed a solid argument that Black and three co-defendants at former Chicago-based media giant Hollinger International Inc. committed a $60 million fraud and abused company perks." It notes that "several" media executives, from the other sides of the sales of Hollinger Int'l newspaper properties, have testified that they did not request any non-compete payments to Hollinger Inc. or any individuals, implying that the relevant disclosures were misleading.

2. An opinion piece by Mark Steyn, a compendium of certain themes in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has been webbed by the Orange County Register. It's entitled, "Trial by jury in America is in terminal decline."

3. A lengthy forecast piece, by Romina Maurino and webbed by CBC News, does bring up Donald Trump's expected testimony, but its main theme is the question: why would the defense exert so much of its allotted effort in shooting down the peripheral charges, instead of concentrating on the main ones? The two legal experts quoted, Steve Skurka and Hugh Totten, have differed in their assessments: Csr. Skurka said that it shows the defense's confidence that the prosecution has failed to meet its burden; Csr. Totten said that it was "surprising," as well as being inconsistent with the defense's opening arguments. He manages to imply that 'confidence' isn't the word he would have used to describe the defense's team-state of mind.

4. From the New York Times, a piece that picks up on a theme first explored by Douglas Bell: to what extent does Kenneth Whyte's appearance as a defense witness create a conflict of interest regarding Maclean's coverage of the trial? Mr. Whyte is the editor-in-chief of the magazine, and thus is Maclean's journalists' boss. "Mr. Whyte said that readers of Maclean’s were informed of the potential conflicts. 'When I decided to answer the subpoena I disclosed to our readers that I would appear as a witness in my capacity as a former Black employee,' Mr. Whyte said. 'Ms. Amiel’s relations to the defendant have been abundantly disclosed, as has Mr. Steyn’s former employment in the Black empire.'” It also notes that Mr. Whyte said that Mark Steyn has promised to be especially harsh on the boss - in a pledge to the boss.

5. The Guardian's Andrew Clark has a forecast piece on what Donald Trump will be testifying about, as well as the flurry that The Donald's appearance is expected to cause.