The Verdict: And Now, The Waiting

A little more than a third of tonight's episode of The Verdict was devoted to the wrap-up of the proceedings, and the likely state of mind of the jurors.

The first guest was Eddie Greenspan, who was interviewed by Ms. Todd. He described Conrad Black as “resolute” and “confident,” as well as engaged in the trial process. Barbara is “fine” and is holding up will under the pressure. He's withholding a self-assessment of performance until the case itself is over. He’ll speak about it then.

He did note, though, that Eric Sussman took 6 hrs and 15 min, and Julie Ruder went for 7 hours. He isn't too fond of the rebuttal system. As far as present concerns are concerned, though, he said (tongue-in-cheek) that he's concerned that the jury will deliberate “for three months.”

With regard to the obstruction of justice charge, he dismissed “armchair experts” who rate the charge as tough to beat. To him, it's a “simple” charge that never should have been laid. His comment on the ostrich instruction was that “willful blindness” is more restricted than journalists sometimes let on. Canada does have an analog, although it isn't much discussed.

When asked by Ms. Todd if Conrad Black will sue for wrongful prosecution if acquitted, he said that he didn't even know if doing so was possible under the American system, nor does he know how difficult it is to sue prosecutors. Conrad will, though, re-activate the defamation suits already launched against Richard Breeden, the authors of the Special Committee report, and those who wrote scurrilous books allegedly defaming Conrad Black.

He had no comment regarding the relevance of Canadian tax law to the case, saying that Judge St. Eve had settled the issue. He ended by saying that he plans to to relax in the interim period between now and the annoucement of the verdict.

After Csr. Greenspan was done with, the next guest was David Akin, the CTV reporter on the trial beat. After saying for some length that the jury's body language menat that they were raring to get at the deliberations, he did venture that Csr. Sussman did “drag it out a little long” He noted that a jury consultant told him that women tend to convict more reliably than men, and also said that it was likely that deliberations will contunue until after July 4. Conrad Black was “stone-faced” unless he was enjoying himself or was rankling under a direct attack. He did not have much rapport with the jury, and the same was true for the other defendants - unlike their lawyers.

The next two guests, brought on to speculate about the jury's deliberations, were jury consultant and lawyer Paul Lisnek, and former prosecutor Ted Chung. Csr. Lisnek began by saying that Conrad was remote largely because he was told to be that way. Defendants schmoozing juries usually end up weakening their defense.

Csr. Chung began by noting that a rebuttal, if used well, can salvage the case. He said that Csr. Sussman had made sure that he had said everything to the jury. Csr. Lisnek then spoke up by concluding that the rebuttal was probably too long, as such considerations tend to ignore juror patience level. A prosecutor should wind up when the jurors show restlessness. When he was presented by Ms. Todd with the alternate explanation – that the jurors just wanted to get to it – he replied that juries are quite unpredictable in terms of deliberation length, but the deliberation is likely to be too long to matter.

Csr. Chung picked up on this point by saying that the case will be complex for a jury to decide because there are four defendants and many charges. The time troubles will come from the need to organize themselves. A quick verdict will only come if they’re of one mind. The difference in defendants makes this single-mindedness unlikely. The jury may start with Mark Kipnis, because he’d be relatively easy to peg. After commenting that juries find it easy to account for plea bargains, he made this point regarding Mr. Kipnis: juries tend to work by negotiation and compromise. If the pro-conviction jurors agree to let Mr. Kipnis go, that agreeableness could make pro-acquittal juries agree to go hard on Conrad Black. (This point backs up an opinion that Ms. Todd has expressed on a few earlier shows.)

Csr. Chung finished by noting that the ostrich instruction suggests that jurors need not worry that much about defendants' state of mind; they can concentrate on actions to determine guilt.

The Conrad Black case made up the substance of Ms. Todd's "Closing Argument" editorial. She began by calling attention to the general relief that the 'trial' is over, which she found amusing. It's long from over - in fact, Ms. Todd believes that it'll never end. If there's conviction on even one count, an appeal will be forthoming almost instantaneously. If he's acquitted, Conrad will go out a'suing. Either way, the supposed finality will prove to be little more than an extended break.