Media Roundup: Unsupported?

The media reports, webbed overnight and this morning, on the Conrad Black trial have concentrated on the closing argument for Conrad Black, scheduled to finish up this morning, by Mr. Black's lead co-counsels Eddie Greenspan and Edward Genson:

1. From CNNMoney.com, a report that describes the trial as "the last great corporate fraud trial of the last great stock market bubble" before describing both the prosecution's closing argument address as well as yesterday's tag-team one for Conrad Black.

2. A mention of yesterday's closing argument is item #5 in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review's "Business Briefs"

3. A brief United Press write-up has been webbed by Monsters and Critics, which begins by mentioning the attack on David Radler before counterpointing the attack on Mr. Black made Monday.

4. Richard Siklos' latest, webbed by the New York Times, starts off with: "It was an enormous betrayal by his former associates — and not any act of criminal fraud — that led Conrad M. Black to the Chicago courtroom where, if convicted, he could face the rest of his days in prison, lawyers for the media baron said in their closing arguments." It mentions the same overall theme that Mr. Siklos brought up in a CBC interview last night - that the prosecution has not delivered on its promises - and contains an important tid-bit about Mr. Radler's plea bargain that was mentioned by Csr. Greenspan yesterday: "if the judge does not approve a reduced sentence (which could be as little as six months), Mr. Radler retains the right to vacate his guilty plea and demand a trial instead."

5. From JournalNow.com, a report that focuses on the attempted impungnment of Mr. Radler's testimony, as unsupported by any documents.

6. The BBC News report starts off with the attack on Mr. Radler, but also mentions Csr. Greenspan's argument that Mr. Black "was being persecuted for his successful career and wealthy lifestyle." The rest of the report contrasts the highlights of the prosecution's closing argument with Csr. Greenspan's argument that the prosecution has failed to meet its burden of proof.

7. Peter Worthington's latest, as webbed by the Ottawa Sun, claims that Conrad Black's defense "not only regained ground lost to the prosecution's summation, but even gained yards." He then reviews the main points made yesterday: the lack of credibility of Mr. Radler; the lack of diligence shown by the Hollinger International audit committee, whom "the SEC considered filing charges against... until prosecutors intervened to clear them if they testified at Conrad's trial;" that all of the non-compete payments fell in a fair range as percentages of the sale prices and were "all open and approved by the audit committee;" and, the bobble made in the prosecution's closing argument that hinged upon a missing set of deposit and withdrawal dates in Mr. Black's bank account - a point made by Csr. Genson, who also put the defense case for the alleged abuse of corporate perks. In the rest of the closing argument for Conrad Black's defesne, Csr. Genson will deal with the obstruction-of-justice charge.

8. The Washington Post has abridged an Associated Press report by Mike Robinson, which notes that Csr. Greenspan spent so much time attacking Mr. Radler because the latter is all the case the government has. The report also notes that "[h]e urged jurors to 'treat and judge Conrad Black the way you treat any of your neighbors.'"

9. In a BNN interview with Amanda Lang, aired at 8:25 AM, she said that the best job done by the lawyers yesterday was pointing out that the paper trail is the defense, not evidence of a supposedly hidden crime. She also brought up the point, made by Csr. Greenspan, that Mr. Black’s character is not on trial. The prosecution had tried to conjure up images of small-shareholder victims in their opening address, but no real victims were ever produced. This is the underlying point behind the "no victims" claim by Conrad Black's defense. There's about an hour left for Edward Genson, and then it’s on to the next closing argument.

10. The Illinois Daily Herald's report mentions that Csr. Greenspan suggested to the jury that the audit committee "approved ([the] non-compete agreements) because there was nothing wrong with them," and that Hollinger Int'l was not exactly a small business that a CEO could successfully micromanage. "While the prosecution spent Monday linking Radler to Black, Greenspan and co-defense attorney Edward Genson said the Hollinger International empire was so vast and complicated that there were 'fiefdoms' within the company and it would have been easy for Radler to deceive his boss and longtime business partner, as he did auditors and others along the way."

11. The latest report by Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune begins with: "Saying Conrad Black's liberty is at stake, the former media mogul's lawyers in their closing argument Tuesday assailed the government's case as riddled with speculation and hinging on witnesses who cannot be trusted." It highlights the main points made by both co-counsels yesterday.

12. Andrew Clark's latest report for the Guardian is entitled "Black trial based on envy and prejudice, says defence lawyer." It relays Csr. Greenspan's argument that class prejudice may make irrelevant details seem relevant. "He told the court prosecutors had unearthed scores of Lord Black's elaborately worded emails and invoices for jewellery, furniture and rare books 'for no other reason but to inflame you'." It ends with Csr. Greenspan's ending: "'I ask you to return a verdict of not guilty for Conrad Black in the name of justice, in the name of fairness, in the name of equality and in the name of equal treatment under the law.'"

13. A similar theme is the start-off for Mary Vallis' report, as webbed by the Montreal Gazette. Most of it focuses upon Csr. Genson's part of the closing argument. One excerpt: "'You know what's unusual about [the Bora Bora trip, the birthday party and the Manhattan apartment]? [Mr. Black] paid for them,' Genson said. 'They're saying it wasn't enough.'"

14. CBC News: Morning had a brief report by CBC correspondent Mike Hornbrook, as aired at 9:03 AM ET. Mr. Hornbrook related that proceedings ended at about 4:00 – 4:15 PM (CT) yesterday after Genson asked for another rest break, and subsequent to it, said he couldn’t continue. His muscular condition was acting up, which explains why he was “off his game” and “lost it a bit.” (Mr. Hornbrook's words.)

15. Theresa Tedesco of the National Post has written a report entitled "Greenspan finally finds his footing," and it begins with this ironic note: "Back in the days before Conrad Black became an accused felon, his lawyer Edward Greenspan worried he wouldn't be aggressive enough for a U.S. court." The rest of it laces some background, including Monday's prosecution closing address, into a recounting of Csr. Greenspan's part of the closing address for Conrad Black. It ends with: "Julie Ruder's father was asked what he thought of Mr. Greenspan's jury address. 'There really are two sides to a story,' came the reply."

16. Paul Waldie's latest, as webbed by the Globe and Mail, works in all of the main points made yesterday by Csr. Greenspan in court. "He called their evidence absurd, insulting and illogical."

17. Mr. Waldie's second report focuses upon the points made by Csr. Genson yesterday.

18. Jennifer Wells is back on the trial beat with an article, webbed by the Toronto Star, asking: "What did Conrad Black know?" She discusses the non-compete agreement Conrad Black had signed with American Publishing company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hollinger Int'l, making it a non-compete agreement between Conrad Black and the company he was the CEO of. It is this agreement that the prosecution has described as Conrad Black signing an agreement 'not to compete with himself.' The theme of Ms. Wells' piece is that the defense's argument that it was above-board isn't that pat, given the related-party nature of the transaction.

19. Another Star feature, by Rosie DiManno, describes Csr. Greenspan's part of the closing argument as less than stellar. "On this occasion... he was pedantic and tedious... the outcome was weirdly flat and unengaging." She ends her latest column by claiming that the class-bias part of the argument was a little over the top.

20. A Canadian Press forecast report, webbed by CBC News, says that lawyers for Jack Boultbee will start once Csr. Genson's hour is up.

21. The Chicago Sun-Times' Mark Brown is still commenting on the closing arguments. This time, he says that what Csr. Greenspan said about Mr. Radler is old news to Sun-Times employees. He also defends his hope for Mr. Black being found guilty.

22. Also from the Sun-Times, a report from Mary Wisniewski entitled "Black's defense says case is based on lies." It contains this quote from Csr. Genson: "Genson said there was no evidence of a plan between the defendants. 'It was like a conspiracy for mind readers.'"

23. From HULIQ.com, two posts on yesterday's proceedings. The first is a review of Monday's closing address for the prosecution by Julie Ruder; the second concentrates upon Csr. Greenspan's class-bias theme.

24. EarthTimes.org has a report that laces a summary of Mr. Radler's testimony into a report entitled "Black's lawyers counter prosecution claims."

25. A report from the Guelph Mercury is the second-last of several that focuses upon the wealth-is-not-a-crime theme. It ends with this quote from Csr. Greenspan: "'(Prosecutor Julie Ruder) said "Make it matter to the victims",' he said. 'Where are the victims? Did we hear from any of these people?'"

26. The Daily Mail report takes up the same theme as the one above.

----------

Two entries in Mark Steyn's Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog discuss the 75%/25% split of non-compete payments between Hollinger Int'l and Hollinger Inc. - the notorious "template." One notes that the two companies were different companies in the same industry, despite them both having the same top executives. The other makes the point that any buyer who neglected to secure a separate non-compete agreement with Hollinger Inc. would run a risk of being called on the carpet for laxity, if not negligence (in the colloquial sense of the term.)

(Mr. Steyn is a journalist and commentator, not a corporate lawyer, but he raises an interesting point that someone in the latter field might want to mull over - as well as this question: does Hollinger Inc. have grounds for suing Hollinger Int'l?)